USADA letting dopers ride

[houtdffan]

US anti-doping agency who brought justice upon Lance Armstrong admits to use of doping rule violators as undercover agents

The global and U.S. anti-doping agencies are at odds

cyclinguptodate.com

Well well

Seems USADA needs to be sanctioned as they broke the rules by letting dopers ride as UCs

Wonder if this means some of the evidence against Armstrong was illegally obtained and must be thrown out

 

[Rob5091]

For some reason the UK's the Guardian got the story not an American news organization. Also the story refers to an incident in 2015 (9 years ago). How come this came out now (in the midst of the WADA USADA mud slinging? Coincidence?
https://www.theguardian.com/sport/a...ed-undercover-agent-to-lift-the-lid-on-dopers

 

[Armchair Cyclist]

The article simply refers to "athletes": do we know that it is cycling?

letting dopers ride as UCs

UCs??? Undercover agents? (Is that a generally applied abbreviation?)

 

[Libertine Seguros]

The article simply refers to "athletes": do we know that it is cycling?


UCs??? Undercover agents? (Is that a generally applied abbreviation?)

We don't, but I have seen at least one editorial that has linked this to the 'final hurrahs' of Lance cohorts who had confessed or given their evidence earlier in 2012 but were allowed to ride unsanctioned through that year until the Reasoned Decision - Hincapie, Leipheimer, Vande Velde, Zabriskie all getting their suspensions given September 2012 to March 2013.

 

[BullsFan22]

The article simply refers to "athletes": do we know that it is cycling?


UCs??? Undercover agents? (Is that a generally applied abbreviation?)

It was a bit strange to me. I hope names come out.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1820623656093159619

View: https://x.com/BeijingDai/status/1820623656093159619?fbclid=IwY2xjawEisFVleHRuA2FlbQIxMAABHcVFPpSgF6_uoXeTcjmT4LpPXoYy9qP074g3EC8RrH9mg5Hmlw7-2SIDPA_aem_97qOlAiAxSRkVV5lCUM_zQ


Very suspicious of the veracity of this given the name of the account it's from, but if true, it gives a lot of context all right. WADA ceding authority to test USADA athletes and relying solely on what USADA reports to them, and USADA being prevented by US college and professional league rules from testing out of competition sounds pretty unbelievably lax to the point of hyperbole, so I feel like this is probably a grain of truth that is being exaggerated, but nevertheless the idea that USADA would be allowed a monopoly on testing US athletes which is such a clear and blatant conflict of interests is a serious accusation levelled at both USADA, WADA and essentially any American athlete competing in any sport, not just at the Olympics but literally everywhere.

Maybe some of our Americans with some insight into the pro péloton can help out here, as I'm pretty sure simple rules on cycling would prevent such a monopoly, with things like the stage winners being compulsorily tested at Grand Tours.

 

[houtdffan]

The article simply refers to "athletes": do we know that it is cycling?


UCs??? Undercover agents? (Is that a generally applied abbreviation?)

Yes, here in the states UC = under cover

 

[houtdffan]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1820623656093159619

View: https://x.com/BeijingDai/status/1820623656093159619?fbclid=IwY2xjawEisFVleHRuA2FlbQIxMAABHcVFPpSgF6_uoXeTcjmT4LpPXoYy9qP074g3EC8RrH9mg5Hmlw7-2SIDPA_aem_97qOlAiAxSRkVV5lCUM_zQ


Very suspicious of the veracity of this given the name of the account it's from, but if true, it gives a lot of context all right. WADA ceding authority to test USADA athletes and relying solely on what USADA reports to them, and USADA being prevented by US college and professional league rules from testing out of competition sounds pretty unbelievably lax to the point of hyperbole, so I feel like this is probably a grain of truth that is being exaggerated, but nevertheless the idea that USADA would be allowed a monopoly on testing US athletes which is such a clear and blatant conflict of interests is a serious accusation levelled at both USADA, WADA and essentially any American athlete competing in any sport, not just at the Olympics but literally everywhere.

Maybe some of our Americans with some insight into the pro péloton can help out here, as I'm pretty sure simple rules on cycling would prevent such a monopoly, with things like the stage winners being compulsorily tested at Grand Tours.

USADA has no authority to test most professional athletes here in the states. It is all the sports leagues themselves ho handle the tests.

There is no such thing as a 4 year ban for a first offense either. The closest is a 1 year ban in golf (with a potential enhancement for cheating), but that is because that is an international sport

 

[Tricycle Rider]

Yes, here in the states UC = under cover

I usually think of a school, like UC Berkley or something.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

USADA has no authority to test most professional athletes here in the states. It is all the sports leagues themselves ho handle the tests.

