I understand your point, but we'll have to agree to disagree. Serious or not it is still a hobby. I don't like the idea of cheating at all and I really wish that no one would do it. I just don't see how having amateurs submit their location to USADA every single day of the year is acceptable to anyone. I was on vacation a month ago. My itinerary was flexible. I didn't know where I was going to be one day to the next and I had no cell phone coverage or access to the internet. Miss a few tests than I am labelled a cheater. Maybe not a big deal, but if you google me all of a sudden that is there for posterity. That can have a significant impact on someone's life and career. Is that what we want for amateurs?

Beyond that, let's look at the responsibility of what you can and can't put into your body. Dev Paul has a post a few above this talking about that. I really don't think its fair to expect amateurs to be familiar with the list. Most of us know we aren't cheating and take comfort in that. "Test me? Sure, I'm cool." Then the results come back and I get nailed because I took Sudafed a few days before the test. USADA has a strict liability standard. Boom. Now I'm sanctioned publicly and have to deal with that fall out. I may be anonymous to 99.999% of the population, but the people in my life are going to know all about it. It's one thing if the list is no EPO or anabolic steroids or HGH or whatever the other big stuff is, but when the list is expanded way beyond that it is putting an onus on people that really shouldn't be present just because someone wants to go out and run a 10K to see if they can go 35 minutes or not.

This discussion is mostly academic as the resources just aren't there for this to become a reality. Think how many people do triathlon and then think how many run and cycle and play basketball and soccer, etc. Here's a link to just the NGBs: http://www.usada.org/resources/links/ngbs . USADA just doesn't have the resources to deal with the number of people.

So you do not support the list of drugs on WADA? You are saying some of them do not improve performance or mask drugs? And for me, there is the issue. There is always this excuse that each person thinks this set of DRUGS is okay for whatever reason. Bottom line we have a set of rules. We have a set of illegal drugs. If one can talk there way around these, then why even talk about little things like drafting.

Nothing will ever ever change. When you really read between the lines of most folks posts, the real truth comes out.

Even today you have to take a drug test at most companies. And yep, some of the drugs on the WADA list that some think are okay to use will not get you that job.

.

Some of us are not talking our way around these. Slowman would like to see pot and other similar things removed, I however would not. I would say they should specify that some drugs are not performance enhancing but are on the list for safety purposes, but they should still be on the list.

Campbell's Phenomenon - When a poster in an Internet Forum thread starts trolling the thread by replying to everyone, effectively ending all meaningful discussion.

Then you need to ban alcohol and tobacco as well then. Along with a host of other substances that could be harmful. Banning pot is stupid and is nothing but an attempt to moralize. We're talking about performance enhancers not someones personal life choices that don't affect competition. Leave that up to the misguided politicians. I totally agree with what you wrote in the post above this one but when you have an institution trying to dictate morality there is a problem with that.

Some of us are not talking our way around these. Slowman would like to see pot and other similar things removed, I however would not. I would say they should specify that some drugs are not performance enhancing but are on the list for safety purposes, but they should still be on the list.

Too many make it personal to their lifestyle and values, rather than the black and white of the issue. .

Another nice sideways veiled insinuation that Trav must smoke pot since he advocates taking it off the WADA list.

And your argument doesn't hold water. There are many countries where marijuana use is legal. Last I checked, WADA was "World", so if it's not performance enhancing, and some countries it's legal to use, why the big stink about someone thinking maybe it doesn't belong on a banned list?

John

Aghhhhh, don't respond to him. Remember the pact. I bet it would drive him crazy to know that pot smoking disgusts me but I'm still able to argue for it.

Then you need to ban alcohol and tobacco as well then. Along with a host of other substances that could be harmful. Banning pot is stupid and is nothing but an attempt to moralize. We're talking about performance enhancers not someones personal life choices that don't affect competition. Leave that up to the misguided politicians. I totally agree with what you wrote in the post above this one but when you have an institution trying to dictate morality there is a problem with that.

I've almost cracked a few times. I have to beat my head against the wall instead. Although at the rate Dan is banning people there might not be anyone left.

I've almost cracked a few times. I have to beat my head against the wall instead. Although at the rate Dan is banning people there might not be anyone left.

If you honestly think that any elite athlete is going to be smoking pot right before a race or that that is the actual reason for the prohibition then I worry about your thought process. It is nothing but a morality play and if you are going to make the argument that it is a danger then you need to start a crusade to put alcohol on the banned list. There is no difference between the two in their potential to harm based on your argument.

i wholeheartedly agree, and i want alochol and pot on the list far more for the weekend warrior than the elite racer. thought it being on the list would be for safety of all racers; and dont think im anti alcohol or anything; im more than happy to have alcohol served for folks who have finished racing.

You can be sober as heck and still come up positive for THC. It is detectible for up to 30 days in a urine test. It has nothing to do with saftey. It is like saying you had one beer last month and now you are banned from racing sanctioned events.

Dunno if there's a way for "them" to differentiate between "Jeff Spicoli just rolled out of his van in a cloud of pot smoke, and now wants to race", and "I was at a Phish concert almost a month ago, and now want to race", and yet both of those scenarios would likely pop positive under the current testing.

This.

(PS - holy crap! You posted something in a Lance thread, that I agree with!! The Mayans were right... ;-)

Dunno if there's a way for "them" to differentiate between "Jeff Spicoli just rolled out of his van in a cloud of pot smoke, and now wants to race", and "I was at a Phish concert almost a month ago, and now want to race", and yet both of those scenarios would likely pop positive under the current testing.

The first could be potentially hazardous (unless Jeff Spicoli's reaction times are like Dr. Johnny Fever's from WKRP in Cincinatti) - the second, um, probably not, unless the reek of patchouli distracted other racers and caused them to wreck.

Dude, you just made 2 of the top 3 best pop references of all time.

#1 is ... "As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly".

Still, nice job.

Technically he covered that, since both of those references are from WKRP. Although that turkey episode was some seriously funny shit.

John