sportbiker

Today's (Sunday's) L.A. Times has a front-page investigation of the World Anti Doping Agency, and it's a pretty damning indictment. While the article isn't Landis-centered, it does talk about cycling and has a separate article discussing Tyler Hamilton.

https://www.latimes.com/news/nationwo...,1444445.story (Registration may be required)

There's supposed to be a second part printed Monday.

baxtefer

Dick Pound is an asshat.
I'm embarrassed that he's Canadian. So glad he didn't get the IOC presidency.

Dubbayoo

But we'll gladly suspend you for one year. This is why he has to go.

cam117

Glad to see that the ITTF (International Table Tennis Federation) has finally stepped up ad joined the WADA cartel. Maybe now we'll be able to end the farce of professional table tennis.

Ramjm_2000

+1. Dick Pound is well...ah hem a big Dick...Pound that is...can't stand his arrogant attitude and trial by media tactics.

Smoothie104

If it wasnt for Dick Pound and WADA, how many athletes would have to die before you guys started wishing someone would come in and clean up sport?

DocRay

+1, Pound is annoying, but he has unveiled a truth we don't like to hear.

Ramjm_2000

YOur making the assumption that it has to be Dick Pound to do it. His actions during the whole Landis affair was disgusting and reaks of bias. Don't get me started on WADA... I whole heartedly agree we need strong leadership and strict guidlines but the heads of these organizations should at least appear to be unbiased.

cyclintom

ALL Professional sports are having problems with doping as well as many amateur sports too.

There is DEFINITELY a requirement for a professionally handled antidoping agency with a professional outlook and a professional management.

WADA and their affiliates are not.

As pointed out in the article, you cannot trust someone who has a stake in finding positives.

If they weren't pulling all those nandrolone positives out of the hat do you suppose that the several tens of millions of dollars they receive would be so handily provided?

It isn't enough for Caesars wife to be honorable, she must be completely above suspicion. In this case not only do we have sufficient information to know that WADA has been playing fast and loose with ethics and morals, but that they have a vested interest in actually being crooked.

For instance - Landis's A Sample tested with a ratio of 4.5:1. This was BARELY over the limit for further testing.

What's more there's more to this than meets the eye - this limit was originally set at 6:1. Reducing it to 4:1 didn't increase the numbers of positives found but it greatly increased the numbers of tests performed. And each one of these tests cost about $500 if I understand it correctly.

After Floyd's sample A was "positive" the B Sample was tested at 11:1. The testing laboratory claimed an accuracy of plus or minus 30% so it is interesting that their errors are about 800% their claimed error rate. We could claim that this was a crooked laboratory, something I'm not about to even consider, or we could assume that there was a contamination in the samples to begin with and that the MANAGEMENT of the Lab and WADA have used their positions to cover up the incompetence of all concerned to handle the samples in such a manner as to preclude contamination.

This is the heart of the problem - bureaucracies often tend to cover up their own problems instead of accepting them as part and parcel of trying to do the near impossible. And those who must pay the costs of such actions are the innocent victims of bureaucratic power struggles.

And that is unethical.

I would fire ALL of the top management of WADA and start fresh.

Bacciagalupe

Nice hatchet job. Too bad the only thing in the article which seems unbiased and accurate is that Dick Pound shoots his mouth off (often to the detriment of anti-doping efforts).... and that's not news.

The article conflates WADA with the national federations and the CAS, which is absurd -- and a frequent error by people who critique (oppose?) anti-doping efforts. Much of what the article blasts are CAS decisions; the final words for Baxter, Vencill, and Neblen were with the CAS. But the CAS is never named, nor is its independence from WADA ever mentioned.

WADA does not control or fund the national sporting federations, it does not prosecute athletes, and has no control over the CAS. (Their HQ's aren't even in the same cities, let alone nations -- WADA is in Montreal and CAS is in Lausanne!) As best I can tell, WADA sets the rules, coordinates anti-doping efforts, does research and acts as a soapbox, and that's about it. In any accusation, there are 2 or 3 agencies which are not run or funded by WADA involved -- the national federation (e.g. USADA), the sporting federation (e.g. USATF) and the CAS. And at least one sporting organization that is involved in anti-doping efforts (the UCI) is famous for its ongoing feud with WADA.

