BREAKING: Anderson Silva (Roids) and Nick Diaz (Weed, AGAIN) both fail UFC 183 drug tests
- Thread starter firemanBk
- Start date
Is anybody in any sport clean 
@Master Teacher
Even more info:
Compare, Contrast
Let's start with this Nevada State Athletic Commission testing vs. VADA vs. U.S. Anti-Doping Agency debate. We weighed in a little here after Kelsey McCarson's reporting on what the Nevada commission did, coming down on the side of "better in some ways than VADA, not others." But we can break it down further.
On expansiveness of testing, I think VADA is in the lead. They're doing year-round random testing for some boxers, although according to the camp of Floyd Mayweather, he's employing USADA for year-round random testing of fighters in his promotional stable. VADA also uses Carbon Isotope Ratio testing on every sample, Goodman told me. "Yes, every time," she said via e-mail. "We also conduct urine EPO [erthropoyetin] on all samples and conduct hGH [Human Growth Hormone] on every blood screen. We follow blood counts as well." USADA uses CIR "regularly" and "strategically," while NSAC used it on half of the occasions for Bradley-Marquez but not on every sample. Whether you can achieve the same or similar results without using CIR on every sample — say, if an athlete knows that CIR is being used some of the time, will it still have the desired deterrent effect? — is a question I'll leave to others, but on mere strictness, VADA is ahead of USADA and NSAC here. NSAC made use of biological passport for Bradley-Marquez (the first time in boxing, to the knowledge of NSAC's Keith Kizer), and while there are still questions about how effective it is, it still strikes me as their one edge over the field.
On reporting procedures and general openness, things get a little closer. In the past, USADA has released the most extensive statistics to the public, albeit situationally. On the other hand they came under fire over when they notified the New York commission about Erik Morales' test results last year, and USADA is in my experience less open with the boxing media than the other two testing bodies. VADA came under similar fire from Kizer with the notification procedures for Lamont Peterson's test results, but all sides agree that VADA has since corrected the problem and there's been no incident reported since. VADA doesn't do the kind of public notice of test results that USADA has done, but here's what Goodman said when I asked her about that: "All VADA results are announced to the appropriate commissions, fighter, the ABC [Association of Boxing Commissions], and the promoter(s). Our role is to facilitate testing. We don't adjudicate results. It is up to the commissions, the ABC, fighter, promoter to release results. When a fighter enrolls and is eligible for testing they are listed on the site, and when they successfully complete the program, that is also listed. If a fighter tests positive, they are removed from the site. We follow that policy. Most important is that any athlete undergoing our program or any other testing program have full access to the policies and procedures." So, in a roundabout way, the public can learn about a failed test, which is better than no disclosure at all. (There is one standout issue as it pertains to VADA's openness, which we'll get to in a little while.) Since the Marquez-Bradley testing has been completed, Kizer has answered specific questions about results and testing procedures used, but he did not do so beforehand. Maybe he has a point in his stance that he didn't want to broadcast to the fighters what was being used or not, but I tend to disagree with that call, and at any rate, it means they get docked a little bit compared to the others here.
On enforcement is where the NSAC testing has a big edge. We've seen states be reluctant to act on the test results from VADA or USADA alone, and maybe that can be corrected. But right now, Top Rank's Bob Arum had a point about wanting to use state commissions because of who has the regulatory authority chain of custody and similar issues. If the states do the testing, they can act to censure a fighter; if they don't do the testing, as of this moment, it gets more difficult. As Goodman notes above, VADA isn't even in the enforcement game (and, I'd add, neither is USADA).
http://bloguin.com/queensberryrules...acquaio-and-other-drug-testing-questions.html
VADA > USADA
Even more info:
Compare, Contrast
Let's start with this Nevada State Athletic Commission testing vs. VADA vs. U.S. Anti-Doping Agency debate. We weighed in a little here after Kelsey McCarson's reporting on what the Nevada commission did, coming down on the side of "better in some ways than VADA, not others." But we can break it down further.
On expansiveness of testing, I think VADA is in the lead. They're doing year-round random testing for some boxers, although according to the camp of Floyd Mayweather, he's employing USADA for year-round random testing of fighters in his promotional stable. VADA also uses Carbon Isotope Ratio testing on every sample, Goodman told me. "Yes, every time," she said via e-mail. "We also conduct urine EPO [erthropoyetin] on all samples and conduct hGH [Human Growth Hormone] on every blood screen. We follow blood counts as well." USADA uses CIR "regularly" and "strategically," while NSAC used it on half of the occasions for Bradley-Marquez but not on every sample. Whether you can achieve the same or similar results without using CIR on every sample — say, if an athlete knows that CIR is being used some of the time, will it still have the desired deterrent effect? — is a question I'll leave to others, but on mere strictness, VADA is ahead of USADA and NSAC here. NSAC made use of biological passport for Bradley-Marquez (the first time in boxing, to the knowledge of NSAC's Keith Kizer), and while there are still questions about how effective it is, it still strikes me as their one edge over the field.
