best I can tell... that the USADA only has jurisdiction over US athletes (duh) and Armstrong is particularly egregious as far as Americans go. The USADA also seems to be fairly consistent about lifetime bans for traffikers.I believe USADA has agreements with the USOC and each National Governing Boby member of USOC. These agreements cover the members of these NGB’s and events sanctioned by these NGB’s. So for example any USA-Swimming member on FINA’s Registered Testing Pool is available for out-of-competition testing by USADA, FINA or WADA. And any swimmer competing at USA-S sanctioned events (regardless of national affiliation or inclusion in the testing pool) is subject to drug testing conducted by the USADA and FINA.
On a side note, I read where Russian cyclist Alexander Serebryakov recently returned an adverse analytical finding in an out of competition test. It appears the Armstrong example and clean sport initiatives haven’t completely sunk in for the cycling world.
best I can tell... that the USADA only has jurisdiction over US athletes (duh) and Armstrong is particularly egregious as far as Americans go. The USADA also seems to be fairly consistent about lifetime bans for traffikers.I believe USADA has agreements with the USOC and each National Governing Boby member of USOC. These agreements cover the members of these NGB’s and events sanctioned by these NGB’s. So for example any USA-Swimming member on FINA’s Registered Testing Pool is available for out-of-competition testing by USADA, FINA or WADA. And any swimmer competing at USA-S sanctioned events (regardless of national affiliation or inclusion in the testing pool) is subject to drug testing conducted by the USADA and FINA.
On a side note, I read where Russian cyclist Alexander Serebryakov recently returned an adverse analytical finding in an out of competition test. It appears the Armstrong example and clean sport initiatives haven’t completely sunk in for the cycling world.