As to the "closed process" accusations, this is almost as ironic as it is inaccurate. Nothing in the WADA code (Article 8, btw) requires that the hearings be closed to the public. American athletes can request an open hearing at their discretion, for example. The accused are clearly given access to the lab paperwork, as evidence by the extensive defense by Hamilton and Landis teams. Athletes can (and do) discuss and critique the validity of the tests in the hearings, e.g. Tyler Hamilton's claim that the EPO test was too new and did not meet appropriate scientific standards. So with the left hand, the author complains that the process is too closed; with the right, he points out the alleged inaccuracies and flaws of the process -- which he is aware of due to the 300+ pages released to an accused athlete, and then to the public by that athlete, before the hearing has even started. To which the USADA will not respond until the actual hearing starts.

Scientists are well aware of the structure of the tests and the interpretive nature of the EPO test; they're also aware that the test for synthetic testosterone is both non-interpretive and generally regarded as extremely accurate (another oversight by the author). Nor does it make much sense to me for the same lab to work both for the sporting events as for the accused -- talk about a potential conflict of interest.

I also find it curious that the author of the article saved his vitriol for WADA, with nary a word for the supplement manufacturers who are apparently contaminating and/or spiking their products with steriods. That sounds far more dangerous and less ethical than the head of WADA running his mouth, as the real damage would be in exposing the general public to these drugs without their knowledge. Where is the righteous indignation about the companies that may have tainted your supplements with nandrolone?

I also find it odd that the author's idea of a "big controversy" -- in a year when the Spanish Police accused 50 cyclists of doping and the US Congress (!) blew the lid off of rampant doping in baseball -- is the accusations against Landis and Jones.

Of course, none of this is under the direct jurisdiction or supervision or influence of WADA. All that Pound can do is talk about the cases. Oh, and run an international conspiracy to bilk world governments out of millions of dollars and intentionally target innocent athletes. Can't forget that part. He even lists that on his resume, if I'm not mistaken.



For the record, she (Pompeia) was apparently neither.

At any rate, casting suspicion is as easy as tossing a handful of sand. I have no problem with oversight of anti-doping agencies, and that's the job of the governments that fund them. But I have a problem with the application of unrealistically high standards to an agency that is, by its very nature, performing both a necessary and deeply unpopular role. Or vague and imprecise accusations of excessive numbers of innocent victims -- without providing the crucial numbers of total cases heard, adverse findings upheld, and adverse findings overturned. (I didn't see any of this info cited in the article, by the way -- just adjectives like "more" and "few." Hmmmm.)

No matter who runs or oversees the anti-doping efforts, athletes and fans will complain of unfair treatment, the cost of defense, arcane rules, "sloppy" or biased labs, and bad judgments. Even if you replaced the top level of every organization involved in anti-doping efforts, you'd still end up with articles long on rancor and short on veracity.

Weeks

agreed.

aikigreg

If you think testing agencies actually catch the real offenders, think again. If you think the sport's (any sport) governing body actually cares if their athletes are using, think again.

If you think the public wants steroid free athletes, think again. They want bigger players, more records broken, and the next big thing. That's what sells tickets. What happens once steroids are 100% gone? No more exciting moments or world records broken. Goodbye fandom, hello the death of ticket sales.

personally I feel they ought to have open access to steroids and be untested. This is their livelihood and their lives - let them live it the way they want, and it'll give the public what they want.

Weeks

That is an incredibly dumb idea. I see us going down the same slippery slope towards the days of the colloseum..

sportbiker

False dichotomy. It's not a question of Dick Pound + WADA vs. death, it's a question of Dick Pound + WADA vs. a better designed, fairer system.

aikigreg

Not dumb - open and honest. Why do people insist that the 500 pound gorilla in the room doesn't exist when it comes to such things like teen pregnancy, steroid abuse, and the like?

You cannot stop someone from using steroids. What's more, the abusers can ensure they'll never get caught - the only ones who do are extremely stupid.

If fans voted with their dollars then we'd never have gotten here to begin with. Baseball's fan base SURGED after the battle between sosa and mcguire, for example. Records are now being broken within months instead of years. We now have 300+ pound linebackers instead of the average 200 we had 50 years ago. Does anyone really believe this is due to nutrition and workout methods? Gimme a break!

