Upgrade to enjoy this feature!
Vital MX fantasy is free to play, but Premium users receive great benefits. Premium benefits include:
- View and download rider stats
- Pick trends
- Create a private league
- And more!
Only $10 for all 2026 SX, MX, and SMX series.
There will be no 14th to 1st rides this year...just the same old story...good start...pull away....win...
So, you’d think fans who think it’s worth having an opinion about PED’s would take the time to know what the rules are. All the more so if one is a professional with a vested interest in how those rules apply to your participation.
If these rules are as bad as people make them out to be when Stewart’s penalty came down, they were that bad the moment so many in the sport championed putting this sport under the yoke of those rules. People can stand back now and either say “I understood what we were getting into” or “I had no idea,” but no one can say they didn’t have the opportunity to know what the rules at issue now were at the time in order to judge their merits. So, it apparently seemed fair before or people were just clueless; not sure what the other options would be, just not caring I guess.
I don’t have a problem with the “throw out the current regimes” position going forward (means of doing that might be a bit tricky…). I’ve pretty much said I don’t think the PED testing system is worth the cost in this sport; and generally I think PED testing is more effective at trapping less culpable people with no intent to cheat than it is to catch intentional cheaters. But how can you change a system without first understanding what it is you are changing, and what consequences will result from the change? That question applies not just now, but back several years ago when PED testing was embraced and some people apparently chose to be asleep at the wheel as far as what would happen when someone got caught, and what independence the sanctioning bodies were surrendering when they agreed to be bound by the doping Code.
Probably worth keeping in mind that once you cross over from nothing to some kind of regulation, there never will be complete agreement on what’s optimal, only a moving consensus as folks try to make things better (however they define better) and continually adjust as events play out. This definitely is one of those situations where what's good for the sport is controversial. Fans definitely have a voice in that, but only as much influence for constructive change as that voice makes sense.
For Stew, I hope they get something worked out that gets him on the track sooner rather than later. It's not a good day for any moto fan when he's denied a place at the gate. Hope everyone learns from it; it's chock filled with lessons for anyone with an ear for them.
The Shop
Luxon 4-Post Bar Mounts
$189.95 - $239.95
DeCal Works Huge Plastic Inventory of UFO and Polisport kits.
Free shipping: VITALMX
we vote in everything else.....but are too dumb to vote in the PED police....are you serious.....
I know ur jokin'...haha...or r u???
I am focusing more on my own little world, making sure me and my cycle are ready for the season.. Even if i all i do is spin laps at the practice track.
I appreciate your comments. They make sense. The primary difficulty I have with this entire process is that most of the time requirements where simply not followed. I find it difficult to conclude that people knew what they were getting into when what they thought they were getting into isn't what happened. Of course it could be that simple voluntary ignorance of the process occurred when the process was adopted. In any event, the resolution of the testing to decision etc. took an absurdly long time, the outcome of the hearing was not timely, and in fact, it seems the decision has never been made available. Your inability to find the appeals filings, etc. also causes concern. From the outside looking in, it seems that many things are being handled in a "make it up as it goes" fashion.
From a "fans" prospective it is difficult to give the process much integrity. From a participants perspective, JS7's team and those associated with it were jerked around by the failure to process events timely. Unfortunately this seems to be a situation common to many quasi-legal administrative processes, where the people governed by the process don't care until it effects them and when it actually does become relevant it is often found that the system is broken.
As for testing, I am personally ambivalent about it. As implemented it doesn't seem designed to address the problem, if one exits. For instance, the odds of a top level rider that reaches the podium regularly being test are dramatically higher than others. I also read in another thread posted by someone in the "know" that SX doesn't test the 250 class. If the object of testing is to insure that the elite members of the 450 class are tested, then, it accomplishes this goal. If the goal is to eliminate use in SX in general, it appears to statistically fall way short of reaching this objective.
However, it looks like testing is here to stay. Given this, a few simple things could be changed to improve the system such as:
1. Shorten the time periods between test date and decision date. (Suggestion of 90 days from the date of test to decision)
2. Make available to the public the decision and relevant hearing dates.
3. Have a viable appeal process that doesn't take for ever. (I'd like to see this done and over with in 60 days)
4. Better defined punishments for the infraction involved to avoid apparent disparate punishment.
5. Finally and of least concern, is there really a need to hearings, etc. in Europe for what is essentially a North America series?
This entire process doesn't really seem to be rocket science. It basically appears to breakdown to (1) did the rider test for a prohibited substance, (2) if so is there a TUE or other exemption, (3) if no exemption, are there factors that mitigate the punishment. Pretty easy questions to answer. Of course I may be over simplifying things.
Anyway just some thoughts.
I'd bet my last dollar that at least a few people on every major team know the technical regs inside and out.
Pit Row
There's been some anecdotal evidence thrown around that James was taking Adderall for several years. Let's assume for the moment that's true and James used it as part of his evidence to justify his therapeutic use. How do you think that looks in the eyes of the panel who are adjudicating the case?
So for two years an athlete takes a banned substance without bothering to submit a TUE. It's either ignorance and/or stupidity that borders on what is believable, or it's intentional use. How do you tell the difference?
If a sport sets up it's own system and does not sign on to the World Doping Code, that organization would have the ability to weight its penalties to the rhythm of its schedule and season, but I'd bet the cost of going alone on that and implementing a meaningful testing program would be orders of magnitude more expensive than buying into the WADA system. I don't think any self contained system the MC world came up with could be effective without being prohibitively expensive.
Post a reply to: JS7 Appeal, FIM Extension