Out of competition Testing - 2011

Anyone know where I can find the stats for out of competition testing 2011?

The 2010 stats makes interesting readings.

comparing how many times the top athletes and not so top athletes from the big nations have been tested makes interesting reading.

See the link at: http://www.iaaf.org/antidoping/statistics/index.html

Richard Pound former WADA official states 'that the Jamaican athletes often cannot be found for testing'

WHAT AN IDIOT.

A simply search of database of the World Anti-Doping Agency which details information of all tests and missed tests does not support Pound’s allegation.

A simply search of the IAAF website shows that Jamaican athletes are tested out of competition more often that athletes from other top countries.

http://tenpercentorless.blogspot.co.uk/2012/08/want-to-run-958-speak-to-bolts-chemist.html

Read this...Also drug testing in Jamaica is considered a joke...Bolt's training partner Blake has already tested positive before and been banned.

100m has a history of dopers

I believe Weir the Jamaican 200m runner pb before was 20.4 now he is running 19.8 and getting bronze hmmm suspicious.

''http://tenpercentorless.blogspot.co.uk/2012/08/want-to-run-958-speak-to-bolts-chemist.html

Read this...Also drug testing in Jamaica is considered a joke...Bolt's training partner Blake has already tested positive before and been banned.''

100m has a history of dopers


PBF:

Keep reading propoganda and baseless comments.

Why is drugs testing in Jamaica a joke? We are talking about out of competition testing here. Checks the stats they dont lie.

Regarding blake, the substance you were refering to wasnt on the WADA list, do the research for yourself.

Weir PB before the olympics was 19:99 - please do not display/parade your ignorance.

I didn't know that Bolt hired Angel Heredia. That's crazy stuff - Is that genuinely true? You want to look that guy up DJK.

But drug testing in Jamaica isn't great. They are tested more by the IAAF out of competition because they don't have their own trusted out of competition program. The stats show low numbers of tests for countries like UK, USA, Germany, France, etc. This is because their testing is carried out by national anti-doping agencies that are ratified by WADA to carry out such testing on behalf of the IAAF.

It's only nations without such a system that the IAAF need to worry about, and obviously those nations with most high level athletes (Jamaica, Kenya, Ethiopia, etc) that are going to show up at the highest level on the IAAF list.

Re: Out of competition Testing - 2011
by djlovesyou Today at 1:44 pm

"".I didn't know that Bolt hired Angel Heredia. That's crazy stuff - Is that genuinely true? You want to look that guy up DJK""


DJ you should know better than that - Reading a random blog on some unknown website.

Where are the evidence and hard facts to suggest bolt hire Heredia?

Why is this not reported in the mainstream media? if it was credible i am sure that it would have been picked up by the maintainstrem media and not some arcane website.

""They are tested more by the IAAF out of competition because they don't have their own trusted out of competition program. ""

What criteria determined trusted out of competition program.

They now have JADCO in Jamaica that is the national anti-doping body. that is approved by WADA and the IAAF.

Are you saying that the American and the UK is more trusted? The same Americans that covered up Carl Lewis's 3 failed drugs test.

It can be argued that since the durgs testing became more robust america performances have been in relative decline especially in the mens sprints events.

For years Jamaicans sprinters lived in the showdow of the russian, american and the east germans who were doping on an industrial scale. I wonder how many gold medals Ottey and cuttburt, stewart et al missed because of this/.

JADCO don't carry out out of competition testing to a high enough standard (if at all). That's why the IAAF spend so much time visiting Jamaica compared to other nations.

I'm not saying the UK and USA is 'more trusted', all I said is that they have their own agencies to carry out anti-doping - so statistics for these countries don't show up on the IAAF list of people tested. I just feel that's something that needs to be said when people bring up the IAAF list and use it as evidence that Jamaica somehow gets tested more often than other countries. It's simply not true.

The Carl Lewis thing is nonsense - this was before the time of any out of competition testing and certainly before the time when nations had their own anti-doping agencies. Not really relevant.

The whole 'Jamaica are succeeding because other evil nations are now not allowed to dope anymore' thing is always very interesting. Especially as Jamaica are completely destroying the times of what these evil, naughty countries were doing. It's a similar thing to what people say about Bradley Wiggins and now people like him can succeed in the TDF now that doping is under control - the difference being is that he wins whilst climbing 5% - 10% slower than they did a decade or so ago - it's a bit more credible.

