The biggest flaw with Current PED testing is?

Related:
Create New Tag

6/6/2018 8:43 PM

After both listening to media discussion and reading the boards, what is the biggest flaw in the current PED testing?

The biggest flaw in current PED testing is:

View Results

|

I'm goin' off the rails on a crazy train

6/6/2018 9:11 PM

With a tue, you can take legal speed.

|

6/6/2018 9:22 PM
Edited Date/Time: 6/6/2018 9:23 PM

I voted for the fourth option. Realistically how much more would it be for SX/MX to do something like Nascar does as opposed to using WADA/USADA? I feel like it can't be that much more as I would assume WADA is charging a premium for their services, but maybe I'm wrong and that's why they went the WADA route?

|

6/6/2018 9:28 PM

The biggest flaw is catching riders people like.Nobody cares about the unknown or mid packer, but a factory star, whoa testing sucks.

|

6/6/2018 10:08 PM

Bermworm wrote:

The biggest flaw is catching riders people like.Nobody cares about the unknown or mid packer, but a factory star, whoa testing sucks.

Funny how that works. wink

|

Ed Johnson

6/6/2018 10:14 PM

It sucks you can't wake up, drink a cup of PEDs then hit the track like some top guys did for years.

|

6/6/2018 10:15 PM

jorgechavez wrote:

I voted for the fourth option. Realistically how much more would it be for SX/MX to do something like Nascar does as opposed to using WADA/USADA? I feel like it can't be that much more as I would assume WADA is charging a premium for their services, but maybe I'm wrong and that's why they went the WADA route?

Agreed, I’d like to see something similar to NASCAR. I believe where the problem originates is that FIM became a signatory to WADA, an admittedly Olympic oriented testing system. As such any FIM sanctioned event is under the WADA code as imposed by FIM becoming a signatory. USADA as used for MX seems to be a much more athlete friendly process. Long and short of all this seems to be either convincing FIM to dump WADA or for SX to dump FIM sanctioning. Even with the draconian WADA code, in many ways it seems that FIM’s lack of responsiveness to the riders is making the process needlessly punitive to the athletes.

|

I'm goin' off the rails on a crazy train

6/6/2018 11:35 PM

If they could just test riders near the back of the pack we would only lose riders people aren’t to bothered about, AND lie to ourselves the sport is clean because it’s tested, win win

|

6/6/2018 11:38 PM

jorgechavez wrote:

I voted for the fourth option. Realistically how much more would it be for SX/MX to do something like Nascar does as opposed to using WADA/USADA? I feel like it can't be that much more as I would assume WADA is charging a premium for their services, but maybe I'm wrong and that's why they went the WADA route?

100% agree

|

Current rides: 2020 CRF450RWE and 2019 TC300
Occasional ride for VMX: 1985 CR500RF
Adventure/Road bike: CRF1000L

6/7/2018 12:32 AM

Biggest flaw are riders using PEDs. Dont use, no problems.

|

6/7/2018 3:44 AM

jorgechavez wrote:

I voted for the fourth option. Realistically how much more would it be for SX/MX to do something like Nascar does as opposed to using WADA/USADA? I feel like it can't be that much more as I would assume WADA is charging a premium for their services, but maybe I'm wrong and that's why they went the WADA route?

spot on

|

6/7/2018 7:16 AM

You left out...

(7) Testing is not as frequent and widespread as it should be.

|

6/7/2018 8:34 AM

ando wrote:

You left out...

(7) Testing is not as frequent and widespread as it should be.

This is my vote as well.

|

6/7/2018 10:38 AM

dkg wrote:

Agreed, I’d like to see something similar to NASCAR. I believe where the problem originates is that FIM became a signatory to WADA, an admittedly Olympic oriented testing system. As such any FIM sanctioned event is under the WADA code as imposed by FIM becoming a signatory. USADA as used for MX seems to be a much more athlete friendly process. Long and short of all this seems to be either convincing FIM to dump WADA or for SX to dump FIM sanctioning. Even with the draconian WADA code, in many ways it seems that FIM’s lack of responsiveness to the riders is making the process needlessly punitive to the athletes.

