We met Carl Lewis again! Last year, when EssentiallySports sat down with the 9-time Olympic gold medalist, he broke down an important debate on the “world’s fastest man,” choosing between Noah Lyles and Usain Bolt. This time, in New Delhi for the Vedanta Half Marathon event, we had the opportunity to get his perspective on the rise of the Enhanced Games. The controversial event, which openly welcomes performance-enhancing drugs, has gained momentum with a significant number of athlete endorsements.

World champion sprinter Fred Kerley, the Tokyo 2020 100m silver medalist, publicly threw his hat into the ring, declaring, “The world record has always been my goal. This gives me the chance to push my limits and become the fastest human to ever live.” With Kerley’s signing representing a major coup for the organizers and a not-unsubstantial blow to the traditional sporting ethos, the debate on the ethics of these games has reached a fever pitch, prompting us to seek the wisdom of a track and field legend who has witnessed the sport’s evolution over decades.

When asked about the Enhanced Games and this recent surge of interest from elite athletes at New Delhi’s Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium, Carl Lewis did not mince words, framing the issue not as an isolated sporting controversy but as a symptom of a broader cultural malaise that’s deepened by social media. “So much of the world depends on what’s fake… I think that the bigger issue is we have to be realistic and honest about what we’re doing,” Lewis began.

“The reason why we can even talk about whatever those games–Enhanced Games– is because people have been talking about it for years. ‘Oh, let everyone take what they want.’ And the world just shuts them down. But now we’re in a world where, ‘Oh, it doesn’t really matter as long as I’m famous,'” he continued, impassioned.

For Lewis, the Enhanced Games are not an isolated anomaly but a symptom of a deeper cultural decay where authenticity is sacrificed for a quick shot at fame. “So you see what I’m saying? So it’s not really about sports. It’s about culture. The culture now is you allow fake things to be important. And you allow someone on a TV show to become president one day because they think you’re good because of a TV show. So I think it’s a bigger cultural issue than just a sports issue.”

This powerful connection positions the Games as a direct consequence of a society that increasingly rewards spectacle over substance, a trend Lewis finds deeply troubling. Beyond the cultural critique, Lewis presents a pragmatic business argument for why he believes the Enhanced Games are destined to fail. He directly challenges the commercial viability of such an enterprise by questioning its appeal to the primary drivers of sports marketing.

“I don’t think enhanced games is going to be successful because what corporation would want to align themselves with it? Because who do you sell products to? Families and kids,” he reasoned. This assessment strikes at the heart of the event’s financial model, suggesting that no major brand would risk its reputation by associating with a competition that explicitly permits performance-enhancing drugs.

This view is echoed by established sporting bodies; for instance, the head of the US Anti-Doping Agency, Travis Tygart, has publicly derided the concept as a “clown show.”

Carl Lewis contends that the event’s appeal to athletes is not based on a genuine desire to push the boundaries of sport in a new format but is purely a financial transaction. “That’s why you have a lot of people sign up and a lot of athletes. And most of the athletes are signing up. Not because they want to do it without drugs. They’ll sign up because of the money,” he asserted, drawing a clear distinction between motivation and financial incentive.

The Enhanced Games have $250,000 on offer per event and $1 million for breaking a world record. To put it into context, British swimmer Ben Proud, another entrant, justified his participation by explaining that the prize money from a single race would be equivalent to that earned from 13 world titles.

Similarly, Lewis hypothesizes that if the monetary rewards were removed, the project would collapse, stating, “So if they’re saying, ‘Oh, let’s have the Enhanced Games. And when you win, you get a medal.’ They don’t have anybody sign up. It’s all about because it’s okay to do whatever it takes in a society that we live in now to make money.” Lewis’ perspective is further validated by the current landscape of the Enhanced Games.

Carl Lewis’ concerns about the Enhanced Games are widespread

The Enhanced Games is an idea for a multi-sport event that would openly permit the use of performance-enhancing drugs and offer huge financial rewards. Each individual event is slated to carry a $500,000 prize purse, with $250,000 awarded to the winner and additional bonuses for breaking world records, notably, $1 million for eclipsing the 100m sprint or 50m freestyle.

The prize levels here outshine what you’d find in traditional track and field or aquatics events. That kind of money can be a game changer, especially for athletes dealing with limited sponsorships and prize money. But joining the event isn’t as straightforward as it might seem. Those who decide to sign up might see some quick rewards, but they also face the risk of bans, damage to their reputation, and long-term health issues. World Athletics President Sebastian Coe has come out and said he doesn’t support the Enhanced Games.

“It’s b****cks isn’t it? I can’t really get excited about it. There’s only one message, and that is if anybody is moronic enough to officially take part in it, and they are in the traditional part of our sport, they’ll get banned for a long time. But I really don’t get sleepless nights about it,” said Coe.

At the same time, Coe mentioned that World Athletics has been boosting its prize money: “But we’ve increased our revenues by about 38% in the last four years. And in the next four years we’re going to spend about $50m on prize money. I don’t want to sound like Gordon Brown, but I do want the athletes to benefit from the proceeds of growth.”

For a legend like Carl Lewis, whose name is synonymous with a golden era of track and field, the Enhanced Games represent the antithesis of the legacy he strives to protect—a legacy where victory is earned through natural talent and relentless effort, and where the records set and the medals won are untainted by the specter of chemical enhancement. However, as a track and field fan, what are your thoughts on the Enhanced Games and the athletes who are participating in the event?