BIG DAWG DRUG TESTS

[Horton]

@jcamp‌

accuracy of testing, the chain of custody and even the potential for tampering.

 

Justin

If you had ever worked in an industry where drug testing was common you would know it is very serious. The people that do it for a living are dead serious and know that if they screw if up that will lose thier job and end up in court. It is a big $ business.

 

When someone busts a test it is not a lab error. When you read in Sport Illustrated that an athlete is clean when then tested dirty it is lawyers looking for daylight.

[jcamp]

@horton that's good to hear, but as I said it doesn't have to be actual tampering, just innuendo. Of course, I guess innuendo is why we find ourselves in this spot in the first place ...

[packski]

Level playing field? What we really need is a salary cap like the NFL. You cannot ski on a private lake. You cannot practice with ZO. You must ski on a public lake. If you ski in Florida year round you get a 12 buoy handicap, 30 foot jumping handicap and 1800 point trick handicap. Now that would be a level playing field. Sorry, I just couldn't help myself.

 

John Goss

[swerveit]

Could someone please clarify why the need for this?

Is it suggested that Dave skied 5 sets and then skied a comp he must be on PED's?

Were the 5 sets back to back then straight into a comp?

[Than_Bogan]

People clamboring for a level playing field should be careful what you wish for! If you remove every possible advantage except pure athleticism, then familiar names like Lebron James and Lionel Messi will be the best. Being a niche sport is interesting, and gives someone who can't compete on pure athleticism (i.e. 99.999% of us) the possibility of some success if they can manage to compete in some other areas like a) making money and b) being willing to build your life around the sport.

[Razorskier1]

I believe normal distributions apply here. All of us on this forum are probably within one standard deviation of normal athletic ability and normal intelligence. We work hard and, in some cases, outperform our ability through pure focus. There are some who are on the high end or even outside one standard deviation. Those folks could either rest on their laurels and let us catch them, or focus and become truly exceptional. I think they work every bit as hard and, as a result, they are truly great skiers. Take what you have, magnify it with hard work, dedication and focus, and let the chips fall where they may. Maybe you can be the Big Dawg winner . . . maybe you can just ski the best you ever skied.

[Horton]

@swerveit I am asking that everyone in this thread put their real name in their profile, signature or add to their post. Your post may not have been meant as an accusation but it is wood on the fire.

 

Please ID yourself. There are no anonymous posts in this thread.

[A_B]

Well if not going the speed limit will hurt the brand, I guess I will never be a Big Dawg! Rats.

 

[Than_Bogan]

@Razorskier1 Generally agree with and like your point, but as a Certified Geek I cannot let this statement stand:

 

All of us on this forum are probably within one standard deviation of normal athletic ability and normal intelligence.

 

One standard deviation only covers about 68% of the population, so it's just about certain that we have people on here who are outside one stddev on both ends. Indeed, I am quite confident we have people outside 3 standard deviations on the high end -- slightly more than one person per 1000 falls outside 3 stddevs on each end.

[swerveit]

Honestly it was simply a question to understand the scenario and grounds should someone be accused of something. i.e. whats the story behind the thread.

 

Jay Brown

[Chad_Scott]

First of all Most of you guys commenting don't have a dog in this thing. We the Big Dawg Skiers formed an association for 35 plus skiers. joining was voluntary and so was the testing. It is about bunch of athletes wanting to keep this thing clean and discourage the use of PED's to gain an unfair competitive advantage. All you that are complaining, don't join the association. There were several people involved in the forming of this association including Dave Miller. So as for JC MCCavit saying it was one- A- hole Obviously he did not bother to read the post that was on the front page a few weeks ago. If you don't wanna be a part of a drug free organization then do as you wish. As for the cost, it was paid for and will be paid for by one individual at no cost to any big dawg skier who voluntarily submits to the testing. As for the assumption that it can ruin someones reputation read the Hippa laws Some of you should do a little research before forming an uneducated opinion about what we as athletes are trying to accomplish. Simply don't join the voluntary organization formed by skiers that want to keep PED'S for the purpose of competitive advantage out of the Big Dawg.

[SkiJay]

This whole ped issue is supposed to be about maintaining a level playing field, but in what other sport is the field enherently less level anyway--from height through access?

