ST'er Cam Loos mentioned a friend of his witnessed two AG'ers refuse to a drug test at registration.

---

-Of course it's 'effing hard, it's IRONMAN!
Team ZOOT
ZOOT, QR, Garmin, HED Wheels, Zealios, FormSwim, Precision Hydration, Rudy Project

ST'er Cam Loos mentioned a friend of his witnessed two AG'ers refuse to a drug test at registration.

Did they say why they refused (it's pretty obvious) or what excuse they provided?

Yikes, that looks bad for sure. As far as I understand it they refused an in-competition test, which breaks the agreement which they signed when they accepted the Kona slot, therefore they would not be allowed to race and would be looking at a 2 year ban.

This is under the assumption that AGer's, and not just professional athletes, can be banned?

Julie Miller was an AGer.

Refusing an in-competition or out-of-competition test carries the same penalty as a doping violation - currently a 4 year suspension.

Pretty sure it's a 4 year ban.

This was mentioned in the Sam gyde thread and I think by the way one post was worded that it may have left some people thinking that it was SGY who refused.

That's not the case, Sam raced and came 3Rd, another Ster came first... I think they were both tested.

Basically if you race kona and pick up your package be prepared to be tested. I don't think it's entirely targeted to fast guys either, iirc a few years ago there was a thread about a legacy guy getting tested.

Maurice

Once you sign your entry form you have consented to in, and out of, competition testing. A number of age groupers were tested in the weeks leading up to the race as well, so it is more than just at registration.

Its great to hear this is happening ... by not accepting to be tested they are 100% hiding something.

Adios Cheaters!

We still have more work to do in this area but every little bit helps.

---

-------------------------
Dave Latourette
http://www.TTENation.com

For sure,

That is the letter of the law, or the agreement. And in the U.S. They appear to be targeting a few fast guys, at the event and before.

I just don't think they have the same cooperation with other countries in regards to OOC testing pre event, IE my bet is that even if they had the greatest suspicion of this guy that they didn't test him OOC in Italy.

Maurice

I really doubt ITU/WADA is going to bear the expense of travelling to test AGers OOC. Testing people at reg. is a lot easier since the testing folks need to be there for the event anyway.

---

ECMGN Therapy Silicon Valley:
Depression, Neurocognitive problems, Dementias (Testing and Evaluation), Trauma and PTSD, Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI)

Tell that to Kevin Moats.

---

----------------------------------
"Go yell at an M&M"

The country specific anti doping agencies work together. If a US pro cyclist or triathlete is living and competing in say, France, USADA might contact the French version of USADA to request that athlete be tested and vice versa. If you look at the USADA testing database you'll see mention that this only includes testing done by USADA. I've seen social media posts from athletes who mentioned that they got tested two days in a row by at the request of different agencies. it might have been the same testers even, but one was at the behest of maybe USADA and the other by WADA, etc.

---

Kevin

http://kevinmetcalfe.dreamhosters.com
My Strava

And there are other examples in category cycling. It's targeted. If someone calls the tip line with specific, credible information it appears USADA will jump right on a plane.

If it were up to me I'd also throw in 1-2 completely random OOC tests. Just to make dopers sweat a little at night.

The issue is if WTC has that level of cooperation with others... As a private company.

For sure they do with USADA as they likely give them 200-300k$ per year.

Maurice

I vote they take a urine sample from everyone right after they weigh you.

Then, determine which athletes to test via lottery. The threat of knowing your urine is going to be collected no matter what may be a good deterrent.

I think the anti-doping rules don't allow that. If they take a sample, it must be tested.

---

Formerly DrD

A large number of KQ age groupers (male and female) have been tested leading into the IM World Championship the last couple of years.

---

-------------------------
Dave Latourette
http://www.TTENation.com

Out of curiosity, what's the rationale for this?

Chain of command and process.

---

Brooks Doughtie, M.S.
Exercise Physiology
-USAT Level II

In one of the more recent (couple years old?) Lance Armstrong documentaries about his comeback: He was in the process of getting tested by one agency and another one arrived before he finished the first! I think he also got tested by a third different agency the day before as well.

They should really communicate between themselves better or set up some sort of online database where they can all see who was tested when or something like that.

---

OlympicHopeful.com - Interviews with aspiring Olympians | Strava
Supported by: Skechers|Zwift|Squirt Lube|TYR|Rubber Ducky Sunscreen|Riplaces|MultiSport Canada|Joshus Bikes
“More often than not bad luck meant bad plans” -Joe Abercrombie

Don't know the specifics. Recall it being brought up in a previous doping thread.

---

Formerly DrD

I would like to see every AG in the top ten have to submit a test. Add a choice on the entry form, Do you want to qualify for Kona? If yes, You are required to test pre/post race. Add 50 bucks to the entry fee for those that do, at $600+ does it really matter? Will it get rid of all of it? No, but I think it would help.

