I wouldn't worry if I were you about innocent athletes being penalized. According to the former head of WADA most athletes are getting away with their doping. They arent catching many outside Kenya and the occasional burrito consumer.
I would hope everyone worries about innocent athletes being penalized, whether they were me or not.
It's not clear to me how much this former head of WADA really knows about who is doping, and how many they are not catching, or for that matter, how many innocent athletes they penalize.
One of the most senior figures in global anti-doping has warned that too many drug cheats in sport are evading detection – and criticised the current system as ‘ineffective’
One of the most senior figures in global anti-doping has warned that too many drug cheats in sport are evading detection – and criticised the current system as “ineffective”.
David Howman, the former director general of the World Anti-Doping Agency (Wada) and the chair of the Athletics Integrity Unit, urged anti-doping bodies to be more ambitious in catching elite athletes again rather than focusing on compliance issues.
"Let’s be honest and pragmatic … intentional dopers at elite level are evading detection,” Howman told the Wada’s World Conference on Doping in Sport in South Korea. “We are not effective enough nowadays in catching cheats. We have great education programmes which help but they don’t impact the intentional rule-breakers in elite sport.
“Our ineffectiveness in dealing with those who are beating the rules is hurting the anti-doping movement’s credibility, with the resulting risk that our clean-sport message falls on deaf ears.”
This post was edited 2 minutes after it was posted.
Do you worry as much about innocent athletes losing money and placings to dopers who don't get caught or about innocent athletes being penalized? If your answer is "both" how would you want to protect the former within the constraints of our available technology and economics? The second question is whether you believe the high level administrators in the sport genuinely want to clean up the sport enough that they'd be willing to catch and ban the highest profiled atheltes in the sport, think Kipchoge, Ingebregsen, Bolt (not to insinuate that any of them are or were dopers but to illustrate the level of athlete I mean.) A third question is if you can think of any really top level athletes in any sport who are caught doping and given significant suspensions? Sinner was caught and banned from tennis for a few hours between Grand Slam tournaments but that's as close as I can come.
I don't see why these things have to be packaged together. But sure, they should punish the bad guys, and not punish the good guys.
How would I want to protect clean athletes? That's WADA's whole "raison d'etre". I would push to improve the "available technology" to improve the reliability and effectiveness of that mission. I think WADA science is bad, and they should conduct better science. They started doing better "intelligence and investigations". They should fortify and continue such non-testing efforts to supplement fortify testing results. I think WADA's banned list contains too many substances that their science hasn't justified belongs on that list. This makes testing more expensive than is justified. They should do better science to justify and priortize which substances belong on that list.
I think different high level adminstrators are many different people and can have different priorities in their agendas. Sometimes it is about genuinely wanting to clean up the sport, and sometimes it is more about power (and sometimes both). I think no one is unwilling to catch the highest profile athletes. On the contrary, netting a profile athlete, like a Ben Johnson, a Mary Decker-Slaney, a Marion Jones, a Lance Armstrong, helps justify the role of anti-doping and give it more power.
You mean top level athletes outside of cycling and athletics? I can think of many in cycling, but few and far between in other sports, like Barry Bonds and A-Rod, but baseball has their own system for sanctions too. In WADA sports, the other doping sports are bodybuilding and weightlifting, but I don't know any high level athletes in these sports, except for Arnold Schwarzenegger.
One of the most senior figures in global anti-doping has warned that too many drug cheats in sport are evading detection – and criticised the current system as “ineffective”.
David Howman, the former director general of the World Anti-Doping Agency (Wada) and the chair of the Athletics Integrity Unit, urged anti-doping bodies to be more ambitious in catching elite athletes again rather than focusing on compliance issues.
"Let’s be honest and pragmatic … intentional dopers at elite level are evading detection,” Howman told the Wada’s World Conference on Doping in Sport in South Korea. “We are not effective enough nowadays in catching cheats. We have great education programmes which help but they don’t impact the intentional rule-breakers in elite sport.
“Our ineffectiveness in dealing with those who are beating the rules is hurting the anti-doping movement’s credibility, with the resulting risk that our clean-sport message falls on deaf ears.”
That's just it. I read these words and wonder if David Howman has any real knowledge about who is not being caught. This article contains and shares no knowledge and just seems to be him expressing his fears, and giving a motivational pep-talk.
But I do agree with his final conclusion:
"We must all do better to support our clean athletes by catching the dirty ones, especially those at the pinnacle of sport," he added. "Let’s resolve to strengthen our anti-doping system as we strive for cleaner, fairer and more credible sport."