As for the Heredia thing. Did you not notice that I asked whether it was genuinely true? I was quite explicit in saying it I thought. It was something I hadn't heard and would be quite surprised should it be true - anyone who can understand basic English would notice that I wanted clarification before jumping to any conclusion.

2012 19.84
2011 20.43

http://www.iaaf.org/athletes/biographies/letter=w/athcode=224247/index.html

So Weir has made a leap of 0.59 in one year somehow

Blake runs 19.2 beating the real legend Michael Johnson time in a short space of time...Glen Mills Bolt's coach trained Ray Steward who recieved a life ban from the sport for supplying drugs to other athletes.

The drug Blake tested positive for was similar in structure to the banned substance tuaminoheptane...there is a reason why he got banned.

Mullings the jamaican athlete was running 9.8 and has been banned for life.

Angel Heredia said in 2008 that the difference from 10.00 to 9.7 was the drugs.

Drug testing IS A JOKE in Jamaica...Follow Victor Conte on twitter he has some interesting things to say about their athletes.

djkbrown2001 wrote: Re: Out of competition Testing - 2011
by djlovesyou Today at 1:44 pm

"".I didn't know that Bolt hired Angel Heredia. That's crazy stuff - Is that genuinely true? You want to look that guy up DJK""


DJ you should know better than that - Reading a random blog on some unknown website.

Where are the evidence and hard facts to suggest bolt hire Heredia?

Why is this not reported in the mainstream media? if it was credible i am sure that it would have been picked up by the maintainstrem media and not some arcane website.

""They are tested more by the IAAF out of competition because they don't have their own trusted out of competition program. ""

What criteria determined trusted out of competition program.

They now have JADCO in Jamaica that is the national anti-doping body. that is approved by WADA and the IAAF.

Are you saying that the American and the UK is more trusted? The same Americans that covered up Carl Lewis's 3 failed drugs test.

It can be argued that since the durgs testing became more robust america performances have been in relative decline especially in the mens sprints events.

For years Jamaicans sprinters lived in the showdow of the russian, american and the east germans who were doping on an industrial scale. I wonder how many gold medals Ottey and cuttburt, stewart et al missed because of this/.

I've done a bit of constructive Googling, and can't find any mainstream media reporting the Heredia/Bolt link - lots of blogs/forums are, but no "credible" sites. Last year Heredia/Hernandez was working for the boxer Marquez (his name change was "outed" by Victor Conte*) in the lead up to Marquez's bout with Pacquiano: http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2011/nov/10/angel-hernandez-boxing-drugs-balco isn't a bad read



*Conte's twitter account is all but accusing the Jamaicans of doping. However he has an agenda - if everyone's doing it, then the fact that he was caught doing it is mitigated

I regard Carl Lewis as a drug cheat as well as Maurice Greene so no agenda from me.

Angel Heredia had evidence that Greene bought Drugs off him...Greene excuse was he had bought them for someone else.

Juan Manuel Marquez strength and conditioning coach was Angel Heredia this was pointed out by Pacquiao's s and c Alex Ariza that Marquez's people work with the same one Bolt does.

Victor Conte says Angel Heredia has confirmed to be working with Jamaican athletes hmmm I wonder which one he is working with.

In my opinion I think Michael Johnson is the only one I trust not to be on something.

British athletes dont run fast times anyway in the sprints.

It's seems to be pretty widely reported by the (particularly US) media that Bolt is using Angel Hernandez (formerly Heredia) as a 'strength and conditioning coach'.

This is a guy that said that it's unlikely that anyone running the Beijing 100m final would be clean.

He's a chemist. He's never been a coach.

That is worrying if so.

To be honest though, there are very good physiological reasons for Bolt to be as fast as he is, so I could easily believe that he is clean.

The other two athletes on the podiums of both the 100m and 200m at the latest Olympics I'm not quite so sure...

TBH I am not sure Athletics really wants to know, and certainly there is little evidence that it is making the concerted effort that (road) cycling has made to clean itself up. Witness the laughable bans handed out to (say) Blake and Fraser-Pryce; witness the fact that Jones, Montgomery were never even caught; witness that Gatlin was allowed to race at these Olympics.

