Anti-Doping from Dopes?

I kid, I kid. But, the PGA Tour announced today that it - in conjunction with pretty much every major tour in the world - was adopting a standard list of prohibited substances and that the Tour would begin drug testing in 2008. The Tour did not indicate specifically what kind of penalties would be incurred as a result of any positive drug tests - no Tour has, for that matter. He did indicate that suspensions levied against a player for a positive test would carry through all participating tours, though.

So, at this point, we only know that there's going to be a list. According to the AP piece, that list contains: "The list of banned substances includes anabolic agents, hormones, stimulants, narcotics, beta blockers and masking agents." The LPGA Tour has outlined the punishments for positive tests among their players, but I have not found anywhere that has been told what exactly they are.

At the press conference today, Commish Finchem pretty much said that the Tours are engaging in this policy because of the world sporting culture and fans' suspicions about dishonesty in all sport. Thus, Finchem claims the PGA Tour wants to be proactive in telling fans that they have nothing to worry about when it comes to golfers. He still maintains that there is no indication that (a) players are doping or (b) there is any impact upon a player's performance by doping if they were.

Geoff Shackelford has raised this point before and, if you don't read his site (you should), here is his take on the subject:

We've heard for the last 10 years or so, and quite specifically from various leaders, that distance gains have been the product of improved athleticism with little acknowledgement that equipment might be the driving force. The most notorious was USGA President Walter Driver's claim that 75% of distance increases could be blamed on "improved athleticism." (And in Finchem's defense, he's also been quite clear that this evolving athleticism might lead to some form of distance regulation.)

So aren't we here today at least in part because golf's leadership wheeled out a suspect rationale for distance increases? A rationale that might drive young athletes to try performance enhancing drugs in order to improve their athleticism, and therefore, perhaps keep up distance-wise?

The same organizations that don't want to do anything to regulate golf equipment in the most meaningful way possible (the golf ball) want to create regulation that supposedly will have no direct impact on the game. That doesn't seem very wise. Why have a dog and pony show if you feel it is unnecessary? Simply regulate the golf ball and that'll be the end of it.

Now, by claiming that something other than the true culprit (the golf ball) could be causing the bomb and gouge style of golf (juicing, the grooves...), there is a real possibility that young golfers may actually be doping.

The most curious aspect of this aside from that theme is how the PGA Tour would react to a positive test. The Tour does not release infomation about fines and suspensions to the public because they are paranoid about their image. (If you've ever read a press release or media transcript of a conference, you'll understand.) So, how would they react if a positive test occurs under the policy? Would it be a hush-hush situation or would the doper be outted? Great question and it is explored more by Steve Elling.

This post is somewhat of a rip from Geoff's site, but he did such a good job of it that I only had to add in a few thoughts. So, just go read his blog. I'll post something more original later :)