This paper considers the implications of performance enhancing technologies for sport. It is argued that radical technologies such as genetic technologies can gain acceptance in sport from conceptually similar technologies such as sports equipment. In arguing the insufficiency of performance enhancement as a justifiable ambition for elite sport, the paper considers two main arguments. Firstly, it considers the conceptual paradox of competitive sport, which involves striving for a conditional form of efficiency. Secondly, it is considered how athletes are approaching their biological limits and, as such, sports must consider how to remain interesting when such limits are reached. In arguing the implications of such limits, three alternative futures for sport are suggested, which derive from strategies already used by governing bodies to combat high technology. Firstly, it is suggested that sports can embrace a re-evaluation of sporting values. Thus, rather than sustain the dominant interest in sport to surpass human limits, sport can re-consider such values in favour of more amateuristic virtues in sport, such as fair play, honesty and sportsmanship. Secondly, it is argued that governing bodies could respond to human limits by altering aspects of an activity. This effect took place with alterations to the Javelin in the mid 1980s and in 1999 where the International Tennis Federation chose to introduce new tennis balls to compensate for the emphasis on the power serve in men’s tennis. Finally, it is argued that a more likely response to human limits in sport would be for sports to embrace borderline cases of performance enhancement in sport. Rather than struggle against the dominant ethic in elite sport for performance, it is more likely that governing bodies will endeavour to legitimate questionable technologies in sport such as genetic engineering or doping.