U.S. Anti-Doping Agency is OK

While the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency isn't immune from constructive criticism, they've been doing things right (Big & Small) for the athletes whose commitment to clean sport they're charged with verifying.

The redesign of the Athlete Express website has made it fantastically easy and convenient to update Whereabouts now from multiple platforms. My last plan change took about 17sec to complete. This is pretty Big, since inclusion in an out-of-competition testing pool means accepting unpredictable intrusions into what "normal" people might consider to be pretty sacred private space. So being able to efficiently manage your role in the process makes it easier and less dramatic for all involved.

And apart from the actual monitoring & testing regimes...just last week I got an out-of-the-blue call from a USADA investigator - not looking for intel or assistance, but just to say hi and ask how I was. And then Chester (Bob) found this gem in the post today. It's a nice reminder that USADA is staffed by actual human beings like Athlete Services Coordinator Kirk W., who'll take the time to send you a hand-signed birthday greeting. Little things like these encourage one to see the relationship as collaborative, and not adversarial or unpleasant.

I know this isn't every athlete's experience with their NADO, but it's been consistently mine and I appreciate it enough to want to let you know.

To Mr. Tomaso Zirbel

Tomaso, I believe you know more or less how I've come to feel about your case, but, after reading your recent commentary, one thing I want to emphasize for our readers - who might not have as sophisticated an understanding as you do of the two cases you cite - it's really CONI that appears to be capable of dubious action (in the case of Di Luca) whereas USADA continues to toe a consistently-hard line (and it sounds like Merritt won't be able to defend his Olympic titles - though I don't agree that the IOC holds any "moral high ground" - they're as corrupt as they come). And I doubt that USADA, had it been party to Di Luca's case, would ever have consented to such a radical reduction in his suspension - when the rider himself goes to great lengths to point out that his cooperation was completely devoid of any significant assistance in identifying other riders using doping products to unfairly earn hundreds of thousands of euros per year.

“I gave no names,” said Di Luca. “I did it for (the good of) cycling, not to point the finger at any cyclists."

No doubt that your cycling career was destroyed at its zenith by a case of inadvertent ingestion of DHEA, and you are paying the price in the form of a full two year ban (how many tens of thousands of dollars would it have cost you to post-up the experts and legal guidance necessary to prove your innocence and obtain a reduction in your ban? $150,000? A quarter of a million dollars? That works out to more per month in legal and scientific expert fees than most guys earn in two years in the US domestic peloton).

But I don't think that USADA is the villain here - they seem to be reasonably consistent in applying what seems more and more to be unfair penalties against those who've accidentally ingested "banned" products like DHEA. (It also bears mentioning that DHEA doesn't work, as you well know, and there IS a radical difference b/w what one can infer about an athlete's motivation when he's been "caught" w/ DHEA vs. EPO - apples and oranges...)

It seems to be the Italian anti-doping system that which is, at least on the surface, unreasonably lenient in allowing an admitted doper like Di Luca to escape the full sanction despite not providing truly significant assistance in the form of fingering his colleagues in the peloton (spitting in the proverbial soup, he'd call it).

Were he holder of a US license, I suspect Di Luca would be sitting out more than two years, whereas if you were Italian, perhaps a case would never have been brought against Tomaso Zirbel.

No one is perfect, and certainly no agency is above reproach in the fight against doping in sport. But for the most part, USADA seems to me to try to apply consistent sanctions to ensure that there is some measure of fairness - even if that fairness takes the form of still-significant sanctions for all athletes (or most athletes) convicted of inadvertent doping violations...

Keep your chin up and keep trying to stay productive during your sanction, invest that $$$ that you saved by declining to arbitrate your case and come back for a few more years once you're cleared. There's no reason to think you'll have lost the class that took you almost as far as a medal in the elite World ITT. I know it en vogue to be jaded and cynical once you've been banned, but it's crazy to think that even two years away from the sport will succeed in erasing a love of cycling from your DNA.

Good luck!