It's a little ambiguous, but the WADA code sounds like you can just store the samples without testing:

"Samples shall be analyzed to detect Prohibited Substances and ProhibitedMethods identified on the Prohibited List and other substances as may be directed by WADA pursuant to Article 4.5, or to assist an Anti-Doping Organization in profiling relevant parameters in an Athlete’s urine, blood or other matrix, including DNA or genomic profiling, or for any other legitimate anti-doping purpose. Samples may be collected and stored for future analysis. "


That kind of sounds like you can collect and store with no intermediate analysis.

But that's just the top-level code. It could be that lower agencies (e.g. USADA) have a must-analyze policy.

I like a little randomness and uncertainty in every stage. If you make things predictable, then you set a nice easy goalpost to defeat the system.

For example maybe one year they do most of the testing upon registration onsite. Then the next year they use all their money to do random out-of-competition testing, showing up at the doors of some qualifiers a few weeks prior to Kona.

The guys that I know, that were tested in Kona this year tell me they took blood not urine. I do like your idea (if it's implementable/legal) as it will deter most dopers

---

____________________________________

Are you ready to do an Ultraman? | How I calculate Ironman race fueling | Strength Training for Athletes |

If more people who had evidence of cheating would use USADA's reporting system it would really help. They monitor that closely and will respond to reports made.

---

-Of course it's 'effing hard, it's IRONMAN!
Team ZOOT
ZOOT, QR, Garmin, HED Wheels, Zealios, FormSwim, Precision Hydration, Rudy Project

Everything has a price. Time and money. With 2000+ athletes at Kona there is a lot of cost in time and money associated with taking that many blood or urine samples.

They do. I can attest to it. One of my AG guys that qualified in 2015 got tested OOC pre Kona 2015 (US athlete, US based).

How much they do? Who nows....

D.

---

David T-D
http://www.tilburydavis.com

That's great to hear.

Testing at registration might catch some people initially, but if people know that is where testing occurs it becomes an intelligence test vs. a drug test. OOC is critical given the short glow times.

---

ECMGN Therapy Silicon Valley:
Depression, Neurocognitive problems, Dementias (Testing and Evaluation), Trauma and PTSD, Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI)

It takes a lot of resources to take a sample. I haven't timed it with a stopwatch, but when I've been tested it has felt like it has taken about an hour to complete the entire process. And a lot of that time needs a desk to work at, where you can sit with the anti-doping officer while all the paperwork is completed, you do the splitting of the sample into the A and B jars, the AD officer tests the specific gravity of the sample, and there's all manner of boxes, bags, sticky labels etc all over the desk as part of the process. ID has to be verified and the details recorded, you have to list all the supplements you've taken, it's all very time consuming. To take a sample from everyone would need a huge number of anti-doping officers and desks to work at, along with the space to house them all.

I know of an age grouper in years past that wasn't able to race Kona because they couldn't find a vein and repeatedly stabbed her in multiple locations in a very futile attempt to find a vein and draw blood. She even warned them it would be a problem and asked for a physician.

---

---------------------------------------------------------
The difference between stupidity and genius is that genius has its limits. -- A fake Albert Einstein "quote"

That doesn't seem fair to the athlete. The failure of the tester to find a vein is not a doping failure or a refusal to test. It just strikes me as an injustice.

She should have ground for protesting that if that's the case.

If the amount of blood that can be removed from the Athlete at the first attempt is insufficient, the BCO shall repeat the procedure up to a maximum of three attempts in total. Should all three attempts fail to produce a sufficient amount of blood, then the BCO shall inform the DCO. The DCO shall terminate the Sample Collection Session and record this and the reasons for terminating the collection.

If the DCO terminates the Collection, it is not an official "Failure to Comply." And there's no listed sanction in the WADA Code where you skip one event. You're either formally sanctioned, or you're not formally sanctioned. There is no "one day" penalty. And there is no penalty without due process, e.g. the athlete is afforded the opportunity to challenge or arbitrate.

Is it possible this age grouper was telling a story about why she left Kona?

Edit: Maybe there is a one-day thing. Just can't find it written as policy anywhere.

I was tested in '13 before Kona. As stated above it was a long and uncomfortable process, painfully redundant, picking tubes and collection devices, signing a bunch of stuff.

And these are government employees. They are NOT phlebotomists. I have great veins, and any 1st day nursing student could hit my veins with no difficulty. But not the guy who did my testing. He rooted around in my arm for 20 minutes. When I complained, he replied we could stop but I couldn't race on Saturday. Finally he lucked up and got a small sample then off to the bathroom to watch me pee, standing much closer to my genitals than a Seinfeld close talker.

---

Coach at KonaCoach Multisport

Why would you want a physician to draw blood? A phlebotomist will be much better at getting a good stick than a physician that last drew blood or started an IV back in med school. I'm glad they didn't resort to a Intraosseous draw.

---

Oui, mais pas de femme toute de suite (yes, but I am not ready for a woman straight away) -Stephen Roche's reply when asked whether he was okay after collapsing at the finish in the La Plagne stage of the 1987 Tour

I wonder why people would show up glowing at registration ... surely you would not be on an EPO cycle during race week. For testosterone, I believe the T/E ratio test can quite easily be dealt with if you know you might get tested at registration and CIR is expensive (too expensive for age group testing????).

Wouldn't one lay off the T for some time before registration or does that push you off a cliff?