Of course athletics is not alone in hiding its head in the sand (football, rugby almost certainly, and I have grave suspicions about track cycling), but it is funny when people say it is trying to clean up. At the moment, it is not.

Fraser-Pryce: painkillers - not PED. It was rather stupid and foolish of her coach (money grabbing francis). was she cheating - of course not?

An athelte can get ban by using a nasal spray or even using an asthma pump. A british athelte was ban for the same thing: was he a cheat - of course not?

yes. To both the above.

Shelley-Anne is a bit of a grey area. She took a morphine like substance on the eve of a race. Probably not cheating per se, but it was pretty stupid and in today's strict liability rules, she probably got off very lightly.

Alain Baxter, the skier, was very unfortunate. He used a Vick's Nasal Spray before during a competition and tested positive for pseudo-ephedrine. The problem was that he'd always used the same product without problems, but didn't realise that the same product with the same packaging had different ingredients in the US than it did in the UK.

Shelley-Anne got a slap on the wrist and a nice little off season ban, Baxter lost his Olympic medal.

DJ no need to resort to playground insults and slurs. It makes it look less credible and kind of invalidates the point you are making.

Should baxter have been stripped of his medal? Of course not.

The Baxter case you highlighted above is not too dissimmillar to Yohan Blakes case.

We have been through ad nauseaum, so lets move on.

It's nothing like it. Blake and pals took some Balco product called 'Mega Boost' or something not realising that it had a banned stimulant in it. That's a bit like me injecting myself with something called 'super blood boost' and then being in shock when I'm done for EPO.

That's a bit different than a Vick's Nasal spray that has different ingriedients in one country than another.

I was editing that anyway before you said anything - I remembered how upset that makes you.

Baxter is certainly one I have some sympathy for - it was a foolish but understandable oversight to not check the US version of the nasal inhaler, and he never attempted to deny his liability, just to explain how it came to happen.

Shelly-Anne Fraser's ban was light, considering (as DJ says), there is a strict liability rule and she was caught with a banned substance in her system. Oh, and using banned pain killers (such as these morphine-derived ones) is clearly breaking the rules for PEDs, even if the performance enhancing effects on a sprinter might be insignificant. If (say) a rugby player was caught using similar, it would definitely be considered performance-enhancing.

There is a wider question relating to both cases with regard to whether anti-doping codes are unduly harsh with regard to commercially available 'over the counter' medications - my feeling is that athletes should be allowed to use such products in the same manner as the rest of the population, and that the levels that trigger a 'doping positive' should be increased in line with the normal dosage recommendations of the product. After all, a couple of paracetamol are not going to make a big difference to an athlete's performance.

There isn't actually that much you can get done for in terms of OTC pharmaceuticals in this country.

Most painkillers are fine (it's the prescription ones you have to watch). These days, most nasal sprays, etc, don't contain anything bad because ephridrine is banned in this country. Just make sure you've got a TUE for your salbutamol inhaler if it's needed and you're good to go.

People tend to get done for supplements from places like Maximuscle, when they don't do enough research into what's in them, or the labels themselves are ambiguous. I always thought it would be better to avoid stuff like that altogether.

The genius of PBF wrote:2012 19.84
2011 20.43

http://www.iaaf.org/athletes/biographies/letter=w/athcode=224247/index.html

So Weir has made a leap of 0.59 in one year somehow

Blake runs 19.2 beating the real legend Michael Johnson time in a short space of time...Glen Mills Bolt's coach trained Ray Steward who recieved a life ban from the sport for supplying drugs to other athletes.

The drug Blake tested positive for was similar in structure to the banned substance tuaminoheptane...there is a reason why he got banned.

Mullings the jamaican athlete was running 9.8 and has been banned for life.

Angel Heredia said in 2008 that the difference from 10.00 to 9.7 was the drugs.

Drug testing IS A JOKE in Jamaica...Follow Victor Conte on twitter he has some interesting things to say about their athletes.

While the sudden Jamaican rise to dominance in World of sprinting can look suspicious, the various links between Bolt and Heredia are quite unsubtantiated. The first to break the story is a sport website called Deadspin and if you look at the source they use to establish a link between Bolt and Heredia, well the evidence is quite weak. Pretty much every piece of news linking both men post date this article.

Is Bolt doping ? Maybe, but in this case he would be extremely dumb to hire a well known dope dealer who has been involved with several other track stars in past (unless of course, Heredia is the only guy in the place knowing about steroids). If he's that dumb, well he might go down soon.