 

I'm not even convinced peds would make much of a difference. 300 sets a year is a lot of skiing, but it's actually only 8 hours. So if you enhance recovery with peds, how many more sets can you ski? 150 more? Will 4 more hours of practice per year make you unbeatable? Not likely at our age. And not likely at the very top of the learning curve where incremental gains only come with exponential effort.

 

On the other hand, legitimate recovery drugs, that could well destroy a reputation for life, might actually help level the playing field by keeping more aging skiers healthy enough to stay in this lopsided game.

 

To me this ped issue is more a test of morality and ethics than one of performance for old water skiers. It's expensive and imperfect. Lance beat The tests for years. But it didn't change what people thought he was up to. If someone is juicing for performance on the seniors tour, they are a misguided asshole--who can still be beaten by a taller skier or a short skier who skied more as a kid.

 

This thread has changed my view on drug testing on old water skiers. And kudos to our eccentric friend @eleeski‌ for standing his ground on the ethically "wrong" side of this emotionally charged moral debate.

[JC McCavit]

I guess I am guilty of not reading the post that was put up a few weeks ago. What was the title of that post? I did not see where it was a prerequisite for having an opinion on this thread, but I would like to read it.

[JoeMac]

I am unaware of the Big Dawg Association that was formed. I participated in the Preliminary of the finals. Who do I talk to about joining?

 

[skidawg]

email Ben Favret

[Horton]

What many of you are missing is that this is extremely personal to the skiers involved. My opinion is arguably BS since I am a number of balls away from ever having a stake in this argument.

 

For the guys at the top of the 55k world winning means a lot. They have become equal to the pros in a lot of ways(*). They have business relationships with the manufactures and sponsors. They are legitimate stars in the sport. They spend almost every non-working moment skiing or training. They are fully invested. So if one guy even appears to be gaining an unfair advantage that is the source of substantial frustration.

 

(*)any of the top 15 or 20 Elite 36 mph skiers in the world could wax the floor with the BigDawg field at 55k. When I say equal I do not mean in ball count.

 

[6balls]

The Dawg's can do as they please...if they want to band together as an organization and do this so be it...it was their call it's not being rammed down their throats. I don't think it is necessary but I'm not competing...I'm a spectator either way with much respect for BD skiers.

[Razorskier1]

@Than_Bogan -- it was more of a generalization than a purely statistical reference :-). You know what I'm saying.

[Than_Bogan]

I do, in fact, know what you're saying. And I'm sure you know that I can't leave it at that! :)

[SkiJay]

Your point about how vested the top Big Dogs are in success couldn't be more true @Horton, and so is the fact that even the appearance of someone gaining an unfair advantage can generate substantial frustration.

 

But appearances cut both ways. I saw someone of sterling character fail a fuel test at a race years ago. The test result was so shocking that his fuel was retested 10 minutes later and it passed.

 

But type A competitors being what they/we are, this guy was considered a cheater from that day forward. It was devastating, to him and all those close to him, and he eventually left the sport completely demoralized and embittered with everyone in it.

 

As sure as we are discussing this today, someone will be unjustly crucified by following their doctor's orders under this program. I've seen similar happen, and the term "crucified" is more accurate than not.

 

I am all for fair play, and that's the driver behind ped testing. It just seems more likely to bring bad things to good people than to snare a clever cheat in a field of injured ageing athletes.

[JC McCavit]

O.k., I read the 35+Skiers Association post that Chad_Scott mentioned as the Basis for this thread. Like others, my opinion may be BS to these guys, but it does not mean we don't have a dog in this fight. I am a fan, a spectator, a supporter, a volunteer, a promoter, a teacher, a product consumer, a competitor, etc., etc. When will one or two of these guys figure out not to upset their fans and supporters? When you upset your fans, you are not professional and your fans loose interest at the expense of the big names in the sport and participation decreases. And for the record, I am subjected to some of the most stringent drug & alcohol testing policies in the work place. So who is this anonymous "one guy" willing to pay for these expensive test for any Big Dawg skiers willing to submit?

[Horton]

@SkiJay‌ the how could be very problematic. I agree.

 

But if I put Sterno in my intake I should be caught. After I lie about it I will make a NAPA commercial.