I hate the use of steroids in sports and over the last years I have donated every piece of team/athlete clothing or memorabilia I owned, and they'll never get another dime of my money because it's not fun anymore. It's just not a good time to watch these freaks every week.

By the way, if you want to stop steroid abuse you'll move testing to jr. high and high school. As a coach, I see the kids who are using, and seeing them nice pretty scholarships instead of the natural athlete, who is passed up again and again, only to be signed once he gains that extra 30 pounds of muscle his competitors have. Once they get to college and the pros, it's too late.

DocRay

Wow. That was a really concise, accurate critique of that article. And even well written.
You should post more than you do.

yes

I'd be willing to bet that nandrolone levels in vitamins are completely harmless and are not put there intentionally, but are a result of producing the vitamins - extracting from natural sources. Perhaps there is a market for 'nandrolone free' vitamins, but certifying that for the general public would probably be too costly.

asgelle

It has been widely reported and never disputed that nandralone contamination occurs from improper cleaning of vessels between production runs of suplements containing nandralone metabolites (which are what has been detected in athletes, not nandralone itself) and vitamins and other supplements which are supposed to be free of banned substances. There is nothing in the process of producing vitamins which would cause nandralone or its metabolites to be present.

ImprezaDrvr

I think that the zeal that WADA has in fighting doping is admirable, but leads to very much the witch hunt mentality. I also believe that the notion of guilty until proven innocent is flawed. I want clean sport. I do. But assuming that everyone is dirty and painting them as so with little regard to anything else is dangerous in and of itself.

yes

Thanks for the correction. In that case, it should be pretty easy to determine which ones are nandrolone free. Perhaps WADA should come out with a list rather than stating that atheletes should not take vitamins, or do so at their own risk.

asgelle

How is it easy? Every single batch would have to be tested, and there's no guarantee that just because a company has a history of not cross-contaminating products it won't in the future. USCF has steadfastly refused to certify products as safe despite (or because of) having supplement manufacturers as major sponsors. The fact is, as soon as WADA or USADA provides a list of approved products, it loses strict liability as an enforcable principle. Something they will never give up.

cyclintom

Then would you care to comment on the samples testing both 4.5:1 and then 11:1 for Landis?

My understanding is that she was simply a beautiful dope who paid for other's attraction to her.

Vinokurtov

Pound could care less, he's a political opportunist. This is the guy who, when it was his doped to the gills ox that was being gored (Ben Johnson), stepped up and defended the guy as the boss of his federation. That's undisputed fact and on the record, as are his many unproven proclamations about the level of abuse in various sports.

If anything he's set WADA back in working cooperatively with a number of sports federations because of his ego and unwillingness to subvert it to make any actual progress. He's an ambulance driver who is going to argue for 30 minutes that his route to the accident is best before actually driving anywhere.

In the mean time the victim is bleeding out.

alanbikehouston

WADA is so amazing corrupt and incompetent, it makes me want to agree with the guys who want to legalize doping. It might be better to legalize doping than allow some brain-dead crooks to falsely accuse innocent cyclists with incompetent and faked test results, while allowing the dirty cyclists to continue to ride.

Bacciagalupe

Not really. After all, no one's paying me to assess the validity of the work by either the lab or by Landis' lawyers. I have my opinions but really, that decision is in the hands of the USADA.

Oh, and I was discussing the isotope test for the presence of synthetic / exogonous testosterone, not the ratios. They're separate tests. But to my knowledge, the isotope test requires almost no interpretation, and ratio test is less interpretive than the EPO test.

My reason for mentioning the excellent reputation of the isotope test was not to debate specifics of the Landis case, but to illustrate that the author of the article has slanted his discussions of the tests. Rather than present a balanced spectrum or viable statistics -- e.g. "4 out of 20 of the typical tests are interpretive rather than simple pass/fail" -- he simply discusses the EPO test, as though it was an instance of a) bad science and b) indicative of all of the doping tests.

Of course, there is zero mention in the article of masking agents, homologous blood doping, HGH and other near-indetectable substances, or hematocrit levels that mysteriously hover just below the acceptable thresholds as techniques that successfully hide doping use. Nor does he make the connection that the use of these techniques, along with the use of designer drugs, keeps the rate of adverse findings low....