She has quite a history of results. So much so that I would believe that either anti-doping controls are poor or that she inadvertently took something recently. Sadly I think both is the correct answer :/

---

Rodney
TrainingPeaks | Altra Running | RAD Roller
http://www.goinglong.ca

I disagree on a lifetime ban across all sports. In the pro ranks I'd say you should serve a ban and after that, 90% of your prize money goes to anti-doping charities/programs. In the amateur ranks I'd say you should serve a ban, be permanently prevented from any world-level events (Kona, ITU worlds, etc) AND you are put on a public doping offenders list with the offence listed, have your name has an asterisk next to it on all event results, and ineligible for any award at any race. That's obviously a lot of organisation so there might be an easier implementation.

People will make mistakes and it would be nice to still have them in the community. If they repent and continue participating for enjoyment they will serve as a warning for other competitors who are thinking about doing it. For people who make a 'mistake' like eating too much contaminated steak it would be listed on the register for all to see. If you did EPO you could hardly go around telling your teammates that someone slipped a blood transfusion in your morning coffee.

Note to self...don't become a roadie where "99%" don't care about drug use in cycling races, or Master's using T-therapy to get an edge in their racing. No wonder cycling is so messed up when even the grass roots members defend PED usage! I mean WOW, I don't even know what to say to that mindset other than I don't want to be part of it.

His POV certainly does not represent the majority opinion of bike racers.

I'd also submit that tri is just as messed up, but participants are less willing to accept or talk about it. At least there's some testing in cycling (though not enough) while for tri it's virtually non-existent.

No it doesn't.

John

---

---

Top notch coaching: Francois and Accelerate3 | Follow on Twitter: LifetimeAthlete |

Anyone know why there isn't much testing? With advances in technology you'd think testing for the common stuff would be easy and cheaper to do?

You would think, and there are a few doctors that claim cheap and easy testing. But, you also have to consider how to pay for the staff that monitors results, goes out and performs testings, storage and legal fees for challenges, etc.

Add to that the levels that can be tested for (A gross test that says "Yeah positive for X" is much cheaper than "Positive for X at a level of Y parts per Z units"), and it keeps the costs high. Last time I looked into this, there were exactly two labs in the whole of the US that were certified to do USADA testing.

John

---

---

Top notch coaching: Francois and Accelerate3 | Follow on Twitter: LifetimeAthlete |

2!? That's crazy.

With regards to funding it all, I think you basically have to poll all of the USAT (or whatever governing body) and say do you want a cleaner sport and willing to pay an extra $X per year for your membership; or; do you want to leave it as is. USAT claims it has $550k members so an extra $5/year provides funding of $2.75MM. Whether that would translate to any notable difference in testing levels I have no idea.

I guess my point is you have a poll and let the community speak

Trust me, I went through a lot of that. I was trying to put together a team that would be randomly tested, and also advocate for stronger testing measures among AG athletes. The overwhelming consensus among the twitcherati was that they didn't want to pay extra bucks for it.

http://forum.slowtwitch.com/...ing=testing;#4204597
http://forum.slowtwitch.com/...ing=testing;#4424538
http://forum.slowtwitch.com/...ing%20clean;#4226200

Try those threads for starters. People all say they want clean sport until it's time to either cough up some extra $$ or pee in a cup themselves.

John

---

---

Top notch coaching: Francois and Accelerate3 | Follow on Twitter: LifetimeAthlete |

I was just thinking of this thread, and if nothing else kudos to the guys in South Africa for actually testing. Over the last 30 years racing in Canada, I have not been tested a single time and have not heard of any of my buddies being tested. During this time, we have collectively won Kona slots, national championships, Armed Forces Championships, 70.3 WC lots....never a single whiff of getting tested.

I get it, we are age groupers and the drug testing police here in Canada have bigger fish to fry...but as a very minimum, the folks in South Africa busted one of their own. How often does that happen in the age grouper ranks in Canada?

Just testing once in a while (even once a year at nationals or a major IM) might keep a few people on the honest side. Right now, it's basically the wild west around here. If you are South African, German, or American, your safe bet is racing in Canada in the land of Ben Johnson for KQ slots LOL :-)

So 0.5% of triathletes get tested at $1000 per test. The testing takes place at races because the average one-and-done participant won't stand for OOC testing. Anyone who is intentionally doping will go off the juice before the handful of triathlons he does a year, and even the ones who are not so bright will still race for years and years without getting popped. The end result will be that most of the people "caught" will be unintentionally doping by taking supplements and other OTC products, which will make potential participants question whether it is worth the risk of doing a triathlon. This is supposed to help?