Hello Trail and All,

How much blood does it take to do the USADA tests currently?

If the USADA tests requires a blood draw of more than one drop ...... I think the blood draw of more than one drop should be after the race ..... I want all my blood to race ..... and not have a big bruise on my arm to boot while racing.

Then all the drug test involves is a finger prick.


There are one drop blood testing machines for a regular CBC ..... are there not one drop machines for drugs?

And yes I am familiar with the Theranos fraud.

There are one drop machines for Warfarin INR levels ..... one drop machines for glucose levels and so .... one drop test cards for blood type ......... that have been in use for years.

Otherwise for on the spot tests just prior to racing ...... use urine tests or hair sample or something less invasive and save the athlete's blood for racing.

---

Cheers, Neal

+1 mph Faster

You mean like Nina Kraft? If you could get away with it you might.
Anyway, that is why you have out of competition, at registration, and post race testing.

..

I have a friend who is an elite age group cyclocross racer in the US. They were told at the lineup of a recent regional cyclocross race "we will be testing the winner & one random athlete at the conclusion of todays race"....

Talk about a bullshit policy to announce prior to a race. Easy way to dodge the system & lose on purpose if you are in fact guilty.

The whole system is broke but I think if it was fixed, we'd all be paying $300 annual USAT fees to cover the cost.

I think you mean "chain of custody."

Ian

They are not government employees.

I had a dco and a phlebotomist visit my house.

What's funny is when they say that and then some athletes immediately get in their cars and leave. That's happened at some SoCal masters races.

---

ECMGN Therapy Silicon Valley:
Depression, Neurocognitive problems, Dementias (Testing and Evaluation), Trauma and PTSD, Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI)

Would it not be good practice to test all Kona qualifiers on their qualifying raceday (after they've crossed the line), and then again randomly at some point before Kona raceday?

I've no idea of logistics or cost, but I would think once all Kona Qualifiers are known (approx. 2500 athletes), it should be a straight forward exercise in picking random dates and testing all competitors before Kona raceday? Same could be done for 70.3 Worlds too no?

I think that way you know have some confidence they were clean when they qualified, and the so-called "world championships" are clean too.

well...
If people really decide not to race, then, I guess on the bright side we know for sure they didn't take away a finishing spot from a clean rider (or at least a rider that is willing to take a test). It's something anyway. Who says testing doesn't have a deterrent effect? They may still use PED's to look like super stars during training, but, if they are afraid to show up for a race - that's pretty good.

I chuckle at someone going all the way from Europe to Kona - and then pull out, and not race - If I didn't see a cast on an arm or leg; guess what I'd be thinking (any time I'd see them at any event)???

---

I saw this on a white board in a window box at my daughters middle school...
List of what life owes you:
1. __________
2. __________
3. __________

In her experience it's been the opposite apparently. She has very deep veins it seems and usually has no problems when an md does the blood drawing. This was one of many blood drawing problems in her life apparently. She was left rather sore, back and blue in multiple locations and had a rather irritated staff because they couldn't get blood from her.

She's gone do Kona twice ... No testing at either of those. But I bet she's still irritated. Haven't seen her in some time.

---

---------------------------------------------------------
The difference between stupidity and genius is that genius has its limits. -- A fake Albert Einstein "quote"

Trail, as I understood it at the time, it was her decision to not race. As she explained it each of the attempts to draw blood also involved a great deal of probing and poking and was quite painful. They got zilch in blood from her too apparently.

After I wrote up the original post I realized I'd probably given the wrong impression. Sorry about that. In my defense, I'm a bit under the weather after Ironman week. At least that my story ...

Speaking of drug testing Kona athletes, I did see Mr. Low T here during the week leading up to the big dance.

---

---------------------------------------------------------
The difference between stupidity and genius is that genius has its limits. -- A fake Albert Einstein "quote"

Think about the cost involved in testing 2500 people. Think about what is required in terms of people and $$ just to test one athlete.

How do they decide who to test? In all the Ironman events I've done, I've never known someone who's been tested. What if, as an athlete, you suspect another athlete of it?

Or just make 2500 people think theyve been tested. Only process 25 samples. A simple urine test is enough.

This was what I thought, no need to buy an array of mass spec's. Tack $5 on to my entry for the specimen cup, collect a sample during registration, & randomly discard 2475 of them. This would provide a likelihood that anyone could be tested.

I really like this idea and for once I would totally agree with an extra fee. This testing fee should work in a way that everyone knows that they will be tested no matter what, only not sure when. Let's say som people don't pay it, no problem: there's a huge line of honest and clean athletes that would gladly pay it if it means that they take a slot and the field is even. I would also like to see far more AG testing at all IM races, they are making piles of cash anyways.

I tried to explain to you why this isn't possible, did you not see my post? In addition to what I said previously, it simply isn't possible for the anti-doping agencies to have the available personnel to collect so many samples, as they wouldn't be able to provide work for such a large number of people the rest of the year, even if the venue for that one event had enough suitable toilets and desk space to handle the collection of so many samples. There's a heck of a lot more to collecting a sample than someone just peeing into a cup.

