Great thread! WHY is there so little drug testing occurring, particularly at many high-profile road races like CIM? First, let’s consider who/what the 2 options are for any race director looking to implement drug testing at a USATF sanctioned road race.
Option 1 – Race director joins the World Athletics Label Program (comprised of 4 different levels), which can cost as little as $1,000 up to $50,000 depending on the distance and competitive level of said race. World Athletics becomes the results management authority (RMA) for the samples collected at the event.
World Athletics Label Program document
There is a minimum # of anti-doping tests that must be conducted at the event. The race director can then select any 3rd party sample collection company (USADA, Clearidium, Drug Free Sport, PWC, etc.) to collect the samples on race day. The cost to collect & analyze the samples is in addition to the cost of joining the World Athletics program. The benefit to this system – if any athlete has an adverse analytical finding (aka – “positive test”), World Athletics burdens the entire legal process and all legal fees.
Option 2 – Race director contracts directly with USADA to conduct drug testing which requires an upfront legal retainer of $10K to $20K (this fee does not include the cost to collect and analyze samples). USADA becomes the RMA for the samples collected at the event. The downside to this system – if any athlete has an adverse analytical finding, the race organization will be billed directly by USADA for legal fees. There’s no way of knowing how much $ this could be. I assume most race directors see this as FAR too risky, especially when you consider the number of foreign athletes that have recently tested positive after an In-Competition event.
World Athletics and USADA are the only organizations with the ability to be the results management authority. World Athletics can be RMA because they are the International Federation (IF) overseeing all disciplines of the sport. USADA can be RMA because they are the national anti-doping organization (NADO) for all US sanctioned sports, in this case under USATF jurisdiction. The same logic applies to races hosted in any other country. If a conflict pertaining to results management authority occurs between a NADO and IF, the IF has authority.
Second, let’s consider the cost. It is more expensive to collect and analyze blood samples than it is urine only. In an event setting, normally only urine will be collected. If blood is to be collected, it is typically done a day or two before the event and analyzed as an "out of competition" test. Samples collected during the in-competition window (typically urine only) are analyzed for wider range of prohibited substances therefore the analysis fee is slightly higher. All in, a standard in-competition (urine only) drug test can cost approximately $600 to $1,200 per sample.
*US based road races have conducted drug testing at their event in 2022
- Houston Marathon
- Boston Marathon
- Pittsburgh Marathon
- BOLDER Boulder
- Peachtree Road Race
- Falmouth Road Race
- Chicago Marathon
- NYC Marathon
- Manchester Road Race
That’s a very short list. *List is according to World Athletics website found here.
Solution: USADA and USATF should work together to fund drug testing at the most competitive road races. According to their 990 which can be found here, USADA receives nearly $12 million from the US Government to fund its testing programs and another $5 million from the USOPC. Commit $250K a year to fund an anti-doping program that would test the top 10 overall female and male finishers at the top 15 races in the US. Additionally, USADA should cover all the legal fees themselves…why should a road race organization pay for USADA to do the job they are given $17 million to do?!