USADA follows WADA rules as well. It appears to simply operate in a more athlete friendly manner, which is nice, but doesn't address penalties that are completely out of line for this sport.

|

6/7/2018 10:52 AM

imoto34 wrote:

With a tue, you can take legal speed.

This is definitely one of my favorites!

|

6/7/2018 11:09 AM

ACBraap wrote:

USADA follows WADA rules as well. It appears to simply operate in a more athlete friendly manner, which is nice, but doesn't address penalties that are completely out of line for this sport.

I'm not on board with the penalties being so out of line. For example, if a rider were stupid enough to manipulate his blood with EPO or transfusions, I think he should get the same penalty as a cyclist or XC skier doing the same thing. The biggest problems lie in the speed with which these things are handled. Tickle for example, could end up getting only a 6 month suspension for his infraction, but the FIM might drag things along so slowly that he won't find out it's only 6 months until pretty much 6 months. And that means he's had no ability to try to sort out his contract and future, with the knowledge that he could return at a certain time.

And this is all on the FIM. They have to be the ones who ultimately hand over the suspension in this case. I'd be interested to know if someone like Herlings or Cairoli tested positive for the same substance as Broc, what would the difference be in the speed of getting things sorted out?

|

Old MXer turned Superfan.

6/7/2018 11:22 AM

When I was a kid, between avoiding the dinosaurs, there were things called pinball machines.
The machine had a tilt sensor. You just knew if you shook the machine too much you lost your
quarter. You didn't get to argue whether it was justified, you just lost your quarter.
If you are in the top tier of the sport, you need to know what's going to get you kicked out.
Maybe WADA should have some facilities that you can send product in for testing or
at a minimum, an advisory system to clarify compliance, what is and isn't going to get you
kicked out. Maybe you could send in your own blood for testing to see if what you're doing
is producing a result that will get you kicked out (without penalty)?
As long as people get away with PEDs, the new up and comers will look to them to compete.
It has to be strict enough that if you don't cheat you're not at a disadvantage. Meaning do more
to catch the cheaters.

|

www.alljackedupinc.com home of the Switch Hauler, the only modular hauling system www.sprocketstuff.com home of the Counter Sprocket Tool

6/7/2018 11:23 AM

hamncheeze wrote:

I'm not on board with the penalties being so out of line. For example, if a rider were stupid enough to manipulate his blood with EPO or transfusions, I think he should get the same penalty as a cyclist or XC skier doing the same thing. The biggest problems lie in the speed with which these things are handled. Tickle for example, could end up getting only a 6 month suspension for his infraction, but the FIM might drag things along so slowly that he won't find out it's only 6 months until pretty much 6 months. And that means he's had no ability to try to sort out his contract and future, with the knowledge that he could return at a certain time.

And this is all on the FIM. They have to be the ones who ultimately hand over the suspension in this case. I'd be interested to know if someone like Herlings or Cairoli tested positive for the same substance as Broc, what would the difference be in the speed of getting things sorted out?

I disagree that penalties should be the same for mx vs cycling. It's about benefit gained, and I don't think any PED in mx will produce the level of relative benefit that it does for cycling or nordic skiing. Not to mention, those are olympic sports with a penalty scheme designed to keep an athlete out of one olympic cycle AND they are sports where careers are much, much longer. If the SX series is the biggest thing in our sport, thus our 'Olympics', then a one season ban should be sufficient. I am at least as bothered by the fact that PED penalties are so out of line with mechanical penalties or on track conduct penalties. One could run a big bore or illegal fuel, aka EPO for the bike, and lose only event points if caught, while very possibly having more benefit gained than any PED would provide.

I agree re the FIM. Big orgs protect their own, like the UCI and the Armstrong era.

|

6/7/2018 12:48 PM

Bermworm wrote:

The biggest flaw is catching riders people like.Nobody cares about the unknown or mid packer, but a factory star, whoa testing sucks.

lostboy819 wrote:

Funny how that works. wink

I guess you’re both forgetting how well it was received when Cade Clason (I think that’s the privateer it was, if not someone please correct me so I don’t drag an innocent name through the mud) got caught for Adderall and explained how big of a mess the TUE process was. I remember some pretty big backlash from that and he’s no factory guy or household name. Doesn’t matter who it is to me, the system just plain sucks and there’s no reasonable way to deny that.