No Such Thing as a Sweetheart Deal from USADA

According to the AP, "Lance Armstrong's attorneys say the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency is offering cyclists a ''sweetheart deal'' if they testify or provide evidence that the seven-time Tour de France winner cheated by doping.

If those riders have been caught doping, the deal from USADA could result in a reduced ban from competition and other incentives, attorney Tim Herman told The Associated Press on Monday."

What Herman is desperately attempting to characterize as something inappropriate, is actually a very forward-thinking, progressive provision in the WADA code.

There's nothing that prevents USADA from inviting athletes suspected of doping to reveal not just their own story, but the details of others' doping that they observed or were aware of, in hopes of earning a reduction of their (possible) sanction.

Just as Dan Staite was apparently targeted for testing by UKAD as a result of 3rd party information, former teammates of Lance Armstrong might choose to provide evidence against him to USADA, or to a government agency - in this case with the hope of seeing their own potential liability reduced.

The WADA Code provides:

10.5.3 Substantial Assistance in Discovering or Establishing Anti-Doping Rule Violations

An Anti-Doping Organization with results management responsibility for an anti-doping rule violation may, prior to a final appellate decision under Article 13 or the expiration of the time to appeal, suspend a part of the period of Ineligibility imposed in an individual case where the Athlete or other Person has provided Substantial Assistance to an Anti-Doping Organization, criminal authority or professional disciplinary body which results in the Anti-Doping Organization discovering or establishing an anti-doping rule violation by another Person or which results in a criminal or disciplinary body discovering or establishing a criminal offense or the breach of professional rules by another Person.

After a final appellate decision under Article 13 or the expiration of time to appeal, an Anti-Doping Organization may only suspend a part of the otherwise applicable period of Ineligibility with the approval of WADA and the applicable International Federation. The extent to which the otherwise applicable period of Ineligibility may be suspended shall be based on the seriousness of the anti-doping rule violation committed by the Athlete or other Person and the significance of the Substantial Assistance provided by the Athlete or other Person to the effort to eliminate doping in sport. No more than three-quarters of the otherwise applicable period of Ineligibility may be suspended. If the otherwise applicable period of Ineligibility is a lifetime, the non-suspended period under this section must be no less than eight (8) years.

If the Anti-Doping Organization suspends any part of the otherwise applicable period of Ineligibility under this Article, the Anti-Doping Organization shall promptly provide a written justification for its decision to each Anti-Doping Organization having a right to appeal the decision. If the Anti-Doping Organization subsequently reinstates any part of Article 2.8 is involved and whether the violation involved a substance or method which is not readily detectible [sic] in Testing. The maximum suspension of the Ineligibility period shall only be applied in very exceptional cases.

An additional factor to be considered in connection with the seriousness of the anti-doping rule violation is any performance-enhancing benefit which the Person providing Substantial Assistance may be likely to still enjoy. As a general matter, the earlier in the results management process the Substantial Assistance is provided, the greater the percentage of the otherwise applicable period of Ineligibility may be suspended. If the Athlete or other Person who is asserted to have committed an anti-doping rule violation claims the suspended period of Ineligibility because the Athlete or other Person has failed to provide the Substantial Assistance which was anticipated, the Athlete or other Person may appeal the reinstatement pursuant to Article 13.2.

USADA bans track coach Stewart for life

When an anti-doing agency talks about "aggravating circumstances," think of the following case...

 USADA bans track coach Stewart for life

(AFP) COLORADO SPRINGS, Colorado — Raymond Stewart, who coached disgraced US sprinter Jerome Young, has been slapped with a lifetime ban, the US Anti-Doping Agency announced on Monday.

Stewart was kicked out of the sport for life by USADA for obtaining performance-enhancing drugs for his athletes. It was determined by an arbitration panel that he purchased drugs from Angel Memo Heredia who has been named in similar drugs probes of coach Trevor Graham and American sprinter Crystal Cox. Like Graham, Stewart was born in Jamaica.

