My main gripe with drug testing in athletics is that it's ineffective. When you look at people like Armstrong, Efimova, Gaitlin, and other world class athletes who have tested positive multiple times they somehow seem to wait out their ban but come back as juiced as ever and ride it to victory. It seems like the drug master's are constantly 1 step ahead of the anti-drug agency and are able to get away with their doping practices and come out looking like winners. Until a sure fire method of testing becomes available I think it's ineffective to spend the money for what we are getting now. Cheater's are never winners and my hope is they never experience the soul-filling satisfaction of completing their competition fairly and on their own power of strength and motivation.
Is that much different than a 72 year old getting carded for buying a beer? OK - Much more personal but, in the same concept.
test all or random it turns out to be a test for all to be interested in the outcome.
IMO, a person who is insecure/dishonest enough to cheat to win is insecure/dishonest enough to plan their doping around testing. Seems like a lot of work for little return.
And back to the issue of being very costly. To bring a male and a female doping control officer to Athens Georgia for a 1 day meet, between travel, lodging and compensation, could easily run over $1,000; before even factoring in the cost of the actual testing.
Right. And they might want some snacks and bottled water on deck.
Look, Rob, you are against drug testing masters swimmers. I get that. And personally I don't believe there is the will to do it within the organization. But the reality is that it would be feasible, and the cost to introduce it at nationals would not be prohibitive
Show me a real plan on how to fund, build and implement doping control and I’ll take it to the board.
Create a task force. Assuming, of course, that the organization really wants to pursue this.
I'll contact Dawson Hughes. Thanks for the feedback.And a little more feedback…
Since doping control will require changes to USMS rules and policies, you should probably contact the president or Rules Committee chair. Dawson would be involved in implementation, but the USMS House of Delegates and Board of Directors would be the groups that vote on any rules and policy changes.
I'm with Ande and others: random testing of top finishers at Nationals. Yes there would be logistical issues, and yes some would evade getting caught, but at least there would be a deterrent. I know a lot of our members couldn't care less, but a good number of us do, and it's important for the integrity of our sport.
So long as this is paid for out of the fees for nationals, this sounds fine to me.
I would not be in favor of this coming out of USMS fees that are imposed on all members.
I think there's only 25-30% of USMS members who even compete (in at least 1 meet per year), and this would impact just a fraction of those, so yes you can count me in the category who doesn't care. Why take up time and USMS resources for something which benefits so few.
