Kamila Valieva: Anti-doping Case and Follow-ups

[saine]

My position was always the lab was to blame for the delay not RUSADA. That has been proven correct.

This is what WADA said at the time.



This is simply untrue. WADA lied. It arrived on the 29th December and conducted the preliminary test on the 30th. The lab was then shut to the 11th January, tested again on the 12th when the preliminary test showed something. Then they spent time doing those 7th, 8th and 9th tests which came back inconclusive (and were thrown away so we'll never know what they showed, if one of them had of been positive then ROC could have changed their team, we'll have to take their word for it that they were inconclusive, which is fine I have no reason to not trust them). Then they worked on that new method of testing the sample, that concluded 3rd, then completed the test on the 7th which came back with a satisfactory result.

She accepted the results of the lab. Fault does not matter once she did that. It is a closed matter as far as CAS is concerned.

 

[beachmouse]

I'm not sure about WADA using this logic to pin it on Eteri:

e. Ms Tutberidze was the Athlete’s head coach. In an interview in 2019 MsTutberidze confirmed that meldonium was provided to Russian athletes forimproved recovery and in support of the heart muscle and that after meldoniumwas banned by WADA in 2016 “we had to look for something new”. TMZ andmeldonium have similar properties

TMZ was banned in 2014. Meldonium banned in 2016. So she decided to use a banned drug to replace another banned drug? Does not really make sense.

Dopers research how long it takes specific substances to clear a person’s body. (Rumor mill says Alberto Salazar reportedly used his son as a guinea pig for that at one point) It could be that TMZ was seen as clearing out quicker than other substances. So the risk of a positive in an out of competition test was rare, and they thought she’d be clean by the time of the competition, but, like with Andrea Raducan, she was small enough that the substance remained in her system when she would have been clean with that dosage if she had been a couple of kilos heavier.

 

[TallyT]

The doping control form used by RUSADA for the Russian championships in December 2021 included the age of the skater. It's not too hard to determine who the 15 year old athlete was.

They literally wouldn't care enough to try and do so because let us step out of our fannish bubble and face it, Valieva is not that important. It's more than likely that the entire Swedish lab personnel would not know her or any of the athletes they test from a bar of soap, would care even less. They are certainly not going to risk their well-paying jobs (it's Sweden, for chrissake) either for curiosity about one of a hundred nonentities they were testing at any given time, or for the interests of either side in the debate.

 

[Baron Vladimir]

She got a 4 year ban because her defense was boiled down to "I didn't take it and you should trust me even though I have no evidence that supports this statement", there's an actual statement in the document released today that there's no proof from Valieva that this "grandfather" actually exists. A defense that boils down to 'trust me' should never equal a reduced suspension.

That was not my point.. My point is that in the past athletes who used that same medicine were banned for 6 months or a year, but for 'some reason' in her case WADA wanted 4 years ban, the harshest punishment possible, no matter what her defense is... It's on WADA to choose to ban athlete for a 6 month, a year or four years, and i'm pretty sure she is the first and only athlete banned for the same substance 2 years or more...

 

[saine]

That was not my point.. My point is that in the past athletes who used that same medicine were banned for 6 months or a year, but for 'some reason' in her case WADA wanted 4 years ban, the harshest punishment possible, no matter what her defense is..

She could not prove that it wasn't intentional. It doesn't matter what the other athletes got for the same drug since their defense would not be the same as her defense. If she could not prove that it wasn't intentional in her case, then it would be four years by the code as per the decision.

 

[Baron Vladimir]

She could not prove that it wasn't intentional. It doesn't matter what the other athletes got for the same drug since their defense would not be the same as her defense. If she could not prove that it wasn't intentional in her case, then it would be four years by the code as per the decision.

That is not what its matter. What is matter is that WADA asked for 4 years ban, even in the past they never asked for such harsh punishment for that exact substance, no matter what circumstances are... Her circumstances were even better comparing to the other athletes in her position, because she was clean when that exact competition happened, as the one prior to that, as all the ones she was tested before her nationals. If her test was negative at Olympics and Europeans i would understand WADA outrage, but this is really too over the top even for WADA...

 

[saine]

That is not what its matter. What is matter is that WADA asked for 4 years ban, even in the past they never asked for such harsh punishment for that exact substance, no matter what circumstances are... Her circumstances were even better not to asked for such harsh punishment comparing to the other athletes in her position, because she was clean when that exact competition happened, as the one prior to that...

I doubt that they wouldn't ask for the maximum ban that they could. They are charging people under a code. If I am them, I will ask for the maximum penalty no matter what, even if the past results are clean. They are enforcing the code and they will want to make sure that it is followed. If they make the punishment minimal, then they will think that athletes will think that they can get away with doping.

 

[Baron Vladimir]

I doubt that they wouldn't ask for the maximum ban that they could. They are charging people under a code. If I am them, I will ask for the maximum penalty no matter what, even if the past results are clean. They are enforcing the code and they will want to make sure that it is followed. If they make the punishment minimal, then they will think that athletes will think that they can get away with doping.

That is what harshest punishment is in her case. I mean you cant punish the person smoking in the public space for the punishment you desire, it is known what possible punishment could be, in her case is from 6 months to 4 years, and as i said i never heard that WADA went over 2 years, like never... So what you are saying does not have much of logical sense to my topic - the point is if athletes are treating equally or not by WADA, or am I somehow different from the rest of the world because my name is Kamila Valieva

 

[saine]

That is what harshest punishment is in her case. I mean you cant punish the person smoking in the public space for the punishment you desire, it is known what possible punishment could be, in her case is from 6 months to 4 years, and as i said i never heard that WADA went over 2 years, like never... So what you are saying does not have much of logical sense to my topic - the point is if athletes are treating equally or not by WADA...