"Violating the sacred responsibility and standards of a coach by aiding athletes with doping is truly reprehensible," USADA chief executive Travis Tygart said.

Steward competed in four Olympics for Jamaica, specializing in the 100 metres. He won a silver medal in the 400-metre relay at the 1984 Games. He was the first athlete to reach three straight Olympic 100 metre finals.

He joins Graham and Remi Korchemny as the third coach to be banned for life for assisting athletes in getting and injesting drugs.

Young was on the USA's 1,600-metre, gold-medal relay team at the 2000 Olympics but has since been banned for life for doping.

Others Stewart coached, include JJ Johnson, a member of the U.S. 2003 world champion 400-metre relay team; Kenny Brokenburr, a member of America's gold-medal, 400-metre team from the 2000 Games; and three-time Olympic medalist Jamaican Beverly McDonald. Stewart and McDonald eventually got married.

At the 2009 Penn Relays in New York, Stewart was honoured by Team Jamaica Bickle for his contribution to athletics.

And for a more nuanced view of "Aggravating Circumstances," (which should soon become a hot topic for British Cycling), see this legal opinion from WADA:

10.6 Aggravating Circumstances Which May Increase the Period of Ineligibility

If the Anti-Doping Organization establishes in an individual case involving an anti-doping rule violation other than violations under Article 2.7 (Trafficking) and 2.8 (Administration) that aggravating circumstances are present which justify the imposition of a period of Ineligibility greater than the standard sanction, then the period of Ineligibility otherwise applicable shall be increased up to a maximum of four years unless the Athlete or other Person can prove to the comfortable satisfaction of the hearing panel that he did not knowingly violate the anti-doping rule.

An Athlete or other Person can avoid the application of this Article by admitting the anti-doping rule violation as asserted promptly after being confronted with the anti-doping rule violation by an Anti-Doping Organization.

Comment to Article 10.6: Examples of aggravating circumstances which may justify the imposition of a period of Ineligibility greater than the standard sanction are: the Athlete or other Person committed the anti-doping rule violation as part of a doping plan or scheme, either individually or involving a conspiracy or common enterprise to commit anti-doping rule violations; the Athlete or other Person used or possessed multiple Prohibited Substances or Prohibited Methods or used or possessed a Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method on multiple occasions; a normal individual would be likely to enjoy the performance enhancing effects of the anti-doping rule violation(s) beyond the otherwise applicable period of Ineligibility; the Athlete or Person engaged in deceptive or obstructing conduct to avoid the detection or adjudication of an anti-doping rule violation.

For the avoidance of doubt, the examples of aggravating circumstances described in this Comment to Article 10.6 are not exclusive and other aggravating factors may also justify the imposition of a longer period of Ineligibility. Violations under Article 2.7 (Trafficking) and 2.8 (Administration) are not included in the application of Article 10.6 because the sanctions for these violations (from four years to lifetime Ineligibility) already build in sufficient discretion to allow consideration of any aggravating circumstance.

Chatting with USADA

USADA to ME:

"The deadline for your Q3 2010 Whereabouts Filing is tomorrow June 30, 2010.

USADA’s office hours are from 8 a.m. - 5:00 p.m. (MST). USADA will not be available to assist athletes with their username or password information after business hours. To ensure your success in completing your Q3 2010 Whereabouts Filing prior to the June 30th deadline, we encourage you to log on immediately to complete your USADA pool requirements in advance of the June 30th deadline.

To submit your Q3 2010 Whereabouts Filing, you will need to log into your USADA Online Account at https://www.usantidoping.org/athletes/login.aspx. If you have lost or forgotten your log-in information, please do not hesitate to contact USADA."

ME to USADA:

"..Athlete's residence is a single-family multi-story home with primary point of entry at front (NORTH) of house on first floor. However, there is NO functional doorbell or other notification system anywhere at the residence. Therefore, it is crucial that the DCO knock FORCEFULLY and REPEATEDLY on the front door in order to attract the attention of a resident. If unsuccessful, DCO should attempt to raise the athlete by phone (xxx) xxx-xxxx in case he is far from the front door and does not hear the knocking. Alternatively, DCO can circle to the rear (SOUTH) of the house, and identifying the second-floor bedroom window on the RIGHT (EAST) side of the home, should begin throwing pennies or other coins at the window in an attempt to roust the athlete, or otherwise attract his attention."