I think no one is unwilling to catch the highest profile athletes. On the contrary, netting a profile athlete, like a Ben Johnson, a Mary Decker-Slaney, a Marion Jones, a Lance Armstrong, helps justify the role of anti-doping and give it more power.
Seriously, "no one"? Armstrong alone proves you wrong, see for example
A damning report has shown how cycling’s world governing body, the UCI, colluded with Lance Armstrong from 1999 to 2009 to circumvent accusations he doped and to cement his status
Lance Armstrong and UCI ‘colluded to bypass doping accusations’
More examples:
USATF covered up over 100 of doping positives.
DLV tried to let Baumann go, against the rules. UK Athletics Linford Christie, USATF Decker, and USADA Knighton. (Yes I know, fortunately, the international authorities were able to reverse those attempts, and banned all four.)
Recall the Chinese positive tests before the Tokyo Olympics, and the Jamaican positive tests at the Beijing Olympics - all ignored, apparently against the rules.
"We must all do better to support our clean athletes by catching the dirty ones, especially those at the pinnacle of sport," he added. "Let’s resolve to strengthen our anti-doping system as we strive for cleaner, fairer and more credible sport."
Do you worry as much about innocent athletes losing money and placings to dopers who don't get caught or about innocent athletes being penalized? If your answer is "both" how would you want to protect the former within the constraints of our available technology and economics? The second question is whether you believe the high level administrators in the sport genuinely want to clean up the sport enough that they'd be willing to catch and ban the highest profiled atheltes in the sport, think Kipchoge, Ingebregsen, Bolt (not to insinuate that any of them are or were dopers but to illustrate the level of athlete I mean.) A third question is if you can think of any really top level athletes in any sport who are caught doping and given significant suspensions? Sinner was caught and banned from tennis for a few hours between Grand Slam tournaments but that's as close as I can come.
I don't see why these things have to be packaged together. But sure, they should punish the bad guys, and not punish the good guys.
How would I want to protect clean athletes? That's WADA's whole "raison d'etre". I would push to improve the "available technology" to improve the reliability and effectiveness of that mission. I think WADA science is bad, and they should conduct better science. They started doing better "intelligence and investigations". They should fortify and continue such non-testing efforts to supplement fortify testing results. I think WADA's banned list contains too many substances that their science hasn't justified belongs on that list. This makes testing more expensive than is justified. They should do better science to justify and priortize which substances belong on that list.
I think different high level adminstrators are many different people and can have different priorities in their agendas. Sometimes it is about genuinely wanting to clean up the sport, and sometimes it is more about power (and sometimes both). I think no one is unwilling to catch the highest profile athletes. On the contrary, netting a profile athlete, like a Ben Johnson, a Mary Decker-Slaney, a Marion Jones, a Lance Armstrong, helps justify the role of anti-doping and give it more power.
You mean top level athletes outside of cycling and athletics? I can think of many in cycling, but few and far between in other sports, like Barry Bonds and A-Rod, but baseball has their own system for sanctions too. In WADA sports, the other doping sports are bodybuilding and weightlifting, but I don't know any high level athletes in these sports, except for Arnold Schwarzenegger.
Almost half of the high profile athletes you mention, Jones, Armstrong, and Bonds were not caught by their sports's anti doping programs and Slaney was not really a high profile athlete when she was caught. That leaves Ben Johnson who didn't have the benefit of having his failed test covered up and A-Rod.
DLV tried to let Baumann go, against the rules. UK Athletics Linford Christie, USATF Decker, and USADA Knighton. (Yes I know, fortunately, the international authorities were able to reverse those attempts, and banned all four.)
Recall the Chinese positive tests before the Tokyo Olympics, and the Jamaican positive tests at the Beijing Olympics - all ignored, apparently against the rules.
There are exceptions in history, so you are right -- I can't say "no one" without any exceptions. In fact, an even bigger example was the IAAF/Russia extortion/bribery scandal with Diack's inner circle.
And I'm not sure all your examples are apparently against the rules.
I'm not so sure of all your examples are valid either. For example USADA prosecuted Knighton in arbitration -- seems like that is a demonstration of a willingess to catch a high profile athlete.
This post was edited 5 minutes after it was posted.
"We must all do better to support our clean athletes by catching the dirty ones, especially those at the pinnacle of sport," he added. "Let’s resolve to strengthen our anti-doping system as we strive for cleaner, fairer and more credible sport."
