the one with the reasonably hot girlfriend apparently...
http://tri-mag.de/...014-hawaii-18?page=2

---

if you can read this
YOU'RE DRAFTING!

There seems to be a big enough supply of them to make it worthwhile though.

Also, what about just getting a sample from everyone and only testing a portion of those sampled? And maybe just not telling anyone that not all samples are tested, could be a cheaper way to deter doping.

I don't believe that is the cost for detecting synthetic EPO but rather just getting an EPO level. However, part of the problem is that there are only two (at least as of about 18 months ago when I was doing research on this) labs that are certified to do USADA level testing in the US. I was looking at putting together a team that would be randomly tested during the year, and 4 random tests on 20 riders would have run me $80,000+ for a year. This includes the costs of sending someone out, doing a certified collection, analyzing and reporting results.

Even if you limit it to KQ/70.3 Worlds and possibly 20 random selections per race, and are able to get the cost down to $750 per test, that's $45,000 per race (20 men, 20 women, 20 random). 177 WTC races, and it comes to slightly more than 7.9 million in costs per year. Just to test for EPO. Add in testosterone and other tests, and just keep adding. Even if you limit it to KQ or Worlds, that's still in the neighborhood of 6 million per year.

I've put forth the theory that top amateurs that consistently KQ, achieve USAT All American status, or qualify for any Team USA slot get put into the random testing pool for the next year, but again you run into the testing costs, and people scream bloody murder if you ask them to pay an extra $20 a year to cover it, or they scream about invasion of privacy, etc etc.

Everyone is all for amateur and increased drug testing until it comes time to pony up $$ or pee in a cup themselves. (Even though technically if you are a USAT license holder you could be tested anyway, same for any major federation such as USATF, USA Cycling, etc.)

John

---

---

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

 
>Even if you limit it to KQ/70.3 Worlds and possibly 20 random selections per race, and are able to get the cost down to $750 per test, that's $45,000 per race (20 men, 20 women, 20 random). 177 WTC races, and it comes to slightly more than 7.9 million in >costs

That sounds about right. The NFL does ~14,000 tests at a cost of $10M. That comes to $715/test. However that's a full-spectrum test, including recreational drugs and the full WADA spectrum except HGH. Probably a lot of economies of scale come into play once you get into the thousands, however.

At least this would be a start. Have a better idea? You could add some OOC testing that would maybe catch more Kevin Moat type folks.

For a lot of these older folks, just looking at them would give you a clue as to who you might want to do OOC testing on.

It has been interesting has I have gotten better running older that I am now having some folks ask if I am taking something to get the results I do. I would love to be in a testing pool, would
be quite an honor.

.

---

Dave Campbell | Facebook | @DaveECampbell | h2ofun@h2ofun.net

Boom Nutrition code 19F4Y3 $5 off 24 pack box | Bionic Runner | PowerCranks | Velotron | Spruzzamist

Lions don't lose sleep worrying about the sheep

I know when they first said at the Germany worlds that random AG folks would be tested, it caused a number of folks on TeamUSA that were going to stay home so anything you do will start to slow it down.

.

---

Dave Campbell | Facebook | @DaveECampbell | h2ofun@h2ofun.net

Boom Nutrition code 19F4Y3 $5 off 24 pack box | Bionic Runner | PowerCranks | Velotron | Spruzzamist

Lions don't lose sleep worrying about the sheep

Sign me up for the extra $20 bucks a year and hand me the cup to pee in! I have nothing to hide.

.

---

Dave Campbell | Facebook | @DaveECampbell | h2ofun@h2ofun.net

Boom Nutrition code 19F4Y3 $5 off 24 pack box | Bionic Runner | PowerCranks | Velotron | Spruzzamist

Lions don't lose sleep worrying about the sheep

If you have a USAT license, you are in a testing pool. It's just a very unlikely to be tested group. What I'm talking about is putting any of the categories I mentioned in the "Have to update the website with whereabouts" testing pool.

John

---

---

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

JD, I would draw the line with updating whereabouts for AGers, even those top pointy end athletes. Just ping them with an random OC test at their home of residence.

The whereabouts is an dangerous line if you have to update daily/weekly. Much in life can change and I don't want that to be part of a sport for the hobby category athletes (even if it's not a hobby for AA athletes, etc).

---

------------------
@brooksdoughtie
USAT-L2,Y&J; USAC-L2
http://www.aomultisport.com

Get him, Dan!

---

Aaron Bales
Lansing Triathlon Team

Yep, I am in some of the categories you suggest so yep, sign me up.


.

---

Dave Campbell | Facebook | @DaveECampbell | h2ofun@h2ofun.net

Boom Nutrition code 19F4Y3 $5 off 24 pack box | Bionic Runner | PowerCranks | Velotron | Spruzzamist

Lions don't lose sleep worrying about the sheep

Yes, I know. You're all for "effective" drug testing, but as long as it's not too intrusive. The odds of finding a top AG athlete at home and available for a drug test at random is probably less than 10%, unless you show up in the middle of the night.

USADA whereabouts are required once a quarter, with one specific 60 minute window a day tied to a location. If this changes, that can be filed with an email, a text or through their mobile app. I don't think that's too intrusive, but I'm probably in the minority on that one.

John

---

---

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

So it seems the crux of the problem is that groups like the USADA aren't really that concerned with catching dopers. If they were they would find a way to make testing cost effective. Certainly they could care less about AGers it would seem.

In a country the size of the USA and with its population, having 2 labs that can do testing and the hoops that need to be jumped through, well of course it is going to cost a lot and take a lot of time.

---

Ian

How has your team testing being going?

