Some excerpts from the WADA's International Standard for Testing:
Random Selection: Selection of Athletes for Testing which is not Target Testing. Random Selection may be: completely random (where no pre-determined criteria are considered, and Athletes are chosen arbitrarily from a list or pool of Athlete names); or weighted (where Athletes are ranked using pre-determined criteria in order to increase or decrease the chances of selection)...
Target Testing: Selection of Athletes for Testing where specific Athletes or groups of Athletes are selected on a non-random basis for Testing at a specified time...
4.3.9 The ADO [Anti-Doping Organization] shall ensure that the timing of Testing is planned to ensure optimum deterrence and detection of doping practices...
4.4.2 ADOs shall ensure that a significant amount of Testing undertaken pursuant to the Test Distribution Plan is Target Testing, based on the intelligent assessment of the risks of doping and the most effective use of resources to ensure optimum detection and deterrence. The factors that will be relevant to determining who should be made the subject of Target Testing will vary as between different sports, but could include (without limitation) some or all of the following factors:
a) Abnormal biological parameters (blood parameters, steroid profiles, etc);
b) Injury;
c) Withdrawal or absence from expected Competition;
d) Going into or coming out of retirement;
e) Behaviour indicating doping;
f) Sudden major improvements in performance;
g) Repeated failure to provide Whereabouts Filings;
h) Whereabouts Filings that may indicate a potential increase in the risk of doping, including moving to a remote location;
i) Athlete sport performance history;
j) Athlete age, e.g. approaching retirement, move from junior to senior level;
k) Athlete test history;
l) Athlete reinstatement after a period of Ineligibility;
m) Financial incentives for improved performance, such as prize money or sponsorship opportunities;
n) Athlete association with a third party such as coach or doctor with a history of involvement in doping; and
o) Reliable information from a third party.
4.4.3 Testing which is not Target Testing shall be determined by Random Selection, which shall be conducted using a documented system for such selection. Random Selection which is weighted shall be conducted according to clear criteria and may take into account the factors listed in Clause 4.4.2 (as applicable) in order to ensure that a greater percentage of ‘at risk’ Athletes is selected.
Riddle me this: What type of testing was being used at the 2006 and 2009 Australian Open (and any other tournaments with similar test distributions)? Was the timing of testing planned to ensure optimum deterrence and detection of doping practices?
Good post Sen. If you want to change-up, give us a couple of pictures from the current Open. "Rafa's 'dodgy' knee that doesn't stop him from destroying (admittedly lowly ranked) opponents", "AO 2012 - The one year anniversary of Novak 'looking strong'", "Ivana Svetlana Karabagich looking strong", etc etc.
ReplyDeleteThanks, Mystery. Pictures will have to wait until the end of the tourney. We're going full steam serious for now. The critics wanted to see evidence, so I'm going to keep giving it to them.
DeleteGood call SnR. Be sure to compile these posts, including your emails a responses on the matter, under a significant link when changing topic. It's great work.
DeleteThanks again for your work Sen. You had really a great inspiration to cross those different data sources to come up with something new. I always thought it was precisely this kind of approach that would yield resultsts, but lacked the time and the inspiration for this. Although the metaphor is by now pretty well worn out, you have demonstrated mathematically that the emperor has no clothes, even I would not have imagined in-competition testing would be so inept. OOC okay, but in-competition... It's really scary to see that there are almost no serious hurdles to doping in tennis.
ReplyDeleteAnother very important point is that your work helps us understand why the AFLD's announcement before Roland-Garros 2009 provoked such a panic and fiery pressers from some Spaniards (Nadal, Ferrer, Verdasco). For years they had learnt to live with a predictable and minimalistic in-competition testing at the Slams, and suddenly, two weeks before the tournament and out of nowhere, the AFLD releases the bombshell that they are going to do real random and/or targeted tests ! The more you look at it, the more suspicious it gets..
Indeed Vincent. There is barely anything that ISN'T suspicious. As you have said, this information shows how something like what happened at RG could potentially prevent people from doing in competition doping. It would be some coincidence that Nadal suffers his only ever loss at Roland Garros in THAT particular year. Of course there's the knees alibi, but he's played absolutely fine on a supposedly painful knee many times. Rafa is The Boy Who Cried Knee Tendonitis ;). Not bullet-proof of course, but suspicious? Very much so.
DeleteSpeaking of Nadal, he qualifies for at least b), c), e), ESPECIALLY f), h), i), k), possibly l)(2009 Wimbledon suspicions), m) and n). I can see why Nadal might be a little concerned with targeted in competition testing. Of course, if he is legit, why the @#%! would you complain? It only adds to the suspicions.
If testing was targeted, Nadal would be the bulls-eye.