Elite Athletes: Held to a Higher Standard?

In preparation for an upcoming onslaught of exciting sports events during the 2026 Winter Olympics, athletes spend almost every hour of their day in training. They train their bodies as well as their minds, to maintain a level of competition that few are ever likely to experience.

They monitor their eating habits, their sleep, their breathing, and their mindset. They ski, skate, run, jump, and push their bodies to the limit of what is possible. But what about their ideals? How do elite athletes build up an ethical regimen?

These athletes are often praised for their hard work. They are the best of the best in their field. They win rivalry games, they win medals, they carry a badge of honor for their country, their team and most importantly, themselves.

How, then, do we reconcile the unethical who may be among the "best of the best"? While many athletes use their elite status to set a moral example, there are those who, in achieving a certain stature, believe the rules then no longer apply to them. The same rules that they learned to when working to become "the best of the best." The same rules that delineate "best" from "great" from "maybe next time." And to a certain extent, they are allowed the free pass to behave badly. 

Take, for example, the recent acquittal of five Canadian hockey players accused of sexual assault in 2018. The case itself was delayed, stalled, excused because of the talent that these young athletes possessed—their potential to continue to win glory for Canadian hockey.

Hockey Canada, once informed that a complaint had been filed against their athletes, reached out to a law firm for an investigation, but did not require the players to participate. The police investigation ended with no charges filed. Almost every player from the team went on to play in the NHL without issue.

In 2016, a Stanford swimmer, Brock Turner, was looking at jail time of up to 6 years for sexual assault of an unconscious woman on the school's campus. He instead received 6 months. His father called the criminal event "20 minutes of action."

In 2014, Olympian Michael Phelps was let off with a warning when pleading guilty for drunk driving twice within a 10-year span, an offense that was initially supposed to land him a year in prison. His coach later stated that even with the DUI arrest, "he was in much better shape" than his initial return to the pool after the 2012 Olympics. He went on to win 5 more gold medals and one silver for the U.S. in the 2016 Summer Olympics. 

The behavior of these athletes in these situations is inexcusable. If nothing else, their judgement off the field, out of the pool, and away from the ice should have people asking about their ability to determine what is "right" from what is "wrong."

Yet those who are their leaders—their coaches, their teammates, their schools, the judges and juries who hand down verdicts, and even their parents, continuously reinforced the message that acting corruptly is ok. As "the best if the best" the standard rules of ethics no longer apply. After following the rules of the game to get where they are, they're given a "get out of jail free" card to operate outside the rules of ethical behavior. 

Instead of holding these "elite" athletes to the standards they must meet (or even in most cases exceed) while in training to become the best -we suddenly expect - no, permit! - less of them on an ethical level once they achieve the highest level of athletic excellence.

And so the question must be asked: does being "the best" perpetuate the value of ethics? Or denigrate it?

Blaise Stanicic

Associate Director, Compliance Training, TRACE