It made logical sense to CAS. That's what matters.

 

[Baron Vladimir]

It made logical sense to CAS. That's what matters.

It would be the same for CAS if WADA proposed 6 months, one or two years ban. She would inevitable be punished, my main point is how, and that is not correct knowing some of the past WADA cases.

 

[saine]

It would be the same for CAS if WADA propose 6 months, one or two years ban, that's my point.

And WADA asked for a 4 year ban in this case and got it. That is what they could ask for under the current code. CAS happened to agree with them and explained why in the decision. It doesn't mean that you have to agree with it.

Maybe she will be able to reduce the length of the ban on appeal. Whatever the outcome of it is, I hope that she will be at peace.

 

[Baron Vladimir]

And WADA asked for a 4 year ban in this case and got it. That is what they could ask for under the current code. CAS happened to agree with them and explained why in the decision. It doesn't mean that you have to agree with it.

Maybe she will be able to reduce the length of the ban on appeal. Whatever the outcome of it is, I hope that she will be at peace.

Why WADA asked for 4 years ban, when in the past asked for 6 months to 2 years ban? CAS decision is no or yes. No reducing. And she could not be in peace knowing that she is the first in history punished with the harshest punishment by WADA, that is the only problem i have with this, it is just no fair to her. WADA should do a proper job, not to judge people as we on the forum are judging the programme components.

 

[saine]

Why WADA asked for 4 years ban, when in the past asked for 6 months to 2 years ban? CAS decision is no or yes. No reducing. And she could not be in peace knowing that she is the first in history punished with the harshest punishment by WADA, that is only problem i have with this. WADA should do proper job, not to judge people as we on the forum are judging programme components.

I will not explain what is in the decision document any further to you. You don't agree with the decisions made and that's fine. I will not engage with this discussion further.

 

[Jontor]

They literally wouldn't care enough to try and do so because let us step out of our fannish bubble and face it, Valieva is not that important. It's more than likely that the entire Swedish lab personnel would not know her or any of the athletes they test from a bar of soap, would care even less. They are certainly not going to risk their well-paying jobs (it's Sweden, for chrissake) either for curiosity about one of a hundred nonentities they were testing at any given time, or for the interests of either side in the debate.

This. It's ludicrous to read all these lab conspiracy theories. I can assure everyone here that no one in Sweden knows who Valieva is, no one in Sweden knows anything about figure skating. It's more likely that Santa Claus himself was messing with Kamila's sample than some Swedish lab person.

As some people have mentioned. The delay was unfortunate, but WHY did RusFed clear Kamila for Olympics when her test wasn't cleared? That is why this mess got so messy.

 

[Baron Vladimir]

This. It's ludicrous to read all these lab conspiracy theories. I can assure everyone here that no one in Sweden knows who Valieva is, no one in Sweden knows anything about figure skating. It's more likely that Santa Claus himself was messing with Kamila's sample than some Swedish lab person.

As some people have mentioned. The delay was unfortunate, but WHY did RusFed clear Kamila for Olympics when her test wasn't cleared? That is why this mess got so messy.

Her test from European which they got on time was clear, nobody would expect that her test from Russian's nationals happened only a month before was not, for that reason, so...

 

[4everchan]

Her test from European which they got on time was clear, nobody would expect that her test from Russian national was not, to be fair...

Really? I am no expert but it is common that substances are not detected just a few weeks later. That's the whole gamble the doctors make with calculating when to take a drug and how much of it they can to get away with it. I am not saying anything about this specific case but testing negative a few weeks before or after doesn't mean anything.

 

[Jontor]

Her test from European which they got on time was clear, nobody would expect that her test from Russian's nationals happened only a month before was not, for that reason, so...

Well, being clear at Europeans doesn't automatically mean that you are clear 3 weeks before that. Everyone in the doping business knows that if you want to cheat, you do it in periods way before the big competitions so that the substance won't get detected when it matters.

 

[Baron Vladimir]

Really? I am no expert but it is common that substances are not detected just a few weeks later. That's the whole gamble the doctors make with calculating when to take a drug and how much of it they can to get away with it. I am not saying anything about this specific case but testing negative a few weeks before or after doesn't mean anything.

You must test medalist on the international competitions, as it is the European, Worlds, Olympics etc It is a rule... And they certainly randomly are testing athletes on any random international competition as it is Grand Prix and Challengers... By that logic Russada or any other national organization are testing their medalist from nationals...

 

[Baron Vladimir]

Well, being clear at Europeans doesn't automatically mean that you are clear 3 weeks before that. Everyone in the doping business knows that if you want to cheat, you do it in periods way before the big competitions so that the substance won't get detected when it matters.

Well, i'm really not sure about that and all the medicines they are testing, but i'm pretty sure for the regular tests health care can use in everyday life, you can detect simple cannabis even 3 months after you take it

 

[beachmouse]

That was not my point.. My point is that in the past athletes who used that same medicine were banned for 6 months or a year, but for 'some reason' in her case WADA wanted 4 years ban, the harshest punishment possible, no matter what her defense is... It's on WADA to choose to ban athlete for a 6 month, a year or four years, and i'm pretty sure she is the first and only athlete banned for the same substance 2 years or more...

WADA seems to have gone with the ISU’s rules for sanctioning doping positives. (I linked them way up thread) Likely because of pervious bad action in speedskating, the ISU starts with requesting a 4 year ban for a doping positive and then reducing from there if there is evidence that the presence of the substance was accidental on inadvertent. And then WADA/CAS didn’t really buy the strawberry dessert story that was given as a reason for accidental ingestion.