Topic: IWF: MORALLY BANKRUPT AND COMPLETELY INEFFECTIVE??

[Chris Ⓐ LeRoux]

From the IWF's own website, their own policy on antidoping: http://www.iwf.net/iwf/doc/antidpoing_handbook.pdf

FUNDAMENTAL RATIONALE FOR THE CODE AND IWF’S ANTI-DOPING RULES

Anti-doping programs seek to preserve what is intrinsically valuable about sport. This intrinsic value is often referred to as "the spirit of sport"; it is the essence of Olympism; it is how we play true. The spirit of sport is the celebration of the human spirit, body and mind, and is characterized by the following values:

• Ethics, fair play and honesty
• Health
• Excellence in performance
• Character and education
• Fun and joy
• Teamwork
• Dedication and commitment
• Respect for rules and laws
• Respect for self and other participants
• Courage
• Community and solidarity
Doping is fundamentally contrary to the spirit of sport.

Now, it has apparently been announced, as apparently printed here http://www.ironmind.com/ironmind/morenews.php?id=1749#1749 and here (in Polish): http://polska-sztanga.opalenica.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=1146&mode=&order=0&thold=0  that despite Iran having 9 positives out their 11 man team busted this year in IWF and/or WADA tests, despite Russia having six positives this year in IWF and/or WADA tests, despite Kazakhstan having five positives this year in IWF and/or WADA tests, and despite Argentina having 3 positives this year in IWF and/or WADA tests, none of these teams will be given a team suspension as allowed in the rules and previously dispersed in other cases like Turkey and India.

Despite the IWF's statements above on doping and their own rules and precedent, the IWF will now seemingly not enforce their own anti-doping sanctions. If one looks at the rules, listed in the above IWF link, one can see that all the doping penalties for teams have the word "may" as a qualifier meaning the IWF can chose not to enforce them. Clearly, this choice is dependent on how much cash the country is willing to pay and/or how politically powerful they are within the IWF. Or is cheating more moral for some countries than others? The team suspensions are intended to prevent national governing body and/or government sponsorship of cheating programs and deter systematic and widespread cheating. Even going beyond whether it is justified, morally acceptable to enforce, and/or potentially effective if actually done, how the heck is it fair to suspend Turkey and India and not suspend Iran, Russia, Kazakhstan, and Argentina? As they all have enough positives to merit the suspensions under IWF rules, the only difference in the cases appears to be the size of the "fine".

The system is a disaster and the IWF does not deserve to run our sport. I believe it is time to appeal to the USOC and IOC to strip them of their power and/or force them to enforce these rules in a non-discriminatory way. The most cynical part of the current doping system is that by claiming all the money gained goes toward more tests and using some or all of the money ingested in fines toward doing more tests, the IWF can claim they do a lot of testing when they have these scandals and thus fool the press in to thinking our sport is aggressively and openly attacking the drug issue and "catching the cheaters." It is an illusion in which a potentially viable system is being hamstrung by selective lack of enforcement of stated penalties and/or a lack of sufficient penalties. This therefore hinders the detterent effect of the system to the point where it is not an issue to systematic efforts by clubs, teams, national federations, and governments determined to win at all costs. The athletes are the losers, even those that cheat, while those that organize the efforts, and/or allow them, and/or look the other way, and/or condone them continue on with no real fear of the system.

In my opinion, The IWF sucks.

PLEASE STATE YOUR OPINION AND/OR VOTE IN THE POLL !

[Matt Denslinger]

It's up to their discretion to enforce the rules how they see fit.

Cycling is extremely dirty too.

[Paul LaDuke]

Track and Field is also full of cheaters.  

Today's athletes know in order to win at the international level in the sports of weightlifting, cycling and track that you have to use performance enhancing drugs.  We now live in an environment that can not be changed unless the governing bodies develop a backbone.  The cycle of abuse can not be broken without causing the cheaters shame and pain.  Those in charge must come down hard on all who are responsible for the cheating in order to break the cycle.  Until then, the cheating will continue.