There is no such thing as a 4 year ban for a first offense either. The closest is a 1 year ban in golf (with a potential enhancement for cheating), but that is because that is an international sport

So, basically, WADA can't test US athletes that compete primarily at home because that's USADA's turf... and USADA can't test them either because it's the individual sports leagues' turf?

So these athletes like Jazmine Jones that only run domestically until the Olympics can only be tested OOC if USATF decide to shoot themselves in the foot and catch their own athletes?!

That's beyond a loophole. That's a loop-chasm. A loop-void. And to think what the Spanish were called out for being soft on doping for by comparison (they are, but that's by the by and pales in comparison to the negligence of duty of anti-doping displayed here).

 

[Samu Cuenca]

I usually think of a school, like UC Berkley or something.

It will give UCLA a different meaning in four years.

 

[houtdffan]

So, basically, WADA can't test US athletes that compete primarily at home because that's USADA's turf... and USADA can't test them either because it's the individual sports leagues' turf?

So these athletes like Jazmine Jones that only run domestically until the Olympics can only be tested OOC if USATF decide to shoot themselves in the foot and catch their own athletes?!

That's beyond a loophole. That's a loop-chasm. A loop-void. And to think what the Spanish were called out for being soft on doping for by comparison (they are, but that's by the by and pales in comparison to the negligence of duty of anti-doping displayed here).

yep

That's why there is no USADA testing of NFL/MLB/NBA players. It is all done by the league (and why first offenses are 1/3 to 1/2 the season, not 4 years)

NHL is a doping free for all and always has been. They only test for steroids, which are useless for a hockey player except for the fighters. No testing for EPO, etc (and we know EPO and blood doping is widely used in the NHL. The Montreal Canadians had a blood doping doctor on their payroll and nobody batted an eye. Came to light in the Jeanson doping scandal)

 

[Libertine Seguros]

yep

That's why there is no USADA testing of NFL/MLB/NBA players. It is all done by the league (and why first offenses are 1/3 to 1/2 the season, not 4 years)

NHL is a doping free for all and always has been. They only test for steroids, which are useless for a hockey player except for the fighters. No testing for EPO, etc (and we know EPO and blood doping is widely used in the NHL. The Montreal Canadians had a blood doping doctor on their payroll and nobody batted an eye. Came to light in the Jeanson doping scandal)

So there are athletes in Paris, including some fighting for medals, that could theoretically literally have never been tested OOC?

 

[Sciatic]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1820623656093159619

View: https://x.com/BeijingDai/status/1820623656093159619?fbclid=IwY2xjawEisFVleHRuA2FlbQIxMAABHcVFPpSgF6_uoXeTcjmT4LpPXoYy9qP074g3EC8RrH9mg5Hmlw7-2SIDPA_aem_97qOlAiAxSRkVV5lCUM_zQ


Very suspicious of the veracity of this given the name of the account it's from, but if true, it gives a lot of context all right. WADA ceding authority to test USADA athletes and relying solely on what USADA reports to them, and USADA being prevented by US college and professional league rules from testing out of competition sounds pretty unbelievably lax to the point of hyperbole, so I feel like this is probably a grain of truth that is being exaggerated, but nevertheless the idea that USADA would be allowed a monopoly on testing US athletes which is such a clear and blatant conflict of interests is a serious accusation levelled at both USADA, WADA and essentially any American athlete competing in any sport, not just at the Olympics but literally everywhere.

Maybe some of our Americans with some insight into the pro péloton can help out here, as I'm pretty sure simple rules on cycling would prevent such a monopoly, with things like the stage winners being compulsorily tested at Grand Tours.

A big difference between sports in this regard are labor agreements and the fact that major league teams are privately owned by a single entity. Negotiations between owners and unions set the terms of contracts that include allowance for drug testing. Even if USADA was the strongest, highest integrity anti-doping organization in the world but they still wouldn’t be able to test in a way that violates the labor agreements. Obviously pro cyclists and pro Athletics don’t have that kind of ownership model and don’t have unions.

The USADA is lame, and idea of major league teams being drug-free is a joke, but the labor contracts woulsld always define what is possible, unless there was congressional legislation that criminalized doping.

ed. I should add I don’t know how it works when a pro in a major league sport chooses to play for “another” team, i.e., the national team.

 

[houtdffan]

So there are athletes in Paris, including some fighting for medals, that could theoretically literally have never been tested OOC?