:sigh: somehow people aren't understanding the cost in time and resources.

But would the total number to be tested not be divided out between the each country tri federations affiliated to WADA to arrange the testing? How do the other sports test their athletes, especially in sports that have way more participants than triathlon? Or is my thinking too simplistic and fantastical?

I have been thru a number of airports where you walk up to a machine, push a button and it shows red or green. Red you get extra security check, green you go on thru. How about having something like this at registration and at finish line. Set the sample size to the amount of funding, people and space available. Completely random and covers the entire field very visibly. Now...how to handle out of competition, that is the real issue I think.

Testing is expensive, we all get that. So why not levy some kind of fine to people who test positive, and use the money to expand the testing program.

To the thread: part of the problem is a lack of transparency of how often tests are currently carried out which makes it difficult to gauge how well, or not, WTC is doing on this issue.

Who is doing the fining? As the testing agency, USADA and WADA would have a serious conflict of interest if assessing fines created a profit center for them. That's the last thing we need. And how do you feel about a private entity like WTC assessing fines on their customers? I'm all for increasing the length of the suspensions and imposing lifetime bans for a repeat offense, but I think you are going down a problematic path when you non-profits and for-profits start assessing fines for something that is neither a criminal or a civil infraction. Better to just kick them out of your sandbox...permanently.

BTW, the ITU assessed a $1000 USD fine on Julie Miller for cheating and another $2000 USD for procedural expenses. What do you think the odds are of the ITU collecting that $3K?

Agree. 0 chance anyone would pay for those fees

Other sports like football, basketball, baseball have crap loads of money. That's how they do it. And they're professional sports. age groupers aren't professional athletes.

If cost and organization are the only issues why not use existing agencies such as LabCorp , Quest or others that do employment testing? They are in many cities and could probably provide location services. They already have a volume of services so could probably provide a reasonable cost to service. They could not afford to allow errors, falsification or false reports (although there is that in all testing).
Athletes could be sent a notice to go and provide a sample within a period of time or else it would equate to a refusal of sample. The testing time could be random.
LabCorp sponsor of Ironman? That would speak well for clean racing perhaps.
Not a perfect solution but if the issue is cost and resources to get more testing than this could be a viable option.

Are those labs wada accredited?

I think cost still would be an issue. And now you're strictly talking outside of race day. Are we talking strictly pros and elite age groupers? Because as a MOPer who will never sniff KQ, I think it's stupid to test me and I'd be annoyed by it. There's no money at stake for me and its just a hobby for me.

[/quote]
I think cost still would be an issue. And now you're strictly talking outside of race day. Are we talking strictly pros and elite age groupers? Because as a MOPer who will never sniff KQ, I think it's stupid to test me and I'd be annoyed by it. There's no money at stake for me and its just a hobby for me.[/quote]
It might be a hobby but cheating is still cheating. I think they need to nail down the Pro/FOP testing before placing a big emphasis on the rest of the crowd though.

I think cost still would be an issue. And now you're strictly talking outside of race day. Are we talking strictly pros and elite age groupers? Because as a MOPer who will never sniff KQ, I think it's stupid to test me and I'd be annoyed by it. There's no money at stake for me and its just a hobby for me.[/quote]
It might be a hobby but cheating is still cheating. I think they need to nail down the Pro/FOP testing before placing a big emphasis on the rest of the crowd though.[/quote]
True. But it's a tricky balance when you talk about adding costs to an already expensive sport and the inconvenience of drug testing. And then you've got MOPers and BOPers who make up a big percentage of racers. I can't imagine somebody just aiming to finish is going to be happy about additional costs for drug testing and having to go to Labcorp for drug testing. WTC doesn't want to start losing this people. In a perfect world, a drug test would be a super quick and inexpensive thing. I think for a hobby sport, focusing on the pros and FOPers is the only way to go at this point. It gets really tricky after that.

I feel, if you qualify for kona (or 70.3 worlds) at a race a drug test is part of the acceptance of your spot. When you accept, you are drug tested on the spot. This would apply to roll down slots. Then, random tests of this pool up until October

---

"injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere" MLK

Good idea in theory, but executing it would be difficult without adding tremendous expense. You would need several WADA certified doping control officers - all of whom in my understanding must be employed by USADA to make the test legit - as well as a number of phlebotomist on hand at every race. On weekends with multiple races (like last weekend with Kona/Louisville) you'd probably need every WADA certified doping control officer in the country and then some.

Further, the time it would take to do it in that fashion would be tremendous. I'm assuming you've been to an Ironman awards ceremony/roll down? If so, you know the ceremony itself already takes hours if you account for all the pomp and circumstance, signing of forms and processing payment for the KQs. Throw in 40-75 WADA protocol drug tests, and the KQs would be there all day ... and probably night as well.

Like others before have said, I think USADA and WTC are on the right track and getting the most 'bang for their buck' by performing random (or upon credible info) testing of pros the FOP age groupers. Could they do more? Sure, but we would all bear the financial burden of those tests through increased USAT fees, race fees, etc... Plain and simple, there is no easy (or cost effective) solution.

