this was posted back in 2013 on a thread in regards to lance armstrong not being allowed to compete in the zones in texas
Rob Butcher, executive director of U.S. Masters Swimming, who are staging the event, told CNN: "The word back is that he is not eligible to participate in our competition because FINA follows the WADA code -- the World Anti-Doping Authority code.
"And, as such, we are bound -- through a couple layers of separation down -- to our events as well.
"So the takeaway is: while he has entered and you'll see him on a heat sheet, he is not eligible to participate in that event. Or any other U.S.M.S competition."
there is certainly more info in the old thread but with a quick look at the thread i thought this waspertinent
I've never been tested and we all can think of a few who we'd like to be tested.
Is doping banned in masters swimming?
www.fina.org/.../7595.pdf
is doping mentioned in USMS rules?
http://www.usms.org/rules/
WADA and USADA prevented Lance from swimming in a masters meet after he confessed.
www.nytimes.com/.../armstrong-plans-to-enter-swimming-competition.html
Consider random testing among those who place top 10 at nationals and worlds & required testing for anyone who breaks a national or world record, incompetition testing should be part of the protocol like filling out the paperwork and shooting the race courses before & after each sessions for pools with bulkheads.
Consider testing anomalies,
swimmers who are unusually muscular for their ages,
elite masters swimmers who have abnormal time progressions, and
ones who have sudden improvement spikes.
I'm sure programs could be written to show normal time progressions from an athlete's lifetime best times at ____ age then how their times should progress as they age.
It's unusual for swimmers in their 50's to suddenly start doing times they did in their 30's or early mid 40's.
Maybe some are doping to enhance their sexual stamina?
T&F Masters is under USATF, while USMS is an independent organization.
If we are independent, why are we not allowed to compete in the full body suits, and why was Lance not allowed to swim at Zones?
If we are independent, why are we not allowed to compete in the full body suits?
We are not allowed to compete in full body suits because our own rulebook restricts their use. From Jan 1 - May 30, 2010 we did allow the use of full body suits when they were banned elsewhere. That is because the organization permitted their use to finish out the SCY season. It would be technically possible for a USMS rules change proposal to allow their use again even if they are banned elsewhere. I am not a fan of this idea, I'm just answering your question.
If we are independent, ...why was Lance not allowed to swim at Zones?
As has been previously reported, it was because we are a member of FINA and FINA banned his eligibility to compete.
How about we think this through a bit and relax the upscale rhetoric for a while? Yes, in a perfect world, testing would be covered by some rich org. but till then we can do little to catch the drug companies that spend Millions on the things we rant against.
If we are independent, why are we not allowed to compete in the full body suits...
In addition to @jroddin's comment, I suspect at this point, the market for old-style tech suits would be pretty small. (I'm not referring to the neoprene stuff triathletes wear, but the old swimming tech suits many top level USMS competitors used to wear).
When masters swimmers break national or world records, require drug testing in order for those records to count & stand.
I think this is an excellent idea on the surface. Drug testing for the majority of us would be an unnecessary waste of money; however, I would hate to see record-holders lose a record to a cheater. Here's the problem, though: For drugs that are typically banned but medically necessary for some Masters swimmers, where do you draw the line as to which drugs should be allowed? :confused:
As has been previously reported, it was because we are a member of FINA and FINA banned eligibility to compete.
Yes, and FINA is a signatory of the World Anti-Doping Code.
That is my question as well. A "doctor's note" just won't do as some of are required to be on some drugs that allow us to stay active but might be on some list as "aiding" in some fashion or other.
To act as a deterrent.
I think the fact that people still test positive is very good evidence that it's not an effective deterrent. At best it will give armchair experts the opportunity to smugly look down on people who test positive. At worst it will punish someone who doesn't deserve it.
just might possibly improve the experience of maybe 5% of the membership
and will annoy the heck out of another 20%.
Convince me this is a widespread concern among USMS members.
Count me as a vote for "not a concern".