Blake looks indeed much more suspicious because of his past failed test (and his frame), even though if he's juicing he's obviously using other things that the supplement that made him fail a drug test (a supplement that quite a lot of athletes got busted for in the last couple of years, most blaming cross-contamination). Weir had a large drop of time, however if he's doping , it is probably not with the same thing than his training partner Blake , given how skinny he is...

About Mullings, some will tell you that it is the proof about large drug use in Jamaica, others will tell you that it is the proof that Jamaican testing works since he got caught by the fact Jamaican anti doping organization during the Jamaican championships in 2011 despite the fact that he trained in the US and competed mostly in Europe...
Honestly, I don't really what to think about the whole thing...

Babario

Good post.

Bolt may or may not be doping - the only people that know are himself, his coach and his supplier (if any). My thought is that if there is one elite sprinter who isn't juiced it's Bolt - he is a freak of physiology (height, stride length and cadence), and he doesn't have that over-muscled look that characterises steroid use.

Blake - well, I'd certainly not be overly surprised if he gets busted. Same with Powell (and Gatlin)

While it is encouraging that Mullings got busted by testing in Jamaica, he was also someone who was outside their system and had a poor relationship with the Jamaican athletics establishment. I hope that they would treat anyone else in an equally harsh way.

A guy who's smashing records in a sport that has been plagued by drug use for the past several decades is also using drugs??

Who would have thought it?

This is stupid. Too many peopl eon here seem to WANT Bolt to be juiced for their own personal agenda.

Look at his progression from junior to senior. He was breaking records as a junior. I suppose he was juicing then. Why not cast doubts on Gemeli. In 6 months he has become the fastest junior in the world and one of the fastest in history.

What I see is a bunch of jealous english football fan type being jealous of others. Shame on you all.

As for Powell, there is nothing to doubt about him. For the past 8 years he has been consistent. His physique is what a sprinter should be. He is not overly muscled and he is on record in saying that Mullins should be jailed for bringing shame on his sport and on Jamaica.

Blake is clean. SO what he took a drug which is sold over the counter. He has run faster since that 3 month ban. Does that make him a druggie? Only in the eyes of the small minded jealous souls who populate this place.

Is Wiggins drugged up also. Is the great british crcling team drugged up. I mean they were smashing records for fun in the velodrome. Plus cyclling is dirtier than track ever has been.

But leave the brits alnoe. They are all good. Especially the middle class ones. Wiggin's dad was also a druggie. Like father like son?

azania wrote:This is stupid. Too many peopl eon here seem to WANT Bolt to be juiced for their own personal agenda.

Look at his progression from junior to senior. He was breaking records as a junior. I suppose he was juicing then. Why not cast doubts on Gemeli. In 6 months he has become the fastest junior in the world and one of the fastest in history.

What I see is a bunch of jealous english football fan type being jealous of others. Shame on you all.

As for Powell, there is nothing to doubt about him. For the past 8 years he has been consistent. His physique is what a sprinter should be. He is not overly muscled and he is on record in saying that Mullins should be jailed for bringing shame on his sport and on Jamaica.

Blake is clean. SO what he took a drug which is sold over the counter. He has run faster since that 3 month ban. Does that make him a druggie? Only in the eyes of the small minded jealous souls who populate this place.

Is Wiggins drugged up also. Is the great british crcling team drugged up. I mean they were smashing records for fun in the velodrome. Plus cyclling is dirtier than track ever has been.

But leave the brits alnoe. They are all good. Especially the middle class ones. Wiggin's dad was also a druggie. Like father like son?

What's the 'personal agenda' az? Why do you always say vague things like that, but never actually explicitly come out and say what you're thinking? Are you scared of something or just worried that you have zero justification for your comments so prefer to remain cryptic?

Love the 'Blake is clean' comment. How on Earth do you know this? Do you live with him or something? We all know that passing drug tests counts for zero these days, so that can't be proof. Saying 'Blake is clean' is just is probably a bigger leap of faith than saying 'Jamaica probably has a doping problem'.

Enough people have accused Wiggins, Team Sky and the British cycling team of doping in recent times. I would imagine, given the backgrounds of these individuals, that you haven't made any slightly hysterical, but otherwise impassioned rants about any of those accusations though. Funny that.

