chrisb12 wrote:
r0bh wrote:
The money went far enough to pay 100k to the winnerif the prize money wasn't there neither would be the athletes or the interest. For this one event in it's infancy, testing the market and trying to spread the hype as far as possible to promote sustainability in future events was the goal. As I said previously do we actually know for a fact that no athlete was tested over the weekend or are we just going off hearsay to try to create extra negativity. Every athlete on an OOCT programme expects to be tested any day, the weekend would have been no different.
1. The race was sanctioned by Triathlon Australia, which means it has to abide by the WADA Code. Ergo, if there was testing, the results would bind the parties to all sports sanctioned by WADA. So, if there was testing, and if there was a positive, that athlete would be banned universally.
2. As a result of sanctioning, ASADA *could have* showed up to do testing. But why should ASADA bear the cost of sending a DCO(s) and the cost of testing, which is typically about $1000/test for a complete urine test with EPO option. Even without EPO option, it's still close to $500 per test. In the same way that USADA *can* show up and test at any USAT race, everybody knows that they aren't showing up unless they are paid to show up. To deny this reality is simply being deliberately obtuse.
Unless you pay for testing, it's not going to happen. This is just a fact. And it's obvious to everyone.
3. Yes, there's a budget that has to be accounted for. As I pointed out on twitter, maybe instead of paying $30,000 for a cast bronze winners statue, they could have taken that same $30,000 and used it cover comprehensive in-competition testing for the majority of that field over the course of the three day event. $30,000 would have covered (roughly) two DCOs (travel, time, accom, etc) plus probably 30 complete menu urine tests without EPO.
The idea that drug testing was left off because of "budget concerns" is simply ridiculous.
4. The ITU's own problems - and it certainly has numerous ones - have no bearing on the truth of the criticisms levied by Marisol.
Bottom line, for an event of this magnitude, there's just no reasonable argument against having drug testing. And Chris McCormack did in fact confirm that there was no drug testing at the event.
However, it is worth noting that the Island House - with it's $500,000 prize purse - also did not have drug testing either last year or the year prior. This is no less troubling, and yet it does seem clear that because McCormack is not involved with Island House (and because the gender issue is not present there), they are getting a free pass.
When two of the three biggest paydays in the sport are being given out without any sort of drug testing in place, I think that's a very real cause for concern. And I'm glad that Marisol wrote and prompted the discussion.
"Non est ad astra mollis e terris via." - Seneca | rappstar.com | FB - Rappstar Racing | IG - @jordanrapp