Problem: Imagine you have two competing athletes who have the option to use an illegal and dangerous drug to enhance their performance (i.e., dope). If neither athlete dopes, then neither gain an advantage. If only one dopes, then that athlete gains a massive advantage over their competitor, reduced by the medical and legal risks of doping (the athletes believe the advantage over their competitor outweighs the risks from doping ). However, if both athletes dope, the advantages cancel out, and only the risks remain, putting them both in a worse position than if neither had been doping. What outcome do we expect from these two athletes? Please use ideas like concepts of monopolies, Oligopolies and Game Theory and Factor markets for this scenario.
Problem: Imagine you have two competing athletes who have the option to use an illegal and dangerous drug to enhance their performance (i.e., dope). If neither athlete dopes, then neither gain an advantage. If only one dopes, then that athlete gains a massive advantage over their competitor, reduced by the medical and legal risks of doping (the athletes believe the advantage over their competitor outweighs the risks from doping ). However, if both athletes dope, the advantages cancel out, and only the risks remain, putting them both in a worse position than if neither had been doping. What outcome do we expect from these two athletes?
Please use ideas like concepts of
Step by step
Solved in 2 steps