Be a bit strange if Bolt and Blake were involved with Memo though wouldn't it? Why would they do that?

You tell me dj. Why casting doubt on team Jamaica but leaving Team GB cycling team alone. Or leaving Adam Gemeli alone. Indeed haven't you praised him before? If he were jamaican you would have doubts. I doubt you have the minerals to admit it.

You seem to start off from the point of view that they are doping unless proven otherwise. Its like asking you if you have stopped beating your wife. Fact is, they are clean until proven otherwise. Unless you have concrete evidence and not housewife gossip, Bolt, Blake et al are 100% clean. FACT!

All else is idle bolox.

Why should I tell you? If you're accusing me of something, isn't it your perogative to tell me what it is rather than have me guess?

To be honest, while you were getting hysterical, did you actually read anything I posted on this thread? This thread was started by a Jamaican and was about out of competition testing in Jamaica. Funny that most of my comments were about OOC testing in Jamaica and not Bradley Wiggins or Adam GEMILI.

The major part of my comments were simply rebutting his theories that Jamaica was somehow subject to higher standard of OOC testing than other nations, and also an interest in Usain Bolts alleged allegiance with Heredia (which is not proved of course).

Dont continue being such a numpty dj. You know quite well that you (and osprey) have cast doubt on Jamaican sprinters. Adam Gemeli has been mentioned before and not a whisper about PEDs and him. Any Jamaican (even weir) gets doubted.

You guys will always give the English the benefit of the doubt and blame Johnny Foreigner without a shred of evidence.

Bolt, Blake et al are 100% clean. Deal with it and put your childish jealousy aside.

azania wrote:Dont continue being such a numpty dj. You know quite well that you (and osprey) have cast doubt on Jamaican sprinters. Adam Gemeli has been mentioned before and not a whisper about PEDs and him. Any Jamaican (even weir) gets doubted.

You guys will always give the English the benefit of the doubt and blame Johnny Foreigner without a shred of evidence.

Bolt, Blake et al are 100% clean. Deal with it and put your childish jealousy aside.

You don't really read any responses to your posts. Why is this?

People cast doubts on Jamaican sprinters because, between the failed tests, the dodgy people they're linked with and the very lax testing regime they're subject to, there are many doubts. These are issues that the likes of Adam GEMILI don't have, so therefore it would be unfair to do it.

I generally only respond to posts that are already in place - if the post is about Jamaica, I post about Jamaica. Sorry if that upsets you. (I'll repeat, but this is the sixth line now so unlikely you've got this far, this post was about drug testing in JAMAICA - why be shocked that people are talking about drug testing in Jamaica?)

People cast doubt on Jamaica because they are jealous and WANT them to be guilty of doping. Jamaicann testing is good enough to catch Mullins and found some dodgy things in Blake's sample in which he paid the price for.

Interestingly that the Jamaican who got caught trained in USA where the best chemists reside.

Which dodgy people they are linked to? Speculation again. You guys sound like Women Institute housewives. Gossip galore.

They are clean. Live with it. Enjoy and appreciate the finest sprinters of our generation. Applaud them for their hard work and gene free talent.

Jamaica doesn't do any out of competition testing.

The fact that the one meeting per year that they do test in actually managed to catch a few people is more damning than it is testimony to the great testing that goes on in Jamaica.

If you'd read my posts, you would know all this already and wouldn't have to make mistakes in your current posts.

You believe what you want. You should be open-minded enough to not get all upset and prejudiced when other people have differing opinions. It's interesting that you accuse people of all sorts, but when you get angry, you're actually far far worse.

Hasn't David Price got a fight soon? Should you be warming your fingers up for 2000 posts about how bad he is?

Personally I am incredibly suspicious when one nation comes from virtually nowhere to dominate a sport exclusively. We have seen in the past that usually this happens for a reason other than "hard work and gene free talent".

So yes, I am suspicious about Jamaica's sprinters. Funily enough, the one I am least suspicious about is Bolt because there are very good morphological/physiological reasons for him to be as fast as he is.

What makes me more suspicious about Jamaica is their lack of serious out of competition testing, the history of drug abuse and their handling of the Blake and Fraser-Pryce cases (punishment? What punishment?).

