Yes, Logistics is a Big issue. To take a real example, my son was tested at IM 70.3 European Elsinore and it took about 30min for him to go through the process with 4 "official" people involved. You need a one man for men, and one woman for women + on security outside + another official in the lab. So, minimum 4 staff. If we want 72 tests at one world event, Ironman will need to create at least 4-5 teams of 4 people to administer the tests within a reasonable time frame. But it will have the $2million Fund.....

Here is a rapid calculation: there are about 200 IM & 70.3 races per year with about 2000 participants, that's 400000 participants. If Ironman adds $5 to each inscription (and noone would see the difference: when you pay $235 to enter a race, if it's $240 you'll still pay it, same for Worlds 70.3, at $425, who cares if it's $430),--and Hawaii at $600-800? is even more expensive)... it makes $2 Million that goes into a AG Anti-Doping Testing Fund. One can make a lot of tests with that money. If we take the 24 AG of a World Championship x Podium 3 = 72 Tests at $1200 = $86400 x 2Worlds (Kona)= $172800......Still plenty left for OOC testing or testing at Ironman Qualifiers races.

I think those numbers are WAY off. Do you have any actual facts to back them up, or did you just make them up?

There have been polls and studies that estimated that 10% or more of the 45+ AG field was doping. Obviously those people DO care a great deal about doping - just in the opposite way that the signers of this petition do.

I would think that well over the number of dopers cares quite a bit that their AG or Kona slots are being stolen by dopers. Several people have chimed in that they don't care because they are "racing against themselves". Well, the dopers are not. The whole point of doping, (as pointless as it seems to me), is to cheat to put yourself ahead of people who are racing legitimately.

I am also surprised at the complaints about the cost of testing. When bikes are often over $10k and a set of tires can be over $150 I don't see the price of testing as that big an issue. Add in travel and race fees and it is not a large percentage of the overall cost. Doping can have a far bigger impact on performance than any of those things.

Why spend all that money and time if your result has a big question mark by it? Courses and conditions vary, and at the end of it all it is a race - your placing is supposed to matter.

I guess I am the opposite of many of the posters here - I am on the verge of giving up on WTC events because of the rampant cheating. A fair race for all the money I spend is one of the few things that would keep me coming back.

Is there a reason you copied and pasted the same thing over and over again? Which you've done more than once in this thread.

---

Favorite Gear: Dimond | Cadex | Desoto Sport | Hoka One One

I could be wrong but I have checked every single signatory and read all the comments ( more than 200), + the fact that, personally I would never sign a Petition (for ex. to please a friend, or just because he is a friend) on a subject that does not concern me ( in this case, if I am not a triathlete, I don' t sign), and my conclusion is that a huge majority of the signatories are "involved triathletes". Perhaps, yes a few are not, but I sincerely think they are a small minority.

About the cost, here is a rapid calculation: there are about 200 IM & 70.3 races per year with about 2000 participants, that's 400000 participants. If Ironman adds $5 to each inscription (and noone would see the difference: when you pay $235 to enter a race, if it's $240 you'll still pay it, same for Worlds 70.3, at $425, who cares if it's $430),--and Hawaii at $600-800? is even more expensive)... it makes $2 Million that goes into a AG Anti-Doping Testing Fund. One can make a lot of tests with that money. If we take the 24 AG of a World Championship x Podium 3 = 72 Tests at $1200 = $86400 x 2Worlds (Kona)= $172800......Still plenty left for OOC testing or testing at Ironman Qualifiers races.

:-)

---

Favorite Gear: Dimond | Cadex | Desoto Sport | Hoka One One

At least, if they know that by finishing in the Top 3, they will be tested, some of them will train differently (will not take any drugs) for they will be discouraged. Ok, some will succeed, because they are "professional cheaters" to cheat the system, and be clean on race day, but some will not take the chance anymore. On the other hand, if everybody knows that there is No Testing, then it's open field to cheat.

i guess it's because I don't exactly know yet how the Forum functions. I was just answering to the comments and since some of the comments were about the same in reference to the "costs", I sent the reply to each one, not being sure that the other would see it also. Now, I suppose that you are telling me that everybody sees my reply even if I sent it only once to one person. OK, thanks.I will try to avoid that mistake in the future.

Yes, Drafting will be another future "fight".

It's not an instant or direct messenger. Everyone can read a single reply.

---

Favorite Gear: Dimond | Cadex | Desoto Sport | Hoka One One

""triathlon is about adults over 40. Kick out the synthetic testosterone crowd and entire fields will be decimated!"". You really think it's that bad? Then, it's an additional reason and motivation to try clean the field of the "cheaters" (people should read Mark Allen's 3 articles on the subject).

Very Interesting. Thanks.

Ok, fair enough. But now lets suppose that, with doping testing, you would in fact be constantly in the top 5%, and not anymore in the 5-10% range...which then makes it a bit easier to some day (your goal as everyone's is to continuously improve however slightly (or at least to do the best you can, maximize "honestly" your potential) be in a position to vie for a World's slot. Suddenly you have a different perspective: "ah! I can perhaps get a slot...then I really would want to have the same chances as everyone, which means a level playing field with the potential cheaters out. Right? Please sign it and Thanks a lot for Triathlon.