As for the LabCorp. or Quest suggestion - also good in theory but there are only two WADA certified labs in the U.S. One at UCLA and the other in Utah. Also, Quest - through its Blueprint for Athletes division/service - is the title sponsor of Ironman Boulder.

There needs to be a culture whereby athletes believe that WTC/national agencies a) have credibility... and b) they will actively pursue those placed under suspicion by well-evidenced 'tip-offs'. I don't want to say 'culture of fear' but something like that.

As others have said, anything else is too costly with this market/audience.

---

29 years and counting

I think the random testing against the pros and FOP age groupers is their only option both because of costs and the concern about alienating MOPers and more specifically BOPers. Maybe I'm wrong about that but I doubt somebody aiming for just beat the cutoff of get in at 14-16 hours for an IM is going to be all that happy about additional costs and more importantly the inconvenience of testing. People can argue about the sanctity of the sport as the reason but I'm pretty sure most of those no where close to the podium who see this sport as a hobby aren't going to be all that pleased about being drug tested. Maybe WTC could do a survey and prove me wrong but I suspect I am not. I do this sport because it's fun and it keeps me active and fit. As a MOPer, I would not be too pleased about being drug tested.

Really? As a MOP racer, trying to get to the front of the race, it is my dream to be relevant enough to be tested. If drug testing showed up at my house or took me aside at a race I would take that as a sign that I finally 'made it'. That would be something worthy of posting to a twitter feed ;-)

---

----------------------------
Jason
None of the secrets of success will work unless you do.

haha. you'd be offering blood, urine, and stool samples. lol

What annoys me about it is two fold. Check the quarterly reports, they just test whatever is closest to them. In triathlon specifically the Colorado based athletes have higher numbers than most other located athletes. That's the lack of a budget talking right there. Which is my second annoyance. Simply move to some far off place that's expensive to get to and it's likely you won't be tested as much.

So lacking a tip... getting tested is few and far between.

---

36 kona qualifiers 2006-'23 - 3 Kona Podiums - 4 OA IM AG wins - 5 IM AG wins - 18 70.3 AG wins
I ka nana no a 'ike -- by observing, one learns | Kulia i ka nu'u -- strive for excellence
Garmin Glycogen Use App | Garmin Fat Use App

USADA is transparent.

WTC hides everything.

I just _love_ the naivete of the situation that has us catching age groupers every now and again but close to zero pros per year. Uh-hunh. Sure. Riiiiight.

---

36 kona qualifiers 2006-'23 - 3 Kona Podiums - 4 OA IM AG wins - 5 IM AG wins - 18 70.3 AG wins
I ka nana no a 'ike -- by observing, one learns | Kulia i ka nu'u -- strive for excellence
Garmin Glycogen Use App | Garmin Fat Use App

We can't get transparency on slot allocation, I don't think they are in a hurry to show it here either. For Profit business, not a sports federation, they behave accordingly, we (myself very much included) are the dummies that expect more from WTC.

---

Ironman Certified Coach

Currently accepting limited number of new athletes

This one would be worthy of framing next to the speeding ticket on the bicycle!

AG'ers doping, I still can't get that through my head....

Agree. It makes no sense to me. There are just people who will do far more than me to reach their goals. I'll never understand an age grouper doping. I understand baseball players who have done it. But it's paid off financially for them big time. For me, it's a hobby sport and I enjoy and want to do well but certainly my ego is not tied up enough in this sport to ever think I would want to dope.

I've had a similar complaint about in-competition category/masters testing in USA Cycling racing. They claim they'll show up at any random amateur race. But so far they've largely shown up at NRC (pro) races that also have masters/category events. I get it. Testers are already there and they tend to be high-profile events. Cost savings. But it makes things predictable.

I think this comes back to the idea of having an competitive and a recreational category. If you want to compete for prizes, slots, awards, etc. then you sign up competitive and are in the testing pool. Otherwise, you are a recreational athlete and are out there just for fun.

---

---

---

Take a short break from ST and read my blog:
http://tri-banter.blogspot.com/

That's all the perp needs to know. Low probability... easily snuck by. Anointed marketing asset or prominent athlete in WTC eyes, results management sweeps the positive away. There's a reason "no names" are the only professionals announced as caught.

---

36 kona qualifiers 2006-'23 - 3 Kona Podiums - 4 OA IM AG wins - 5 IM AG wins - 18 70.3 AG wins
I ka nana no a 'ike -- by observing, one learns | Kulia i ka nu'u -- strive for excellence
Garmin Glycogen Use App | Garmin Fat Use App

I'm not naïve, but that is a strong accusation that USADA can be bought when they perform testing for WTC. Do you have evidence or are you merely speculating?

Yeah, a former pro IM athlete (whose identity I don't want to reveal without his consent), told me that in the not-too-distant past he knew of a couple of guys who were quietly told by WTC to "take 6 months off" rather than expose their positives publicly. I tend to trust the guy. He's a pro with credibility.

That would be a nice policy.