Summer 2009 edition of USADA's Spirit of Sport

The Summer 2009 edition of the Spirit of Sport is now available. This issue of the Spirit of Sport features:

• Doping in Sports by USADA CEO Travis Tygart;
• Cycling: A Team Sport;
• and Destination Vancouver.

Click this link to access the newsletter.

USADA has broadened its Blood Collection Program

Recently received this email from USADA:

"September 3, 2009 - You may have already received educational information from USADA or your NGB, or even experienced first-hand, the blood collection process…here’s the scoop in case you have any additional questions.

USADA has broadened its Blood Collection Program, to ensure the most effective Testing Program for athletes in the Registered Testing Pool. All athletes in the USADA Registered Testing Pool, as well as others who may be selected for testing by USADA, are subject to blood testing as part of USADA’s Out-of-Competition Anti-Doping Program. In addition, any athlete competing at an event where Doping Control occurs is subject to blood testing if selected.

Blood collection can occur in both In-and Out-of-Competition settings. In both of these settings, the DCO will manage the Blood Collection Session and will work in conjunction with a qualified phlebotomist (also referred to as a Blood Collection Officer or “BCO”), who will perform the actual collection of the blood sample.

At the start of the testing session, a DCO or representative of USADA will notify you that you have been selected for testing and that a blood Sample is required. You may also be required to provide a urine Sample.

The DCO will ensure that the Doping Control Station is suitable for blood collections, which includes maintaining the privacy of the athlete and ensuring that the Station is clean.

You will be asked to be seated for a period of time prior to providing a blood Sample. You will need to remain in a seated position, uninterrupted, prior to the blood collection.

In most cases the amount of blood that will be drawn for Doping Control will be less than a tablespoon. As the human body has approximately 6 liters, or 379 tablespoons of blood, the amount of blood collected for Doping Control is minimal, and your performance should not be affected.

You will be asked a series of questions related to your recent training and the altitude of these locations. These questions are necessary in order to have the full background information needed to evaluate your blood test results.

The DCO or BCO will provide instruction and if you have any questions regarding the process, please ask the DCO or BCO..."

If You're in the OOC Testing Pool and USADA Asks You to Update Them on Your Whereabouts...

So, first arrives via email a gentle reminder that the deadline to submit whereabouts info is approaching, and I've yet to submit mine... Despite Todd Wells's complaining to the contrary (he gets paid enough that he should be able to handle this not-so-herculean task), at least in the USA it's all pretty easy, friendly and professional; after awhile I'd even become Facebook friends with the Doping Control Officer (DCO) who collected my samples, so often did we interact professionally. Of course, it's possible that if the DCO is jerk, the sample collection process could be tense and unpleasant (just as it would be if the athlete was a scheissekopf). But if you have a DCO who is "cool" at best, or professional at worst, and you're not a stronzo, it actually is about as pleasant an exchange as could be expected. I remember one time while trying to hydrate enough to pee (using BEER of course, which the DCO refused when I politely offered him a bottle - I think it was a Chimay or some other Belgian trappist), we were listening to new music on Itunes and he was giving me music suggestions while my kidneys and bladder did their stuff.

[Note to USADA: DCO's like the guy you send to collect my samples are the kind of people to continue to employ! Not, by comparison, someone like the Euro-tester who broke Kevin van Impe's balls. The Quick Step rider was at a crematorium in Lochristi, Belgium when a drug tester showed up demanding the rider provide a sample, and warned that he would face a two-year suspension if he refused...] So then you gotta hustle over to the USADA website and log-in.

Lots of good, supplemental info. I'll give USADA credit...they certainly play fair with athletes if there is no violation to adjudicate! No complaints about the website and the material available therein.