[Klundell]

I seriously don't get the negativity around this argument. If you don't think PED's can help your performance on a waterski then you don't understand PED's or waterskiing. Testing for PED's is not about "leveling the playing field" it's about not allowing someone to cheat. If you don't want to lose to Jim Michael's moving the buoys around then you don't want to lose to someone using PED's. Testing add's legitimacy to our sport at its highest levels.

[The_MS]

If someone has researched how and why to use PEDs, then they know how and when to beat the test.

[Brady]

I know this topic has been hammered, but I want to voice my opinion on the matter. To me, every thing about what is happening in the ranks of the BD could be summarized by one word--Intent. I have taken steroids in my life as well as pretty much every other substance you can put in your body. Currently, I am taking Testoterone, not to enhance my performance, but rather to get my levels to where they should be. Like @Chad_Scott said earlier, the testing is completely unique because the athletes are the ones asking to be tested. We are free to choose to put whatever we want into our body, but IF we have the talent and choose to be a part of the BD, then we also agree to the rules of THEIR game.

 

I play a lot of golf and there is a group of about 30 that have a weekly game together. We do NOT go by the USGA handicap system, but rather by an internal system kept by the group--it keeps the game fair and equitable, and we know that when one person cleans house, it was his time, and not the result of sandbagging. And newbies that come in can't even bet until they have a few scores with the group under their belt.

 

No matter how "fair and equitable" these Bid Dawgs are trying to make their tournies, there will always be a possibility of a "Dr Jim" trying to gain advantage by Intent. So, I salute you all for having the integrity to govern yourselves, and I will continue to take my performance "in life" enhancing substances, because it is what is best for me and my health.

[skiray]

This thread has amazed me. @Horton is a better man than me.

 

My two cents:

 

The only folks that want PEDs are the ones who think they can't compete straight up.

 

It's the Big Dawgs decision. If they decide you have use wooden skis, that's what you'll ride.

 

If you want it your way, have it your way. Start a Juiced Dawg series.

 

I'm a hack that loves the sport. No chance at being a Big Dawg. If the devil walks up and offers me an outlawed 41 off pill I may take it. So I can just run it to see how the rest of y'all live. I be damned if I take it to cheat anyone out of a win.

 

My two cents.

[T-fromTO]

The results of the drug tests for the Big Dawg finalists have come in. All 16 skiers tested negative.

 

(Got this information from an email from George Levien to Harald.)

[skosney]

Interesting debate overall and I certainly can appreciate and understand every position/opinion/argument.

 

I'm not a "Big Dawg", but I know and have skied with several both in in practice and at tournaments and they are no different than me as a person that loves to ski. In other words their just as happy to see me run -35 as I am to watch them run -39 ... likewise they are just as interested in my perspective if they happen to miss the pass.

 

That being said, what I find most upsetting about this entire topic were the accusations and rumors being spread that prompted someone like @David Miller (whom I skied/competed with for over 20 years) to start this post. Dave is a very good skier, but he also a successful business person and family man. We are not close friends, but I am always happy to see him and I feel equally welcomed.

 

So a little piece of insight to those that like to create and/or spread rumors ... when you're telling something negative about someone behind their back, I can't help but wonder what you're saying about me when I'm not around. Also, Dave was very professional about dispelling these rumors, but someday, you may run across someone less diplomatic.

 

Here ended the lesson. (dislike me if you must)

[klindy]

@skosney‌ a general observation because I have zero insight on the rumors or accusations. And frankly I agree with much of what you said. I also know many of the Big Dawg skiers and would believe they are straight up great people.

 

It's rarely someone from the "outside" that questions things or starts rumors. Typically it's the folks that know the athletes and their routines best - someone else on the same starting dock.

 

Again, before I get accused of starting rumors, this is meant to be a general observation in other sports. I in no way am suggesting anything beyond that.

[pgmoore]

In the wintertime, I work as a ski technician with the US Ski Team. One of our athletes wrote this about doping. It's worth a read.

 

http://noahhoffman.com/doping/

 

Just in case you don't read it, here is the most important bit:

 

Sport is defined by arbitrary rules. The race or competition is held to see who can perform best within the given guidelines. Doping in a cycling race is no different than showing up on the starting line on a motorcycle. If the athletes are not following the rules, there is no reason to hold the competition.