|

Make Hillclimb Great Again

Ratbeach Racing

Instagram / YouTube: @485Josh

3dpmoto.com



6/7/2018 1:51 PM

ACBraap wrote:

I disagree that penalties should be the same for mx vs cycling. It's about benefit gained, and I don't think any PED in mx will produce the level of relative benefit that it does for cycling or nordic skiing. Not to mention, those are olympic sports with a penalty scheme designed to keep an athlete out of one olympic cycle AND they are sports where careers are much, much longer. If the SX series is the biggest thing in our sport, thus our 'Olympics', then a one season ban should be sufficient. I am at least as bothered by the fact that PED penalties are so out of line with mechanical penalties or on track conduct penalties. One could run a big bore or illegal fuel, aka EPO for the bike, and lose only event points if caught, while very possibly having more benefit gained than any PED would provide.

I agree re the FIM. Big orgs protect their own, like the UCI and the Armstrong era.

I do believe blood manipulation for outdoor MX would be quite an advantage. The ability to carry more oxygen to working muscles over a longer duration....just what makes MX so much more demanding than SX. And when we talk about the penalty lengths, 4 years is not always the penalty even for blood manipulations. Cycling and XC skiing had to go through 20 years of scandals to get where they are....and even then they remain in scandal. If motocross keeps stiff penalties for blood manipulation then maybe it never has to be dragged through the mud to get to the endpoint. The bigger problem is how to handle the "lesser" infractions like a stimulant in a timely manner so that the athlete is not held hostage by the sanctioning body.

I do agree, there is probably a significant parallel between the FIM and the UCI in terms of corruption. I just find it hard to believe that the FIM would treat Herlings the same way they've treated Tickle or JS7 when it comes to communication and expedient decision making.

|

Old MXer turned Superfan.

6/7/2018 2:58 PM

No oversight on WADA is the biggest problem. Who validates their findings and who holds them accountable?

Without some kind of oversight, Wada is free to ruin careers with no more than their own say-so. Bogus.

|

Braaapin' aint easy.

6/7/2018 3:48 PM

Falcon wrote:

No oversight on WADA is the biggest problem. Who validates their findings and who holds them accountable?

Without some kind of oversight, Wada is free to ruin careers with no more than their own say-so. Bogus.

CAS

|

Twitter: @ftemoto
Instagram: @mstusiak

6/7/2018 3:58 PM

Ignorance and amateurism of athletes regarding their responsibilities and what sorts of records and samples they should maintain in order to meet the standards for defending oneself in the event of a positive result.

The lack of fixed procedures to expeditiously resolve appeals while a provisional suspension is in effect.

The lack of a responsive single point of contact at the regulating body with whom an athlete can communicate about a pending matter.

Frankly, the cost relative to our sport. If you test once a year, then essentially you're relying on a "you might get caught" theory of deterrence (hence the big penalties) rather that testing frequently enough to be effective at creating the mindset that "you will get caught." But that level of testing would be cost prohibitive.

|

Twitter: @ftemoto
Instagram: @mstusiak

6/7/2018 5:42 PM

FreshTopEnd wrote:

Ignorance and amateurism of athletes regarding their responsibilities and what sorts of records and samples they should maintain in order to meet the standards for defending oneself in the event of a positive result.

The lack of fixed procedures to expeditiously resolve appeals while a provisional suspension is in effect.

The lack of a responsive single point of contact at the regulating body with whom an athlete can communicate about a pending matter.

Frankly, the cost relative to our sport. If you test once a year, then essentially you're relying on a "you might get caught" theory of deterrence (hence the big penalties) rather that testing frequently enough to be effective at creating the mindset that "you will get caught." But that level of testing would be cost prohibitive.

Agreed. To me the procedural aspects are so flawed that it is almost laughable. Sadly, we are dealing with a Rider's livelihood, so it isn't a laughing matter. While I think the penalty provisions are way too excessive particularly for the substances that have been involved in our sport, the lack of timely handling and responsiveness by the FIM during the provisional suspension period is inexcusable. I appreciate the comments of some to the effect that it is the Rider's responsibility to not get in the mess, however, violations have and do occur through no fault of the athlete and to not have a procedure in place that expeditiously affords the athlete a right to a fair hearing and fair/open communication violates basic fundamental fairness.



|

I'm goin' off the rails on a crazy train

6/7/2018 6:25 PM

ando wrote:

You left out...