BTW, I hate cheaters.

[Matt Denslinger]

Track and Field is also full of cheaters.  

Today's athletes know in order to win at the international level in the sports of weightlifting, cycling and track that you have to use performance enhancing drugs.  We now live in an environment that can not be changed unless the governing bodies develop a backbone.  The cycle of abuse can not be broken without causing the cheaters shame and pain.  Those in charge must come down hard on all who are responsible for the cheating in order to break the cycle.  Until then, the cheating will continue.

BTW, I hate cheaters.

I don't know if you would absolutely have to, I mean it does seem somewhat pessimitic to say anyone in the International or Professional stage is automatically juicing to get where they are. But I understand your point.

Although, I think individuals should be punished instead of organizations. But I can understand the arguements for org. punishment especially if the org. encourages idrug use. But I think something like a 6-8 year ban for an individual would set a clear message. Then maybe a fine.

But realisitically drugs will always be an issue.

[Chris Ⓐ LeRoux]

It's up to their discretion to enforce the rules how they see fit.

Yes, thats true according to page 36 of the WADA anti-doping code, found here- http://www.wada-ama.org/rtecontent/document/code_v3.pdf

Article 11  Consequences to Teams
"In sports which are not Team Sports but where awards are given to Teams, Disqualification or other disciplinary action against the team when one or more team members have committed an anti-doping rule violation shall be as provided in the applicable rules of the International Federation."

On the other hand, I seriously doubt WADA meant for or would be happy to see different penalties for different countries as we are seeing now. They obviously wished to leave team punishment to the discretion of the International Federation for each sport, but I am sure they meant for every country to compete under the same rules within each sport. It appears WADA needs to reexamine the issue in light of these IWF decisions and standardize such penalties or insist that each International Federation standardize them within the sport.

Either way, the IWF has some real big balls to try and promote this decision as being in the interest of fair, drug-free competition.

[Matt Denslinger]

Yes, that is a problem.

What's your ideal punishment scenario?

[Jim Hooper]

Penalties/policies that would in fact deter abuse, and inspire each country to police its own team, and possibly save this chaotic sport from the ash heap of history toward which it is now hurtling.

1.  Individual lifter:  Test positive, lose your appeal, you are banished from the sport for life, AND all records of your past pseudo-accomplishments are expunged from the record books.  Martians landing here in 50,000 years will never know you were a weightlifting "champion" -- because you were NOT a champion any more than Rosie Ruiz won the friggin Boston Marathon, or any more than Hulk Hogan is a great "wrestler."  You're a fake, fraud, and a charlatan, and no one should have to pretend that you were ever anything but that.  

2.  National Body/Team:  Catch one of your OWN first-team lifters positive, in random, no-advance notice, out of competition testing:  No adverse team consequences whatsoever.  (As for the individual, see No. 1.)  If you are willing to fund testing 4x per year for your entire national team (on a no-notice, yearround basis), please accept one extra spot in the Olympic games for every year you do so -- or some similarly worthwhile reward for doing the right thing.  

3.  National Body/Team:  If somebody ELSE catches more than one of your lifters positive, in random, no-advance notice, out of competition testing:  no more international competition for you for FIVE years.  Entertain yourselves by having waterfights with the syringes.  The sport will be blessed by your absence.

4.  Headhunting:  Any country can call for the no-notice testing of any five athletes it likes -- if it will pay for the testing costs, including the transit costs for the WADA team that rings their doorbell with cup and stopwatch in hand.  If the athlete tests positive, see No. 1 above.  If the athlete does not test positive, the country that called for the test eats the expense.   Top lifters will find themselves urinating into sample beakers approximately every other tip to the bathroom -- and that's what it takes to prevent undetectable abuse by anyone with half a clue about the pharmacology of the compounds -- frequent, no-advance notice, year round testing.   This is a way to pay for it.

[Danny Cox]

Penalties/policies that would in fact deter abuse, and inspire each country to police its own team, and possibly save this chaotic sport from the ash heap of history toward which it is now hurtling.