Then you're into the inner sanctum. At least they tell you what you need to know in order to make the process go smoothly. SWEET! The system will pre-populate for me!

Now there is still a lot left to do, but I'm tired. But I'm trying to show all the fans out there that I personally am playing fair (even though I'm just training right now with no competitions scheduled), I'm not an hijo de puta, I'm trying to walk the straight and narrow, USADA is not the nefarious organization that Floyd Landis and co. have made it out to be, etc. I really wanna go to bed so I'm going to hold off on filing my Q3 info until later. If you want to see more of that process, let me know...I'm happy to share. The only hard part for me is remembering to update my whereabouts when my schedule changes...

I envision being out one night in say, Miami, and connecting with some beautiful Latina named Sandra and going back to her place, only to realize at some point later during the night, "Hijo de puta! I have to update my USADA whereabouts because if I don't it's guaranteed that tomorrow will be the day they show up at my house at 6AM to control me and I'll be curled up in a bed here and not at the address that is listed on my form! Now how the frakk do I use the SMS-feature to update USADA? [The 'mood' is killed and several minutes pass as I plod through my BlackBerry trying to find the note I took for myself on the topic of remote updates via text, for just this occasion.] Finally, I figure it out, and then ask, in a manner that will always be awkward no matter when or how it is phrased, "Oye, mi amor, que es tu dirección? Necesito avisar a mis reguladores en USADA que si mañana vengan a las 6 de la mañana para pedir que hago peepee, ellos deben pasar por aca en vez de mi casa. No te preocupes! Soy ex-deportista infame y la gente tiene ganas de saber con quién ando! Ellos son como mi propia Papparazzi!"

Thanks for reading, folks. But before I go, please let me give a tip of the hat to Tanya L. for her love of Chimay, my cousin Robert for manning-up, defending his PD's honor and finally trying a Chimay, D.S., for significant consulting services rendered on an upcoming cycling-related project, and Phil I., for keeping me entertained with stories from OZ.

But alas, before I go, there is a wag of the finger to a certain Charlie...it is easy to speak ill of someone when they are not present, but to do so repeatedly, in the presence of friends and acquaintances of he who you seek to malign, is disappointing and embarrassing - for you. Even the walls have ears (and sometimes , like Davide Rebellin learned much to his horror in 2001.). What do you get out of incessantly bad mouthing someone? I knew a guy who once was so desperate to win a race in Gotham that he offered this other guy a lot of money to sell him the win. The other guy, who had already been corrupted by the sport to some degree, incongruously still thought it unethical to buy and sell races, so he politely declined, yet never mocked the rider who ultimately finished a dejected third in front of his big money sponsor. And he certainly didn't expose him publicly for being a fraud who would criminally seek to cause a race to finish in a way other than on its merits. While the guy who won was no saint, neither was the guy in third, and what was worse was that he didn't seem to realize that he stood only to ruin his reputation for having violated this rule:

"1Q2.General Misconduct. The following offenses may be punished by suspension or lesser penalties: (a) Acts of theft, fraud or grossly unsportsmanlike conduct in conjunction with a sporting event; (b) Entering competition under an assumed name; (c) Offering, conspiring, or attempting to cause any race to result otherwise than on its merits."

I am required by USADA to submit the information discussed in the pages above because I violated significant rules, codes of ethics, tenets of socially accepted behavior and the codes of honor and morality under which I was raised and educated. I pay the price for my serious errors in judgment every day, but I do my best to hang-on and fight towards arriving at a time and a place in the future where the events of 2006-2007 will no longer exert such a negative influence on my waking hours. I saw a lot of stuff on the bike - not the kind of horror experienced by soldiers on the battlefield - but cycling's own unique forms of corruption and destruction and betrayal and hate and violence and criminality and duplicity and pettiness and scorn. And yet it took place across the backdrop of some of the most beautiful places in the world, through fields of flowers in " Pescia, Italy (click through on that link if you can), along the Caribbean, through the Alps, across the pampas of Argentina, here in Pittsburgh, apparently in New York City and even in Wyoming of all places. And I still love to ride my bike.