I am equally suspicious of the GB track cycling team (and have said so, but funily enough not on the athletics forum, because, well, it has nothing to do with athletics). Track cycling has very little history of doping cases (which makes me more suspicious, not less) and the way it handled the Baugé case didn't exactly shout "we take drugs very seriously" from the roof-tops.

Road cycling on the other hand has almost certainly cleared itself up the most amongst all sports in recent times. Witness the way it dealt with Contador as opposed to the way Athletics dealt with Fraser-Pryce. It may well be that Sky's recent success has too close echoes with US Postal's, but I am certain that cycling is trying to catch the cheats where it can, and should Wiggins (or more likely Froome, given his meteoric rise, but again there are very good reasons for it) then we will all hear about it. Athletics, less so.

Track cycling is subject to the very same UCI drug testing procedures that the road is.

British cyclists (track and road) are subject to testing by UK Sport anti-doping as well as being part of the UCI biological passport. It's pretty draconian in all fairness, but most cyclists accept it as being a necessary evil - something that sports like tennis should take note of when they cry about 5 tests a year.

The 12 month ban for Bauge for three missed tests is pretty much standard across all sports, nothing wrong with that one.

Whether Wiggins and SKY are clean are not is completely irrelevant when it comes to the fact that these days cycling is orders of magnitude more clean than athletics - it's just that they took a massive PR hit by catching and implicating half the peloton and are now paying the price in terms of clueless people saying it's the dirtiest sport around.

Athletics has never taken that plunge and that's why the testing they do is more to keep up appearances than it is to catch cheats.

djlovesyou wrote:Track cycling is subject to the very same UCI drug testing procedures that the road is.

British cyclists (track and road) are subject to testing by UK Sport anti-doping as well as being part of the UCI biological passport. It's pretty draconian in all fairness, but most cyclists accept it as being a necessary evil - something that sports like tennis should take note of when they cry about 5 tests a year.

The 12 month ban for Bauge for three missed tests is pretty much standard across all sports, nothing wrong with that one.

Whether Wiggins and SKY are clean are not is completely irrelevant when it comes to the fact that these days cycling is orders of magnitude more clean than athletics - it's just that they took a massive PR hit by catching and implicating half the peloton and are now paying the price in terms of clueless people saying it's the dirtiest sport around.

Athletics has never taken that plunge and that's why the testing they do is more to keep up appearances than it is to catch cheats.

Athletics also introduced the biological passport last year. In fact several athletes got banned before the OG, not because of failed drug tests but mainly because their biological passport showed abnormal readings....
Baugé retroactively lost all his titles won in 2011 but was never banned (in fact the 3 no-shows were announced on January 2012, but yet he took part to the Melbourne World championships in march 2012 and to the London Olympics, that's not what I call a ban). Ohuruogu, however was I think banned for 1 year for the same thing.
Saying that athletics has never take the plunge is simply wrong. It is viewed as a dirty sport mainly because cheats were caught especially in marquee events such as sprinting ( Jones, Montgomery or Gatlin etc... were BIG names, WR holders or OG champions ). Some were even (rightly) banned despite the fact that they never tested positive for anything.
Saying that cycling is orders of magnitude cleaner is extremely debatable and is as misinformed as those who indeed spit on cycling only because of its strong anti-doping policies.
The problem is that there are athletes out there that we think are doped up (and I suspect some of them to be on drugs) but we are upset because they are not caught.
You have to understand that they can't ban athletes because some random anonymous poster want them to get caught if they don't have any evidence.

The fact that you use Jones and Montgomery as evidence that athletics is interested in catching cheats is very interesting.

Those guys were brought down during the BALCO case. Nothing to do with failed drugs tests. The IAAF had nothing to do with catching those guys. They were cheating right in front of the IAAF for years and weren't touched. You do realise that when they admit in court that they doped, the IAAF doesn't really have an option other than to ban them, but it doesn't make it a win for the IAAF and their testing.

It was still a 12 month ban though for Bauge, although backdated. That had nothing to do with the UCI mind you, you need to take that one up with the French authorities. They found a legal loophole and they used it.

Biological passport in athletics is pretty funny - have you seen how many blood tests they do? They went after a few obvious cases from countries that everyone thinks are cheating anyway and looked great prior to the Olympics. Obvious PR exercise - to think that most of the big names in the sport are subject to the 'biological passport' is laughable.