Thanks Scott, I will go over it thoroughly. BTW, have you signed it? Thanks for Triathlon.

That looks about as reliable as USAT doing any testing.

Well, what can I say: I agree so much with what you said. That's practically the main reason why we have started this endeavor. We want people like you in the races, we want the others, the ones that are in the races for the wrong reasons or at least with the wrong mentality ( the drafters, the dopers etc..) out. To put it simply and shortly: no reason the bad guys should own Triathlon, the good guys should. Yes, the Wanda Group/ Ironman is the legal proprietor of the ironman races, but we, the athletes, we, the people, aren't we a bit also the "owners" ( a bit like a shareholder) of ironman races? In that sense, we should be able to have a voice and rid out our Sport of what's rotten in it. If this Petition keeps on gathering momemtum, perhaps we can have a say. There are also people (cannot give names now) on the inside that care about these issues, are willing to try to implement the changes but need "athletes support" ( as large a Petition as possible).

I just don't think you'll get Ironman on board with wanting to test the masses. Especially when it comes to OOC testing. If you applied testing to only athletes that want to be competitive for 70.3/140.6 WC slots and possibly awards I think it would gain more traction. Once you have a program in place thats working maybe you look at expanding it. It would be interesting to see if some of the competition for spots opted out of being eligible for testing.

i'd be willing to pay extra, were i an avid ironman racer. but i would only do it on some sort of a match basis, where IM, USADA, USAT, the ITU and the athletes each contributed. remember, the point of the ironman pro license, which began at $750 a year and has risen since, was supposed to be the funding mechanism for drug testing. ALL of that money was supposed to go for anti-doping tests. is that really the case?

ironman's problem is that its current owner paid a LOT of money for the brand. that is not the athletes' problem. that was dalian wanda's choice. there's plenty of money in there for AG drug testing, if you consider the EBIT ironman earns. so, yes, the athletes could pay more money, but the cost should be shared by IM and other orgs who benefit from IM.

incuding USADA, USAT, and ITU. why the ITU? because ironman keeps a lot of its federations in business, USAT first among them. why USADA? because testing is what it does with its $10mm or $15mm or whatever it gets from the US gov, and because a lot of its funding comes from the deals it strikes with race orgs, such as IM. for every x number of tests IM buys, USADA ought to throw in y out of its own funds. which i hope it does.

all the pro testing is supposed to have been paid for directly by the pros. all the AG testing should already be paid for by the money the athletes already pay with their taxes, their annual USAT memberships, and by their entry fees. however, i could see the athletes paying a bit more. but not the whole thing, or are you spending $700 or $800 for a budget airline and you're expected to buy your own pillows and pretzels?

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

How many numbers are these "insiders" suggesting you need.

---

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

Totally agree with you. If a race that I do every single year suddenly increased $25, I'd probably be looking elsewhere for a race. Unless it goes to puppies. Then it's worth it.

---

---------------------------------------------------------------

https://connect.garmin.com/modern/profile/domingjm

Why would that be? Seems to me that if you're interested in competing at the highest level, with the most to gain, you should expect to be tested. I just know that if randomized testing cost me an additional $25, I'd be looking for other races. I'm sure I'm not alone in that.

---

---------------------------------------------------------------

https://connect.garmin.com/modern/profile/domingjm

I feel like what you are suggesting is done in one of those population assessment simulations when you set the parameters to however you want to. And I agree, WTC/ITU/USAT should eat some costs, but we are in the real world.

Why is WTC or USAT going to eat into their profit margins, when this is something that generally is an "1st world problem" and not one that is a game changer for whether people will do IM races or not. Like this is an issue that is not going to cause people to quit racing IM events.

That's the issue I see with all this. Like this is an problem that we all want to address, but we don't want to know the real solutions that it will likely take to making it work. We can all say/hope everyone should go equally in, but is that really how it'll be to making it happen?

This isn't a "should do", this is what will be done. No way in hell WTC is going to eat into their profits simply to appease what 2% of the racing population.....that would be dumb as hell business strategy. '


ETA: And it should be known from Day 1 I've thought AG testing was wrong in that they can't even get the pros right. So it'll be in "name only" because of the vastness of AG athletes. Someone said it was 400,000 WTC customers for races. 1% of that would be 4000 tests.......1%, that's basically 1 podium test per year. That's nothing, but lip service. But it's lip service, so that would be a start.

---

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

So that's why I feel like this has to be customer driven and it has to be them willing to "eat" the costs. You don't get to step up to the table demanding someone else goes halfies when they have zero incentive to do it.

ETA: And so if this is such a customer driven decision, then let the customers back up their words with putting money down. That's my whole gist to this. I easily signed the petition, I'd easily pay $25 per year to make my athletes and myself feel better about competition....But would I pay $50? No....is the average AG'er cool with his membership fee (I don't even know it exactly now, is it $40?), be cool paying $65 a year? No I dont think so.


But when your trying to force a change, you better come to the table with a real solution, and not tell me I have to pay for half your solution. I'll tell you to get lost.

---

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

in that case, you stop racing IM. which is what i did. moved onto other races. pretty simple.

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

I'll pay $100 bucks a year or even $25-50 extra per race I enter. Where do I send my money?

---

blog