On reporting procedures and general openness, things get a little closer. In the past, USADA has released the most extensive statistics to the public, albeit situationally. On the other hand they came under fire over when they notified the New York commission about Erik Morales' test results last year, and USADA is in my experience less open with the boxing media than the other two testing bodies. VADA came under similar fire from Kizer with the notification procedures for Lamont Peterson's test results, but all sides agree that VADA has since corrected the problem and there's been no incident reported since. VADA doesn't do the kind of public notice of test results that USADA has done, but here's what Goodman said when I asked her about that: "All VADA results are announced to the appropriate commissions, fighter, the ABC [Association of Boxing Commissions], and the promoter(s). Our role is to facilitate testing. We don't adjudicate results. It is up to the commissions, the ABC, fighter, promoter to release results. When a fighter enrolls and is eligible for testing they are listed on the site, and when they successfully complete the program, that is also listed. If a fighter tests positive, they are removed from the site. We follow that policy. Most important is that any athlete undergoing our program or any other testing program have full access to the policies and procedures." So, in a roundabout way, the public can learn about a failed test, which is better than no disclosure at all. (There is one standout issue as it pertains to VADA's openness, which we'll get to in a little while.) Since the Marquez-Bradley testing has been completed, Kizer has answered specific questions about results and testing procedures used, but he did not do so beforehand. Maybe he has a point in his stance that he didn't want to broadcast to the fighters what was being used or not, but I tend to disagree with that call, and at any rate, it means they get docked a little bit compared to the others here.
On enforcement is where the NSAC testing has a big edge. We've seen states be reluctant to act on the test results from VADA or USADA alone, and maybe that can be corrected. But right now, Top Rank's Bob Arum had a point about wanting to use state commissions because of who has the regulatory authority chain of custody and similar issues. If the states do the testing, they can act to censure a fighter; if they don't do the testing, as of this moment, it gets more difficult. As Goodman notes above, VADA isn't even in the enforcement game (and, I'd add, neither is USADA).
http://bloguin.com/queensberryrules...acquaio-and-other-drug-testing-questions.html
VADA > USADA
Same here, i'm at the point where I expect athletes to get popped for something....................Usain Bolt
No. USADA and VADA is not the same.
This breaks down how shady USADA is: http://www.maxboxing.com/news/max-boxing-news/the-ped-mess-part-two
Get caught taking steroids.....and then get 4 more chances to test brehs
USADA
You realize WADA handles the testing for both USADA and VADA
in the article it seems like the problem lies with Golden Boy and NYAC, USADA took the test which they are paid by the promoter to do and gave them the results, that's all they are suppose to do, the promoter allowed him to be tested again and paid for those tests, NYAC overlooked the fact the test were positive
Vada didn't exist until 2011
Vada already lied about Shawn Carwin testing positive
and Hendrix didn't want to GSP to be tested by VADA because of favoritism
http://www.mixedmartialarts.com/news/427801/Carwins-manager-blasts-VADA-credibility
http://www.mixedmartialarts.com/new...-under-the-bus-with-maybe-shady-VADA-testing/
AB: "Pauletta asked me to take a VADA test for the fight Big Bro"
Floyd: "What you tell him?"
AB: "I told him to suck my dikk and hung up on him....Jessica was on the other line!"
#BandCamp
The Infamous
Superstar
AB: "Pauletta asked me to take a VADA test for the fight Big Bro"
Floyd: "What you tell him?"
AB: "I told him to suck my dikk and hung up on him....Jessica was on the other line!"
#BandCamp
Why is AB so against VADA testing?
This article doesn't say anything about anything, also who wrote this
It clearly says VADA isn't in the enforcement game and neither is USADA, so the fault lies with the commission and the promoters
WADA actually performs the testing anyway for both of them
Why is AB so against VADA testing?
because they already have contracted USADA to do it
VADA is just a rival business
WADA are the actually ones who do the testing anyway
The Infamous
Superstar
WADA makes the guidelines, they don't do the testing. VADA uses the guidlines put forth by them.
The Infamous
Superstar
He follows it up with 'but I'm clean'
not really, he said he didn't use them during when they do testing, it's different
like it's not enough to get caught these dummies know exactly the timeframe they'll get tested in and they STILL drop the ball
The Infamous
Superstar
Same here, i'm at the point where I expect athletes to get popped for something....................Usain Bolt
Funny you say that:
http://zeenews.india.com/sports/others/jamaica-on-the-verge-of-blood-testing-athletes_1539735.html
AB could be roided up right now....we wont know, because he uses USADA instead of VADA