I would agree with DJ: Jones and Montgomery (and recent "bans" for Blake and Fraser-Pryce) are perfect examples of the IAAF not taking drugs seriously enough.

Gatlin is the only genuinely high profile athlete who has been properly banned since Ben Johnson, and even then it took his second positive for the general public to know about his first, and the ban wasn't as long as it could/should have been.

Anyway I will keep my suspicions about track cycling.

djlovesyou wrote:The fact that you use Jones and Montgomery as evidence that athletics is interested in catching cheats is very interesting.

Those guys were brought down during the BALCO case. Nothing to do with failed drugs tests. The IAAF had nothing to do with catching those guys. They were cheating right in front of the IAAF for years and weren't touched. You do realise that when they admit in court that they doped, the IAAF doesn't really have an option other than to ban them, but it doesn't make it a win for the IAAF and their testing.

It was still a 12 month ban though for Bauge, although backdated. That had nothing to do with the UCI mind you, you need to take that one up with the French authorities. They found a legal loophole and they used it.

Biological passport in athletics is pretty funny - have you seen how many blood tests they do? They went after a few obvious cases from countries that everyone thinks are cheating anyway and looked great prior to the Olympics. Obvious PR exercise - to think that most of the big names in the sport are subject to the 'biological passport' is laughable.

Then why saying that cycling is orders of magnitude cleaner despite the fact at the time both Jones and Montgomery were cheating , Armstrong was winning the tour year after year, even threatening some who were speaking too much about doping (like Christophe Bassons) and stayed untouched (while small fish were caught).
and BTW, do you have any evidence that big stars are not submitted to the biological passport or is it merely speculation ?

I'm talking about now, not then. Since Armstrong, Festina, Puerto, etc cycling has stepped up and at least tried to do something about it. The PR hits they were taking were just too great for them to sweep it under the carpet any longer. They felt enough damage had been done to the sport that they may as well just do it properly.

Internationally, athletics has done very little besides talk a big game. USADA and USATF have had to clean up their act at least a little bit - anti-doping is relatively tough in the USA now, but a lot of other nations are getting away relatively scot free.

Are you suggesting that if Bolt or Blake were doping, that the IAAF would bust them if it was uncovered? I seriously doubt it.

The big stars are subject to the biological passport in name, but given the amount of time they are blood tested in a year, it's not really going to be effective.

Mike Selig wrote:I would agree with DJ: Jones and Montgomery (and recent "bans" for Blake and Fraser-Pryce) are perfect examples of the IAAF not taking drugs seriously enough.

Gatlin is the only genuinely high profile athlete who has been properly banned since Ben Johnson, and even then it took his second positive for the general public to know about his first, and the ban wasn't as long as it could/should have been.

Anyway I will keep my suspicions about track cycling.

In fact in what is concerning Blake, he wasn't banned at all originally because the substance was not on list. But his federation decide to hand him ban (albeit a small one). It is not the IAAF which conducted the test but JADCO which means that they could have easily hid it under the carpet. Why didn't they do that ?
I am not knowledgeable enough in the Fraser-Pryce case (even though she is indeed suspicious to me) .
I totally agree with you in what is concerning Gatlin, but remember that he got 4 years because he cooperated with anti-doping authorities, in criminal justice felon often get reduced sentence when they cooperate, that's called a deal !

djlovesyou wrote:I'm talking about now, not then. Since Armstrong, Festina, Puerto, etc cycling has stepped up and at least tried to do something about it. The PR hits they were taking were just too great for them to sweep it under the carpet any longer. They felt enough damage had been done to the sport that they may as well just do it properly.

Internationally, athletics has done very little besides talk a big game. USADA and USATF have had to clean up their act at least a little bit - anti-doping is relatively tough in the USA now, but a lot of other nations are getting away relatively scot free.

Are you suggesting that if Bolt or Blake were doping, that the IAAF would bust them if it was uncovered? I seriously doubt it.

The big stars are subject to the biological passport in name, but given the amount of time they are blood tested in a year, it's not really going to be effective.

Why wasn't Blake covered when he was caught by his own Jamaican federation for a substance that has existed for years but not on the banned list ? Why didn't the Jamaican fed bury his failed test (along with Fraser-Pryce and the 5 other caught with Blake) in the sand ? You're aware that Blake was already billed as the next big thing back then and Fraser Pryce was the olympic titleholder ?

He wasn't caught by his own federation. He was caught by JADCO.