---

36 kona qualifiers 2006-'23 - 3 Kona Podiums - 4 OA IM AG wins - 5 IM AG wins - 18 70.3 AG wins
I ka nana no a 'ike -- by observing, one learns | Kulia i ka nu'u -- strive for excellence
Garmin Glycogen Use App | Garmin Fat Use App

WTC handles their own results management. They don't contract with USADA for all of their testing. After acquisition it's just a number that gets matched up on their side. USADA never knows.

---

36 kona qualifiers 2006-'23 - 3 Kona Podiums - 4 OA IM AG wins - 5 IM AG wins - 18 70.3 AG wins
I ka nana no a 'ike -- by observing, one learns | Kulia i ka nu'u -- strive for excellence
Garmin Glycogen Use App | Garmin Fat Use App

I've heard the same thing. One needn't look hard for certain folks that have taken extended breaks from WTC racing.

---

36 kona qualifiers 2006-'23 - 3 Kona Podiums - 4 OA IM AG wins - 5 IM AG wins - 18 70.3 AG wins
I ka nana no a 'ike -- by observing, one learns | Kulia i ka nu'u -- strive for excellence
Garmin Glycogen Use App | Garmin Fat Use App

Recalling a con call i was on in late 2009 when the first rumblings of a union were gaining steam... Jarrod asked some pointed question to PNF who was WTC's rep on the call which was responded to with "WTC is a private enterprise that does not have to reveal trade secrets in this area." The question had something to do with professional racing under the WTC banner... nothing that remotely would touch upon trade secrets yet that was the stone wall that was raised. Translation: they didnt give a shit then, dont give a shit now. Hiding all that info is the best management practice.

---

36 kona qualifiers 2006-'23 - 3 Kona Podiums - 4 OA IM AG wins - 5 IM AG wins - 18 70.3 AG wins
I ka nana no a 'ike -- by observing, one learns | Kulia i ka nu'u -- strive for excellence
Garmin Glycogen Use App | Garmin Fat Use App

That's me. Recreational. For ironman events, I am not near good enough to compete for prizes, slots, awards. MOPer all the way. Trying to get faster of course. I would understand drug testing if I was closer to FOP and going for slots, awards, etc. But I'm not. It would be a waste of resources testing me.

Thanks. I was completely unaware of this technical process and would not have expected that USADA would have ceded their control of results. In this case, WTC does have a conflict of interest when adverse results would impede their marketing plans. It's disappointing, but certainly not shocking.

USADA results management can be found here:
http://www.usada.org/...thlete-test-history/

(specific search terms don't produce a new URL)

---

36 kona qualifiers 2006-'23 - 3 Kona Podiums - 4 OA IM AG wins - 5 IM AG wins - 18 70.3 AG wins
I ka nana no a 'ike -- by observing, one learns | Kulia i ka nu'u -- strive for excellence
Garmin Glycogen Use App | Garmin Fat Use App

Yes, fully agree. This is something that should be looked at and tried out for a season!

Hello MarkyV and All,

To reduced the cost of personnel to administer drug tests that are a significant expense ...... it seems that there are agencies and labs that could be 'deputized' to do the tests for outlying locations.

http://www.drugfreesport.com/...ort-drug-testing.asp

When I worked for an airline I was 'suprised' drug tested at various locations by contract personnel ..... usually on arrival in the United States .... so the agencies are available .... like the one above.



Also http://www.americanscreeningcorp.com/Default.aspx shows an FDA approved 12 panel cup for about $4.37 per test and they advertise drug tests for sweat, spit, and so on at reasonable costs.

http://www.theathlete.org/...esting-In-Sports.htm

Excerpt:

"According to an August 2013 article printed in the British newspaper, The Daily Mail, the Word Anti-Doping Agency (or WADA for short) administered more than 267,000 drug tests to athletes around the world in 2012. Of the tests administered, approximately 3200 (or 1.2%) of the results came back as positive or had adverse findings that disqualified offending athletes from competition or resulted in forfeitures of wins or medals.The testing procedures for drug abuse in sports are strict and at times deemed unfair by athletes. They are deemed unfair because athletes are responsible for knowing what is banned despite the fact that additions are made almost daily to the list of banned substances. The best possible solution is to avoid all drugs unless listed on the allowed substance list."

On balance 1.2% positive does not seem to be a major problem .... and 267,000 is a lot of drug tests .... so WADA is doing a pretty good job on the face of it.

http://www.ncaa.org/...s-about-drug-testing

"The penalty for a positive test for a performance-enhancing drug (PED) is strict and automatic: student-athletes lose one full year of eligibility for the first offense (25 percent of their total eligibility) and are withheld from competition for 365 days from the date of the test. A second positive test for a PED results in the loss of all remaining eligibility.

The penalty for a positive test for a substance in the street drug class is withholding from competition for 50% of the season in all sports in which the student-athlete participates. A second positive test for a street drug results in the loss of a year of eligibility and withholding from participation for 365 days from the test."

http://www.usada.org/testing/

"Testing is an important part of any effective anti-doping program, and the area that most often comes to mind when thinking about anti-doping. From test planning and collection of a urine or blood sample, through the results managements process, USADA provides a thorough program, with policies and procedures in accordance with the World Anti-Doping Code, the WADA International Standards, the United States Olympic Committee Anti-Doping Rules, and the USADA Protocol for Olympic and Paralympic Movement Testing."