Eta: I'm for basic testing if your going to do testing. I think it's completely unnceccessry to go to that length. Let's get an in comp testing working first and actual testing being done before we get into this complex process. How many AGers are we even testing now? Less than 300 in a year I imagine?

---

------------------
@brooksdoughtie
USAT-L2,Y&J; USAC-L2
http://www.aomultisport.com

That's beneath you. You know it wasn't feasible due to lack of funds. If I happened to win the lottery, I'd fund it myself. Until then, it's a potential, nothing more, unless you know someone willing to pony up $100k to be the title sponsor for a 20 person team.


Did you miss the initial segue into this? We were talking about the costs to test the KQ/World qualifiers at all WTC events. It expanded slightly. Ballpark cost to test the KQ/World groups and 20 random people from every WTC event is ~ 8 million a year minimum. I'm all for that as well. However, as Ken pointed out, if you test at the event, you catch only the stupid and the careless.

John

---

---

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

Having been on the M35-39 podium at Kona two of the last three years I think I qualify here. I applaud what Sam did in Frankfurt and was hoping that some of the guys at Vegas would have done something similar last year.

If I had to share a podium with Colom, I would make an attempt to get the other guy(s) on the podium to do something similar to what Sam did so that we could make it known to this guy that he isn't welcome.

---

_________________________________
Steve Johnson
DARK HORSE TRIATHLON |

JD, I was asking because your one of the biggest proponents of AG testing. I've always been kinda anti-AG testing (I'd like to see the pro testing program cleaned up before we actually think an AG testing with any teeth is going to work) because it's way to complex and not really going to ever matter, and everyone seems to talk big about it but then fail when it comes to actual execution of a AG testing program. But we currently have it *technically*, as anyone in USAT can be tested at any time period. You (or your team) created an team specifically to promote clean racing. I think a lot of this shows that AG testing is great on paper. It's great to talk about and dream about how we are going to create this great complex program, and then what happens? How many people are tested per year? Which is why, I think until we actually get people tested on a regular basis, talking about an complex system, is more just talk.

My question about your team and you admitting that there isn't a lot of testing being done due to funding is what is happening to the rest of the sport, just on a complete larger scale. There simply isn't the funding to do AG testing at a manageable level.
ETA: So yes while being popped at races is only going to catch the dumb and stupid, to me that's the 1st and most necessary step before we add whereabouts, and out of competition testing, etc. Let's just first start out with getting athletes actually tested, and then see how to better manage it. I've not been to AG Nationals nor worlds, so others can chime in on how many athletes were tested there. If you want to do AG testing, then lets see some actually tests being collected and see if we can manage to increase the numbers of tests before we try and change the complexitity of the testing programs.

Simply get more athletes tested would be my 1st goal. This whole whereabouts for AG'ers is not the step I would currently push for with this young of a program and as few tests as they are actually collecting.
ETA #2- Race day allows for testers to have the greatest access to the athlete pool at any one point. I would like to see the sport actually getting tests performed a lot more than we currently are, even if only the dumb and stupid would get caught. That to me is where we need to start.

---

------------------
@brooksdoughtie
USAT-L2,Y&J; USAC-L2
http://www.aomultisport.com

If you don't mind, how many times have you been tested, either at a race or OOC? I'm just curious.

Never....well, at least in triathlon. Back when I was competing for a spot on the USRowing worlds team in '01 I got to pee in a cup at trials. That was it.

---

_________________________________
Steve Johnson
DARK HORSE TRIATHLON |

This thread main it much easier to get out of bed and onto my bike this morning.

Not everyone is. I'm with ajthomas

How much would it cost to start biological passports for top AGers (ie: KQ and/or top 3AG)? As some ppl mentioned, you wouldn't have to test more than a few...you just don't tell the athletes that. That'd be enough to make quite a few guys and gals nervous and possibly not race.

And presumably there is, in your mind, close to a zero probability of you ever having to pee in a cup, at the behest of WTC?

See, this is what I meant when I said earlier there must be some low hanging fruit. Let's make some assumptions, and suggest there is a 0.1% chance of you being asked to pee in a cup after your next Ironman race (in your mind). In other words, a one in a thousand chance.

But then suddenly WTC does ask a random handful of podium finishers to do just that after some of their 140.6 or 70.3 races. Word gets around. Now you think, hmm, it's still pretty unlikely they ask me to pee in a cup, but I guess there's alot more chance now. Maybe (again, in your mind), the chance has now gone up to 1.0%. One in a hundred.

In other words, in this example, in your mind the perceived chances of you being asked to pee into a cup after an Ironman has increased by a factor of ten! You now percieve it to be ten times more likely you could be tested. Not twice as likely, ten times as likely!

Now considering many AG dopers are likely doing it pretty blind - ie. just injecting a little EPO at a time and hoping for the best - and given many of them have professional careers they would not want to be tarnished by being caught cheating at a sport, I think that a large percentage of them would be deterred by the scenario above. I may be wrong, but this is my gut feeling.

Now I understand this is looking only at in-competition testing, but if the perception grows that in-competition testing is being done more frequently then that could also raise the perceived probability of OOC testing occuring. At least enough of an effect to deter those really worried about their reputations. Maybe I'm way off base on all of this, but based on this thread and other threads on the topic, it seems to me that WTC could be doing something more at a relatively low cost to deter AG doping.

But isn't the point of the bio passport, to have the athletes baseline tested and then use random tests to compare to the baseline values? Then randomly test and recheck against the baseline?

So if you've never had your blood checked, they cant really test it against any baseline can they, and therefore the passport is meaningless to that athlete right?

Help me out if I'm wrong on that.

---

------------------
@brooksdoughtie
USAT-L2,Y&J; USAC-L2
http://www.aomultisport.com