(7) Testing is not as frequent and widespread as it should be.

No kidding. They are not testing properly. It would be incredibly easy to test clean given the lack of actual testing that is taking place. They test like crazy in cycling and they still aren't catching people, how do you think it's going to work out if they only tested once last year the top 6 or so riders.

|

6/7/2018 8:37 PM
Edited Date/Time: 6/7/2018 8:39 PM

dkg wrote:

Agreed. To me the procedural aspects are so flawed that it is almost laughable. Sadly, we are dealing with a Rider's livelihood, so it isn't a laughing matter. While I think the penalty provisions are way too excessive particularly for the substances that have been involved in our sport, the lack of timely handling and responsiveness by the FIM during the provisional suspension period is inexcusable. I appreciate the comments of some to the effect that it is the Rider's responsibility to not get in the mess, however, violations have and do occur through no fault of the athlete and to not have a procedure in place that expeditiously affords the athlete a right to a fair hearing and fair/open communication violates basic fundamental fairness.



People make mistakes, which is why you plan for them. The examples we've seen in our sport make it seem like people have an, ummm, inadequate grasp of how to preplan for things going wrong.

That would include knowing what the defenses are in the event of a mistake and assuring yourself that you have a system that will provide the exonerating evidence one may need down the road when results come down, some system of records and maintaining residual productin its original container, date marked, and likely sealed in some way to guard against an inference that it was concocted after the fact. Basic chain of custody best practices.

Knowing the rules well would inform that a rider who claims inadvertent exposure has to prove his defenses: the way it was consumed and identity of the product that originated the positive hit. Because all ~ innocents, knuckleheads, and cheats ~ can say "I have no idea how why what," but it is up to the innocent and the knucklehead to prove he's not a cheat under the Code. That takes being able to identify what exactly one took that originated the hit, and then establishing that based on labeling and available information the athlete could not have known she or he would have been exposed. That's a high bar, one CAS has ruled is almost impossible to overcome without being able to trace it back and credibly make the case.

But maybe that conscientious record keeping is the prevailing practice in the sport, like the rigor of logging part lifecycle, suspension settings in testing, or jetting/mapping. But man the axe swings hard if you haven't planned for that in advance. No one lost four years of his career because his bike blew up.

|

Twitter: @ftemoto
Instagram: @mstusiak

6/8/2018 1:35 PM

FTE:

Yep, you are spot on with those comments. Tracking intake if it isn't done by all athletes is something that should be done. Even with all of that, the athlete can find him/herself in the unenviable position of proving a negative. I liked Roczen's explanation of just not taking anything that isn't natural.

I really can't figure out why things can't be handled during the provisional suspension period so that a hearing and decision is reached within say 45-60 days of testing of the B sample. We aren't litigating the AT&T anti-trust case. Seems kind of simple, FIM comes in and says, here are the test results, it then shifts to the Athlete to explain it ( i.e. TUE, innocent ingestion, etc) so that the appropriate penalty can be determined. It's just the idea of issuing a provisional suspension and then having the problem disappear into a black hole to resurface at some later "reasonable" time that disturbs me.

|

I'm goin' off the rails on a crazy train

6/8/2018 2:34 PM

The world is apathetic to PED use after it became obvious in every sport, and you can buy it at the corner drug store.

|

2015 Beta 500 RS, history: 99 KTM 300, 87 CR250, 84 KLR 600, 82 GPZ 550, 81 KX 250, 80 KX 250, 79 Montesa 414 VE, 78 250 VB, 77 360 VB, 76 360 VA, 75 YZ 125, 74 TM 125, 72 TS 125, 60's West Bend Go Boy Kart

6/8/2018 4:15 PM

Johnny Depp wrote:

The world is apathetic to PED use after it became obvious in every sport, and you can buy it at the corner drug store.

If by “the world” you mean a handful of people on Vital, then yes.

If you mean the actual world, then the reactions of teams, sponsors and the general public to high profile athletes testing positive says otherwise.

|

6/8/2018 5:11 PM

The poll options are the worst. Did you pull them out of your ass?

|