I'm sorry to those who I disappointed, I lament that I deprived your of diaries that some of you found to be entertaining for what I conveyed outside of the race; I'm sorry to those clean riders - wherever you were - who didn't finish in the money...I'm contrite. I'm paying my dues more than you know. I'm happy to fill out USADA's forms and share with them what I knew about former teammates and squads and riders from Chile to Cesenatico to China. I can't control what people say behind my back, and I have little time these days to waste swatting away the juvenile insults that seem so popular with the the bike groupies.

Shannon Rowbury sounds off on doping

The title of this article should be "Shannon Rowbury Whines About USADA's Not Giving Her a Free Pass to Use Supplements Containing Banned Substances." Sheesh.

Rowbury whines:

"Rather than making a blanket statement that essentially leaves us (the athletes) to try to makes sense of the hundreds of products out there on our own or spend thousands to test our vitamins independently, why doesn’t USADA instead use it’s resources to find 1 or 2 safe companies for the athletes to use? All I ask is that USADA help me in my quest for clean records and a clean sport."

But she seems to understand that USADA doesn't certify nutritional products because of liability concerns and the fact that there are simply too many products on the market. She writes:

"USADA admits that it is hard to be sure about the quality, even of a multi-vitamin: Supplements do not appear in DRO™ because USADA is not able to provide a definitive answer as to the status of each product. This is due to a variety of reasons, but primarily to limitations in the regulation and ongoing quality control over dietary supplement labeling, purity and many of their ingredients..."

The reality is that it's unfortunately "Buyer Beware" for those of us athletes who are in the OOC testing pool (I don't even train full-time anymore but I still have to submit my whereabouts in the form of a guaranteed 1-hour availability for testing time window, just like Rowbury). USADA isn't going to pick two out of 200 supplement manufacturers and certify them, because neither Travis Tygart nor his board are going to risk the legal liability or claims of commercial favoritism that would accompany such an action. As long as the government says that we can get the RDA of vitamins and minerals from eating food (regardless of whether or not people do), USADA won't get into the business of certifying non-essential nutritional supplements that themselves aren't regulated by the FDA.

But if Rowbury feels this strongly about the issue, perhaps she can develop the framework for a program whereby the supplement industry itself can fund the analysis of its products. Oh wait - what industry is going to intentionally invite increased government oversight just to satisfy a few whiny elite athletes who typically don't even have enough money to pay retail price for their nutritional products?

On the Road, and USADA

On the road to Ohio as previously discussed. Forgot that I had to update my OOC-testing whereabouts for USADA in case I'm in-line to be tested this quarter. Was able to send a simple text with the specifics of my "change of plan," for which USADA was even kind enough to send me a receipt:

Your information was received on 3/11/2009 and will be added to your file.

Your tracking number is: ME-090311-xxxxxx

Nick Price S*ck My Balls!

USADA 60 MInute Window

One of the new USADA Whereabouts Filing requirements for athletes (like me) who are members of the out of competition testing pool is the "60-minute time slot". Athletes in the Registered Testing Pool must submit a 60-minute time slot for each day in the quarter between the times of 6 am-11pm. Yes, for every day for next quarter I've had to specify a 60-minute period during which USADA can always find me. I'd rather have an RFT or microchip implanted under the skin at the back of my neck than have to keep this 60min slot current.

Also of interest is the fact that, when locating an athlete for testing, the Doping Control Officer (DCO) will make a reasonable attempt based on the information given for each day. As of January 2009, DCOs will NOT make phone calls, in accordance with the International Standards of Testing.

USADA sends their regards...

"...Your role in the worldwide elite athlete network helps ensure global harmonization of anti-doping regulations, and protects clean sport for all athletes. Due to the IST changes, this new process will be for your benefit and will help ensure your compliance.

Thank you,

USADA"

Latest USADA OOC Test Result