A moral line has been drawn which states that using drugs is bad.  I accept this entirely because the rules state that drugs shall not be used.  

Just put to one side, for a moment, the fact that drugs should not be there, because the rules clearly say this; whether drugs are intrinsicly bad is harder to argue, even if sport is much the poorer for their presence, and certainly that is my opinion.

Before I state the following, don't misunderstand me please, I most certainly don't want to sound like I'm an advocate of any drug use, nor that I use such things [I don't and won't use them], but it is probably possible to safely use them under medical supervision.   On the other hand, I imagine that drugs in sporting circles are doubtless taken outside of such careful medical supervision, so giving rise to all sorts of problems, liver disease, cancers, impotence and sterility, etc.  In that context, at the very least, removing drugs from sport altogether cannot be a bad aim.

The other major moral foundation of the argument against drugs, is that they prevent a level playing field.  That's harder to really argue when it doesn't exist anyway, given that some athletes have access to full time training, excellent coaches, superb equipment, good physio, fantastic food and nutrition etc. which probably make as much if not more difference than any drugs

Because of these sort of issues, to me there is a bit of a moral ambiguity about drugs in sport per-se, before one looks at what the rules say.  For example, if there are organisations which permit drug use, rather than ban them, then I'm not persuaded that taking legal, prescribed drugs is wrong in an absolute moral sense.  

[Trafficing and buying from dealers is an entirely different matter, and there is no moral ambiguity there to my mind, if for no other reason than it is supporting an illegal supply network and all that goes with it.]

But, that's why I like them being banned.  It takes all of these issues away, and draws that moral line nice and clearly.  

So, given at least, the fact that the rules state what they do, we *must* test, regularly and rigorously and punish accordingly, but the tests must be reliable and unimpeachable and the procedures must be foolproof and fully transparent in order to completely prevent false positives, which unfortunately do and have happened.  These must be devastating to the athletes involved.

So, I am concerned that, as tests become more sensitive, they don't find people guilty of taking drugs, when perhaps the tests simply find microtraces of things present in foods, supplements etc.  It is easy to state that the athlete is responsible for what they ingest, and I know WADA among others does offer something of a list of safe things to take, but there's much more work to be done here to give athletes confidence if nothing else.  There may even be a new market in tested foodstuffs and supplements which are guaranteed not to generate positive drug tests.  It worries me that we're in danger of seeing the tail wagging the dog.

1.  Individual lifter:  Test positive, lose your appeal, you are banished from the sport for life, AND all records of your past pseudo-accomplishments are expunged from the record books.  

My difficulty with this is that all a positive test, assuming it is foolproof, proves definitively is that the athlete has, at some point recently, ingested a substance which is tested for.  If they've set records ten years previously, then it cannot be shown that drugs played any part in these older records, championship wins, or whatever.  

2.  National Body/Team:  Catch one of your OWN first-team lifters positive, in random, no-advance notice, out of competition testing:  No adverse team consequences whatsoever.  (As for the individual, see No. 1.)  If you are willing to fund testing 4x per year for your entire national team (on a no-notice, yearround basis), please accept one extra spot in the Olympic games for every year you do so -- or some similarly worthwhile reward for doing the right thing.  

I like this in principle only it does mean that teams which are wealthier end up able to send more athletes just because of this and I'm rather wary of that.

4.  Headhunting:  Any country can call for the no-notice testing of any five athletes it likes -- if it will pay for the testing costs, including the transit costs for the WADA team that rings their doorbell with cup and stopwatch in hand.  If the athlete tests positive, see No. 1 above.  If the athlete does not test positive, the country that called for the test eats the expense.   Top lifters will find themselves urinating into sample beakers approximately every other tip to the bathroom -- and that's what it takes to prevent undetectable abuse by anyone with half a clue about the pharmacology of the compounds -- frequent, no-advance notice, year round testing.   This is a way to pay for it.

It would have to be controlled to make sure that a cabal of countries can't pick on one athlete and make their lives misery, but it's an interesting idea.

Danny