Questions about who has to submit to drug testing. (amateurs, retired runners, etc)

Drainthefecesswamp wrote:

7370 wrote:

If they don't do this at running races, they probably should!

Why? I'm all for catching dopers, but I'm just not sure if I care if a 15:30 5k guy gets caught if he is doping (or 2:35 man, or equivalent women). Unless there is potential money in the times from prizes or sponsorship, I'm not sure it really bothers me if people cheat. As soon as money is on the table, I am all for people getting caught and banned.

I'm not knocking your opinion, just curious why you think we should be trying to catch people at amateur levels?

Because its cheating.

People can get all behind a course cutting lynchmob (cheating), regardless of how fast the perpetrator is. Doping is another form of cheating, no different than course cutting.

Also, I'm not necessarily saying they should test through the entire field. I am suggesting that there should be some testing beyond the winner though.

And for clarity, there usually is some amount of money on the line for bike races (which is where most of my perspective is from), albeit fairly insignificant.

subelite hobbyjogger wrote:

It's Crazy Out There! wrote:

Here's a "59 year old" cyclist who was ambushed at his home for an OOC test. He refused and was hit with a 4-year ban! He says he doesn't why he was target tested when he doesn't win any races. ?

https://masterstrack.blog/2018/05/cyclist-59-suspended-for-refusing-drug-test-outside-race-are-we-next/

At that level, most unannounced tests are based on tips from whistleblowers. These agencies don’t have the budget to do blind random testing, especially out of competition. They aren’t going to do something like they did with this guy unless they think there is a very good chance he is glowing.

But despite whistleblowers, why would USADA waste their time & money on testing athletes who are middle of the pack finishers and don't place in any races? And you're right about whistleblowers - in the case of cyclist Scott Gross he says his "old girlfriend" may have dropped a dime on him (be careful with old girlfriends. Lol). After refusing a drug test, he later admits to taking the dietary supplement "DHEA" (I wonder how many middle-aged guys, competitive athletes or not, are using DHEA). Gross says "he says he competes for fun — and isn’t anywhere near championship caliber. He doesn’t deprive anyone of prize money."

And here's another weird case where this "lone wolf" race walker (only competitor in his age group) was tested IC at a National caliber indoor meet. Look at this unassuming chap who was tested as the only competitor in his age group? And positive for testosterone? Does this dimuitive, very thin guy look like someone on "T?" ?

whatwhat wrote:

What about this dude? Why would you test 2:35 male marathoner who dropped out of a race? And why, as a non finishing armature could he not just refuse the test?

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/newfoundland-labrador/local-runner-fails-drug-test-1.5326713

He was a 1:08 half guy, so his 2:33 marathon isn't necessarily indicative of his supposed calibre.

He presumably was on the elite athlete list for the Ottawa NCM marathon, so regardless of whether he dropped out, would have potentially been in the testing pool for that race (and athletes would likely have been selected prior to the race, but not told until after they finished/dropped out).

As mentioned later in this thread, sure he could refuse the test, but as an Athletics Canada member (by virtue of his provincial membership), he would not be eligible to compete in any sanctioned events (and even non-sanctioned events would likely not be keen on the negative publicity of having a suspended athlete racing their event).

whatwhat wrote:

What about this dude? Why would you test 2:35 male marathoner who dropped out of a race? And why, as a non finishing armature could he not just refuse the test?

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/newfoundland-labrador/local-runner-fails-drug-test-1.5326713

In "pro" events or high level junior races, sometimes a random draw of bib numbers is done. They will be tested in addition to the winner or however deep the testing goes. I was at many UCI (cycling) junior races and the stage winner, GC leader and then several randoms would be tested. The numbers were usually announced partway through the race. They had to show whether they finished or not

In team sports, it is often a random draw of jersey numbers or I even saw one case where there was a roster and a person not associated with the teams or testing was asked to pick 4 numbers between 1 and 25. The roster listed the players by jersey number and the tested counted from the top. (This was in the earliest days of USADA/WADA).

AdrianCh wrote:

So here's a situation. Your random runner, even if very fast but still amateur, won't know all the rules and substances to avoid. Having a cold or a flu and taking some medicine may flag you for banned substances. If an amateur gets a positive because of random testing because he happened to be taking something for sickness, is that fair? We can't realistically expect for every runner to know what is doping and what is not.

It is fair in the sense that everyone is playing by the same rules.

Few of "random runners" are ever going to be tested. A bigger issue is in the masters and older categories where prescription medications that are often given for treatments (think women on hormone replacement therapy) lead to a ban.

Cycling and road running are different. I am not sure of the rules in road racing to be honest. As you note, there is no running license like a cycling license. USATF talked with USA Cycling about how that might be implemented, but USATF does not sanction all races. USA Cycling does not either, but a large number are (for insurance reasons and for points/rankings).

But to win a state or US championship you have to be a USATF member. I think it was Matt Carpenter a few years ago entered a race that was the USATF state championship and although he won since he was not a member, he was not the USATF state champion.

whatwhat wrote:

What about this dude? Why would you test 2:35 male marathoner who dropped out of a race? And why, as a non finishing armature could he not just refuse the test?

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/newfoundland-labrador/local-runner-fails-drug-test-1.5326713

In many cases anyone entering a race is subject to drug testing. What can happen is that the top X finishers are tested (say top 4 at the Olympic Trials in the US). Then athletes are chosen at random. It can be done by finish place or bib number and is done before completion of the race.

I was on a trip with the US junior national team (cycling) and one of our kids crashed during the last stage of the race. He was done so we got him in the car. A little while later over the radio came the random draws and his bib had been chosen. So despite not finishing, we went to doping control.

7370 wrote:

I don't know about running, but in cycling it was fairly common for testing to show up unannounced. I recall unannounced testing several times a year at cycling races in the northeast. Typically they would test the winner and a couple of others in the top 10-15. More common in category 1/2, but I can think of examples where category 3 was tested as well (category 3 is basically a reasonably fast recreational rider). I can also recall at least two positives from races that I was in. Never heard of out of competition testing though.

I THINK that the regional governing authority paid for it (not the race or the doping agency). Not totally sure about this though.

If they don't do this at running races, they probably should!

I had a friend at a bike race who said there was a rumor that USADA was there. He said it was amazing how many guys suddenly got sick and dropped out of the race. USADA was there it turns out.

Thank you so much for the information!