It would be interestng to see what actual costs are for drug testing and what devices and procedures will be available in the near term to reduce those costs and improve the efficiency of the process.

---

Cheers, Neal

+1 mph Faster

Rhetorical question as to testing just the pointy end. What about the random 35 yo with low T that is taking T & never considered that it is banned? How many people here take Allegra-D for allergies? Both would be positive & if you are content with only testing the pointy end then you need to be content that you are racing against people on drugs. To me cheating is cheating; it shouldn't be acceptable for anyone to do.

Are those labs in the link your referenced WADA accredited?


Having had a drug screen for work, surgery prep, and other things, I can tell you that the USADA/WADA process is significantly different in test administration then the others I have experienced .

To be honest, once the table is set up, and it's a production line, the difficulty and time issues get reduced.
For example, from my short order cooking days, one steak takes say 10 minutes. 2 steaks takes 11 minutes and 20 steaks takes 30 minutes. The overall time drops from 10 minutes per steak to 1.5 minutes per steak. I suspect the same would happen with blood tests.
And if you're paying for the team to fly to Kona to test one guy, they're already there, so even if the time takes the same one hour each time, they're there all day so test 10 guys in 10 hours, pretty much for the same staff cost.
Both time and cost decrease by testing more people.
Lets say it's $500 per test and an hour per test. Test 10% of the people and add $50 to the race entry fee. $50? Triathletes wouldn't even notice $50

---

TriDork

"Happiness is a myth. All you can hope for is to get laid once in a while, drunk once in a while and to eat chocolate every day"

wrong, and not this triathlete.

Hello turningscrews and All,

If I understand your comment you are in favor of testing everyone or at least most athletes.

If there was more widespread testing and the random 35 year old tested positive for a banned drug (and there were very many athletes) they would probably be granted a TUE .... same with athlete allergies ..... same with pros like Wiggins using drugs for medical condition therapy.

What is a banned drug and what is not changes over time also .... we live in a changing world .... and when banned drugs or procedures are use for injury therapy the matter is complicated by the division of what is therapy and what is a PED.

What percentage of triathlon athletes should be tested in your view?

I think one of the primary limits to more widespread testing is costs...... both materials and personnel.

Make the test program cheap enough and it could be more widespread .... although more positive drug tests could just result in more TUE's .... especially for amateur age groupers.

The question is how to both lower drug testing costs and find an acceptable way to pass the costs to the customer without impacting the bottom line ..... and still weed out the egregious PED users .... to provide athlete confidence in a level playing field.

Remember that triathlon is a business ...... as are many adult sports .... and how much would the business suffer if there was no testing at all?

It appears at present there is enough testing and penalties to make most of the customers happy .... although that level of testing can go up or down over time .... dependent on customers' attitudes and costs.

---

Cheers, Neal

+1 mph Faster

I think this is the point that people are failing to understand. In addition to chain of custody there are standards for the labs as well, If it is correct from a previous poster there are essentially 3 accredited labs in all of NA, for a population of close to 400 million. (Montreal and 2 in U.S.)

Combine that with the 5 or 6 step process to actually collect a sample (and be correct..and limit liability on appeal), then there is a huge amount of human capitol involved in just collection.

WTC could however increase threat, IE at any and all IM or 70.3 if you have intentions of going you need to sign an AD consent form...IE before people steal a slot they need to know that there might be an AD presence at the race.

Including anyone there who has intentions, roll down or out right Q...*you might be randomly selected* at sign in on the day after the race. You could then do zero, four or forty tests.

I am a bit torn between catching dopers or letting them crawl away so a legit guy who is 6-10th ag gets in the race, in this situation it's not that someone will get a ban...but someone else was robbed.

Of course the best of both worlds is better.

Maurice

It appears you're the exception that proves the rule. :-)

Even back in the day when I was a starving student with 2 kids, somehow TriSpouse managed to find $500 for my first IM race entry, plus travel expenses, plus, plus, plus, and if the entry was $550, I'd still have done the race. $50 doesn't even cover one night at a Motel 6. $50 hidden a race entry fee wouldn't stop anyone, and I include you in that group.

Kona? we all just pay what it costs. The total cost of racing Kona is stratospheric. $50 isn't even a blip in that cost.

---

TriDork

"Happiness is a myth. All you can hope for is to get laid once in a while, drunk once in a while and to eat chocolate every day"

What planet do you live on?

The cost of Kona/a WTC race has nearly doubled since 2007. I do not support an additional 5% cost increase to enable wide spread testing. The typical triathlete has not seen their disposable income double in that timeframe.

While I support testing, WTC does not currently have enough transparency on who they are testing, when they are testing, and the results of that testing.

When WTC commits to those things, I will support an additional 5%/$50/some other "KQ eligibility fee" to help enable further drug testing.

WTC needs to prove they are doing what they say they are doing, and as has been mentioned the fact that the majority of people caught are AGers, makes me question if they are doing what they say they are doing.