People need to accept that there is no solution. It is a hobby. Race yourself and be satisfied with how you perform relative to your own potential. It does not matter what anyone else does.

Screw that, man. I don't have a solution, but athletes/people cannot be trusted and need to at least have the fear that they'll be tested. We live in a society now that is basically self medicated, all the time, and it has bled over to sports. They don't even see it as wrong!

I see that Devlin posted links with STers stating they support, but don't want to pay extra for AG testing. I would not mind. Tack on 5 extra bucks to the annual membership, don't make it optional, and have it go towards random testing, but with extra emphasis on top AGers.

You might as well be upset because people cheat at Strava. It just does not fucking matter. This is not even a first world problem. It is a first world hangnail.

People cheat at Strava!!!???? Nooooooooooooo

Hangnail? More like a shart. Uncomfortable, but not going to stop anything.

I had another thought...Maybe USAT makes that extra $5 optional, just to gauge interest. Even if 10% of members checked yes, that's still a quarter million that goes towards testing. I don't know, maybe add a little icon or blurb on your USAT card (kind of like organ donors on driver's licenses) that state you donated.

Which is why tri should adopt the CAT system. And then anyone racing at CAT1/2 can be eligible for a WC slot (Kona or 70.3). And in order to accept CAT 1/2 licensing, you need to participate in IOC and OOC testing. And you need to pay the extra fee for the testing.

No road block type testing at events for the one-and-done'rs. No fear of accidental supplementation from Nyquil or Flintstone vitamins.

You want to race against the best in your age group and be clean, then cat up, then pony up the extra testing fee, and play it clean.

Wait a sec, you shart and keep going? Nasty. Go change first or that can become a nasty rash.

If it doesn't matter, are you advocating that we let everyone dope (pros included)? Maybe we should let everyone draft too? How about cutting the course? At the end of the day you need rules to define the boundaries of the sport so that people are actually doing the same sport. Rules evolve and maybe one day the sport/society says doping is okay but right now it is cheating, and cheating is a characteristic that should be discouraged.

My personal belief is that doping is not safe to all those that do it and has long term health impacts so it should therefore be against the rules. Additionally it would create a two-tier system by which the haves who can afford to dope gain an unnatural advantage.

Imagine your kid gets into triathlon and he gets his arse whopped week in week out because the other kids in his hood are doing EPO. If you allow doping to go uncontrolled believe me there will be crazy parents that push their kids into doing it.

I love this idea!

I was curious about this because it says the was caught at a 70.3 in east London, which would mean that British Triathlon (or what ever they are called) is working with WTC to test AG at non-champioship races.

I would be curious to know the details, if its true….I think it indicates a shift in testing frequency/and or event frequency for the positive.

I think this was IC testing not targeted,

Maurice

Unfortunately you are right on the economics of this. A recent study suggested that to detect 100% of potential doping in one year by any given athlete would require 15-60 tests a year at a cost of 25000$ a year PER ATHLETE (http://omicsonline.org/open-access/antidoping-systems-in-sports-are-doomed-to-fail-a-probability-and-cost-analysis-2161-0673.1000148.pdf?aid=32505).


Only sports like cycling and track and field invest anything close to this and only to the very top echelon of competitors. To get caught as an AG racer one would have to be either very brazen (Moats) or very stupid (perhaps this SA athlete. Testing effectiveness needs to be improved massively, until then it is a moral deterrent more than anything.

---

Professional Athlete: http://jordancheyne.wordpress.com/ http://www.strava.com/athletes/145340

Coaching Services:http://www.peakformcoaching.com/

I am just stating the reality that the testing is ineffective and the economics do not work out.


There is already a two tier system. People buy an advantage in the form of equipment. Making the field unlevel has become a central part of triathlon culture.

$250,000 (unfortunately) wouldn't even really pay for the administration costs.

For the UCI biological passport (Covering just the UCIPro registered teams and UCI Continental Pro registered team) program it's around the $5 million mark as of 2012. So you're talking a few thousand riders/staff, and we see how well that is working.

John

---

---

Top notch coaching: Francois and Accelerate3 | Follow on Twitter: LifetimeAthlete |

This is a defeatist outlook. There are always answers for those willing to look for them. You can reduce the equipment advantage with draft legal racing, for example. Not all measures will be cost effective day 1, but if you have a plan on how to make it cost effective then you're half way there.

East London IS in South Africa.