At the time, it seemed like the head of JADCO was actually very keen on catching and banning Jamaican drug cheats. They tested them, came back positive and within hours these results had been leaked to the press. There was no chance for covering this one up.

It's little wonder that the only time they test athletes these days is still at the trials.

djlovesyou wrote:He wasn't caught by his own federation. He was caught by JADCO.

And JADCO is ? the Jamaican anti-doping body ? isn't it ?

djlovesyou wrote:
At the time, it seemed like the head of JADCO was actually very keen on catching and banning Jamaican drug cheats. They tested them, came back positive and within hours these results had been leaked to the press. There was no chance for covering this one up.

That's why they caught Steve Mullings two years later, a 9"80 sprinter (therefore a medal hope) and handed him a life ban for using, not a doping agent but a diuretic (generally used as a masking agent). BTW, you said that the results were leaked to the press(I don't know if it is true ) but it is the case, it shows that covering is not as easy as you believe (whistleblowers are always a problem, ask BALCO cheats...)

djlovesyou wrote:
It's little wonder that the only time they test athletes these days is still at the trials.

And this claim is based on which evidence ?
Having doubts against their athletes is perfectly normal (and there is one in particular that makes me very suspicious). But base your claims on facts, not speculation...

Read the below and let put this to rest now about Jamaica's anti-doping programmne and out of competition testing.


Source: http://www.jamaicaobserver.com/sports/Jamaica-defends-its-anti-doping-programme



"WADA said the Jamaica Anti-Doping Commission (JADCO) was deemed compliant in the compliance report passed by WADA's foundation board last November."

"In order to achieve compliance, an anti-doping organisation needs to satisfy a number of criteria with regard to its anti-doping programme, including having an element of out-of-competition testing," WADA said in a statement sent to the RJR Communications Group.

"It must also have in place anti-doping regulations that allow the programme to function effectively."

WADA said many Jamaican track-and-field athletes are part of the IAAF's registered testing pool and are, therefore, also tested independently of their national anti-doping programme.

"WADA has visited Jamaica several times in the last couple of years to provide guidance and advice to JADCO," the international agency said. "We expect an invitation to return again this year as a result of the appointment of a new CEO at JADCO."

WADA also noted that JADCO is mandated to deliver a report every year to its stakeholders which identifies any anti-doping rules violations, and that WADA had received the report.

"As with all signatories, WADA will continue to monitor and offer assistance where needed to make anti-doping efforts as robust as possible," the agency said.

Explain to me the sections of that newspaper report that contradict anything that I've said on the thread.

I already told you that Jamaican athletes were subjected to a lot more IAAF testing than other nations because they don't get out of competition testing enough from JADCO.

The report doesn't really say anything more besides a few Jamaican officials getting all upset.

djlovesyou wrote:Explain to me the sections of that newspaper report that contradict anything that I've said on the thread.

I already told you that Jamaican athletes were subjected to a lot more IAAF testing than other nations because they don't get out of competition testing enough from JADCO.

The report doesn't really say anything more besides a few Jamaican officials getting all upset.

But the link given in the first post shows that there are actually as much if not more athletes from countries that have a so-called "functionning" national antidoping agency that are tested by the IAAF. Look at the number for the USA, higher than for Jamaica despite the USADA . The number of test conducted by the IAAF also depends of the number of elite athletes ranked in an event that's why Jamaicans in Track are a lot more tested than, let's say India.

USA has more athletes, hence why more athletes are getting tested.

Jamaica has a lot more athletes getting tested 4+ times. If you look at the USA, the vast majority are 1-3 times.

This is my favourite post on this topic, in fact probably on the entire forum

"A guy who's smashing records in a sport that has been plagued by drug use for the past several decades is also using drugs??

Who would have thought it?"



But it's closely followed by this one courtesy of our resident track and field expert

"They are clean. Live with it. Enjoy and appreciate the finest sprinters of our generation. Applaud them for their hard work and gene free talent."

Oh how I laughed

Do you have any evidence that they are juicing other that your usual tittle tattle and housewives gossip you so enjoy?

azania wrote:Do you have any evidence that they are juicing other that your usual tittle tattle and housewives gossip you so enjoy?

Probably not, in the same way there was no evidence on Flo Jo!

I forgot about this thread.

Ding ding ding, round 3.