Olympic athletes are SUPPOSED to be subject to Olympic tests

But the NBA players likely would howl to their union

And the NHL... well, they've had a few players busted in pre Olympic tests. The NHL refused to take any action

 

[Invicituz]

So, in exchange for some leniency, you basically become a rat by spitting in the soup; though not the only reason, it's no surprise then that their names are withheld. It's a dirty game. 😄

 

[Nomad]

yep

That's why there is no USADA testing of NFL/MLB/NBA players. It is all done by the league (and why first offenses are 1/3 to 1/2 the season, not 4 years)

NHL is a doping free for all and always has been. They only test for steroids, which are useless for a hockey player except for the fighters. No testing for EPO, etc (and we know EPO and blood doping is widely used in the NHL. The Montreal Canadians had a blood doping doctor on their payroll and nobody batted an eye. Came to light in the Jeanson doping scandal)

I didn't know the NHL doesn't test for EPO - I assumed they did.

For example, the NFL Players Union agreed to add EPO & HGH to the testing policy in 2007 & 2011, respectively (An EPO positive would be the same offense as other prohibited PED substances: 6 games - or about 1/3 of the season).

That's quite a surprise that a anabolic steroid/testosterone influenced sport like professional football would test for EPO but not the NHL.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

So, in exchange for some leniency, you basically become a rat by spitting in the soup; though not the only reason, it's no surprise then that their names are withheld. It's a dirty game. 😄

The question has to be then, well, who was caught on the information provided by these rats? The implication was that small fry were caught and allowed to continue to compete in exchange for ratting on bigger names, but no big name US athletes have been caught in a long time, so who exactly were they informing on or was it just an excuse to let people continue to compete? I mean, did they then take person Y that person X had been informing on and then allow them to compete if they reported on person Z, and then person Z be allowed to compete if they informed on person X, or what was the end goal here? Looking at the names of the sanctioned athletes on USADA's site, the vast majority do not fit the profile of being a 'bigger name' than an athlete who competed at Olympic trials. I've seen a few names bandied about (some fanciful and very unlikely imo, but a couple more grounded and with some decent rationale) but nothing that seems very concrete.

 

[proffate]

Yes, here in the states UC = under cover

not in any of the 4 states I've ever lived in

 

[Rob5091]

The original article focused on runners from East Africa and the use of one guy to get dirt on other runners and more importantly who and how the doping was organized. Lots of guys and gals from that area of the World have been done for "indiscretions" so some good might have come from it.
As for cyclists being "snitches", we know nothing at the moment.

 

[Nick2413]

Olympic athletes are SUPPOSED to be subject to Olympic tests

But the NBA players likely would howl to their union

And the NHL... well, they've had a few players busted in pre Olympic tests. The NHL refused to take any action

Imagine drug testers showing up to Lebron James’ house in the middle of the night

 

[BullsFan22]

Imagine drug testers showing up to Lebron James’ house in the middle of the night

He’d probably fall back and yell ‘ref!’ Or lock himself in, like Serena Williams.

Serena Williams -- Locked in Panic Room Over Drug Test Mix-Up

Serena Williams went into total lockdown last week -- fleeing to a panic room inside her L.A. mansion after security cameras picked up a suspected intruder ... but it was all a case of mistaken identity.

www.tmz.com

 

[EarlyGrux]

USADA is in hot water after it was revealed that they l et dopers act as undercover agents. This raises questions about _the legality of evidence in doping cases including Armstrong's. It's interesting why this info has come out now, especially with the tensions between WADA and USADA. USADA should clarify their strategy to rebuild trust among athletes and fans

 

[Sciatic]

USADA is in hot water after it was revealed that they l et dopers act as undercover agents. This raises questions about _the legality of evidence in doping cases including Armstrong's. It's interesting why this info has come out now, especially with the tensions between WADA and USADA. USADA should clarify their strategy to rebuild trust among athletes and fans

In criminal law (which doping doesn’t come under in the U.S.) we know there are plea bargains made for lighter sentences in return for “wearing a wire” or providing other inside information. But is doing so in cycling less legitimate because there’s no court case (CAS is only involved afterwards)?

 

[houtdffan]

In criminal law (which doping doesn’t come under in the U.S.) we know there are plea bargains made for lighter sentences in return for “wearing a wire” or providing other inside information. But is doing so in cycling less legitimate because there’s no court case (CAS is only involved afterwards)?

CAS also holds zero weight when it comes to real courts.

It's why Heras is the 2005 Vuelta winner. He appealed through a real court where the UCI and WADA had to adhere to established procedure. Procedure was violated. This invalidated his positive test.

I suspect Armstrong would have his suspension overturned if he appeals through a real court, not the kangaroo CAS