FTR - if WTC had a page like this: http://www.usada.org/...thlete-test-history/ I would probably no longer question their transparency.

Yep, it's a huge process, which is important as it protects all of the parties involved.

I'd be in favor of lots of things that increase testing and encourage clean racing, but as has been called out between a lack of transparency and vendors at two different major tri expos this year - we have a number of problems that are coming together to hamper clean sport.

Another example: the @IMtrue twitter account seems to have more posts in the days *just* prior to Kona, than the rest of the year combined. That is a problem. That account should be active promoting and educating 24x7x365.

I will never understand why people dope and why people give a shit about people who dope. The elites dope. Period. If you're an age grouper as most of us are, who really gives a shit? Aren't age groupers out there to just beat themselves?

Wow, that would be great. I'm pretty convinced that I'd be surprised by the number of guys using T boost in tri.

Hello turningscrews and All,

turningscrews wrote: "What planet do you live on?"

Currently on space ship Earth ..... although after just reading the 'The Three-Body Problem' trilogy ..... (spoiler alert) I am not so sure.

Do you think there should be more drug testing?

Are there any recent polls of triathletes on these questions:

.......Should triathlon have more or less drug testing?

.... What percentage of triathletes should be drug tested?

...... How much are you willing to pay for additional triathlete drug testing?

And of course ...... how would race promoters answer the same questions since that is where the rubber meets the road.

For my part I am happy to go along with whatever the majority would vote for (and the triathlon race promoters implement ..... or not) and if my costs do not exceed $200 I would not squawk too loud ...... since in view of the big picture of entry fees and travel and time for preparation that would not be excessive. I do not like giving blood (if more than a few drops) less than 3 weeks before a race .... but I do not know if anyone else is concerned.

What are your answers and thoughts?

---

Cheers, Neal

+1 mph Faster

chain of custody

---

Eric Reid AeroFit | Instagram Portfolio
Aerodynamic Retul Bike Fitting

“You are experiencing the criminal coverup of a foreign backed fascist hostile takeover of a mafia shakedown of an authoritarian religious slow motion coup. Persuade people to vote for Democracy.”

it's all just narrative control. The shark has already been well and truly jumped.

IMO we need to take it out of WTC's hands, meaning you and me and a few other like minded athletes. It's not hard to do... couple of meetups a year and monthly conference calls.

---

Eric Reid AeroFit | Instagram Portfolio
Aerodynamic Retul Bike Fitting

“You are experiencing the criminal coverup of a foreign backed fascist hostile takeover of a mafia shakedown of an authoritarian religious slow motion coup. Persuade people to vote for Democracy.”

Sad to see that there is an issue with Carta. I was on the podium with him in Austria where he qualified as 3rd in M40. I knew about his doping past (http://www.dopeology.org/people/Maurizio_Carta) but hoped that ethics come with age as the infraction was 11 years ago.
Obviously I am too naive and again it appears that 'once a cheater, always a cheater' is true in lots of cases :-(

Speaking about myself: I have only been tested twice: once in Kona right after my first AG win and a second time in Kona during registration 2 years ago. First time was urine sample, second time was blood sample.
I think a good criterion to determine the sample group for athletes to be tested is consistency, or rather inconsistency. Over the years, my results have been pretty regular (apart from declining slightly because of aging and a very busy professional life last couple of years). I see the same with guys around me that I know reasonably well: all very consistent. Dan Stu is also very good example: no spikes - always same outstanding level over the years.

It is a tough debate but I stopped caring after the Toni Colom issue. More dirty athletes are entering the scene, I guess we have to live with it and bring rotten tomatoes to award ceremonies (just aim at the right person)...
Doping and drafting seem to be 2 issues WTC refuses to take seriously among amateur athletes. They keep paying anyway.

Sam Gyde

I'd like to know that the people I'm competing against are clean. If you're an AGer in the running for a Worlds spot and miss it by a few places, wouldn't you want to know that those in front of you were clean?

IIRC a race promoter who paid for drug tester to show up for his gran fondo (there were cash prizes - somewhere on the East Coast US? ) said it cost about $1000 per tested athlete ( and they caught someone cheating ). Maybe one could reduce the cost a bit if you tested everyone but it's closer to doubling the entry fee for Kona versus $50.

I will never understand why people dope and why people give a shit about people who dope. The elites dope. Period. If you're an age grouper as most of us are, who really gives a shit? Aren't age groupers out there to just beat themselves?

So, if you were trying to get a slot for Hawaii, and everyone in your age group was on drugs and you failed to qualify, you would be perfectly happy with a PB?

I don't believe that for one second.

Because all sport is based on rules, and enforcement of those rules. As soon as you start selectively ignoring rule enforcement, things can unravel pretty quick. If you want to strike a rule from the books - fine - you can argue for a change to all-drug competition. But it's fundamentally corrosive to have a written rules that says, "No drugs" and an unwritten rule that says, "Wink, wink - everyone does it and we don't really care."


Some probably do. Some probably don't.


Personally, I get the most enjoyment out of beating other people, though PRs are nice too. So I give a few shits.

My appologies, I didn't consider those trying to qualify for Kona.