World Masters Athletics is getting too big for its britches. It was formed (as WAVA) in the late 1970s to give geezers a chance to compete in track and field. But over the years, it's become an elitist IAAF-wannabe. That includes pretending to crack down on doping by doing a handful of tests at world meets (several dozen tests among 5,000 athletes).

But at the Lahti World Masters Championships General Assembly on August 5, 2009, delegates from 140-plus nations will vote on a 40-page anti-drug policy that sets up a drug czar within WMA and forces "Members" (national groups like USATF) to do drug-testing at their championships.

The proposal is posted here:
http://www.world-masters-athletics.org/laws_rules/anti-doping-rules.pdf

The proposed policy also contains a ridiculous suggestion that the WMA Council reserves the right to order "unannounced out-of-competition testing" of any Masters athlete anywhere in the world!

Yes, you heard that right. Just like the elites, you'd be expected to provide USATF your whereabouts at all times, and if you missed three surprise tests within five years, you'd be banned for a couple years, or for life if repeated. I'm not making this up. And USATF could not simply opt out.

As noted here, if the policy is approved, you couldn't be a member nation of WMA unless you adopt these Draconian rules:

 "Every athle te under these Anti-Doping Rules may be subject to in-competition testing at the competitions at which he competes and for out-of-competition testing at any time or place only after WMA informs Members that it has introduced out-of-competition testing. Athletes shall submit to doping control, as provided for in these Rules, whenever requested to do so by a responsible official.

    2. It is a condition of Membership of WMA that each Member (and Area Association), includes within its/their constitution/s:

    (a) a provision giving the Member (and respectively the WMA Regions) authority to conduct in (and only when announced by WMA, out-of-competition), doping controls, a report which, in the case of the Member or WMA Region, must be submitted to WMA on an annual basis (see Rule 41.4 below);
    
    (b) a provision giving WMA, if it so chooses, authority to conduct doping MH/dmv Page 17
    18022009 controls at the Member's National Championships (and respectively at the Regional Championships);
    
    (c) a provision giving the WMA, once decided upon by Council, authority to conduct unannounced out-of-competition testing on the Member's athletes, and;

    (d) a provision making it a condition of membership or affiliation that participation in competitions which are sanctioned or organised by Member or alternatively, Competitions, subject to any in-competition and when introduced by Council, out-of-competition testing carried out by the Member,  WMA and/or  any other body with competent authority to test under these Anti-Doping Rules."

WMA gives itself some wiggle room by saying that it can modify the "Prohibited Substances List" that WADA promulgates. But the idea that WMA would kick out USATF for not adopting these idiotic rules (thus barring Yanks from world masters championships) is beyond funny. It's pathetic and suicidal to the Masters movement.

What are the chances of this policy passing? Who knows? But the WMA Council has come out foursquare for it. WMA Secretary Winston Thomas of Britain writes in his report: "The new WMA Anti-Doping Rules have been agreed with the IAAF and WMA Council. The Council is recommending them with the Regulations to the (General Assembly) for ratification."

But cooler heads may prevail, such as the Brits, who in 2007 made a proposal to study the Prohibited Substances List and make some Masters exceptions. But time ran out at the Riccione General Assembly before a vote could be taken, so it's returned again for a verdict in Lahti.

Here's how the proposal is described:

"The British Masters Athletic Federation propose that WMA Council ask the IAAF Medical & Anti-Doping Commission and WADA to draw up a separate and less rigid list of prohibited substances, applicable only in Masters Athletic competition, to allow for prescribed edication for age related conditions in athletes aged 35 years and over. Reason: BMAF feels that master's athlete particularly in the older age groups, need to have different values in prohibited substances from those of normal athletes, whilst following the same anti-doping principles."

What punishment would be meted out to Masters dopers? Pretty much the same as that for elites -- generally a two-year ban for a first offense and a lifetime ban for a second offense. But wait! Two years is nothing in the life of a Masters athlete, right?

So the Norwegians want WMA to get even tougher, and have proposed a four-year ban for a first offense.

The Norwegians explain: "The reason for the proposed changes of the rules is the experienced lack of impact from the two years exclusion. We know one master athlete having two world records M50 and M55 in shot put. Then he was caught for doping. After 2 years quarantine he got a new world record in M60. We believe that the athlete has prepared the comeback in his out of competition period with smartness and great expectations. To avoid such praxis we propose the rules to be changed from 2 to 4 years exclusion from competition as indicated above. We can not see the reason for not taking the lead in the fight for having clean competition well aware of IAAF/WADA's rules. Remember masters compete for a long period, may be 60 years, but juniors and top athletes just for a few years. Therefore two years penalty does not have the same effect on masters."

Reaction of the Masters masses?

So far, not much.

But two comments on my blog may be indicative.

An anonymous poster wrote: "As a masters athlete I find it absurd that a flyweight organisation such as WMA goes to all this trouble and grief to document a parallel set-up to IAAF and country anti-doping rules -- and intends to inflict it on the Lahti WMA General Assembly. It is overwork. Delegates simply cannot handle it. Masters athletics is not of this dignity anyway."

Mary Harada, a W70 distance runner, wrote: "This attempt to mandate drug testing by all WMA affiliates is so ridiculous that I think it is responsible for my computer crashing this morning. How absurd. With all the blather about helping countries build up masters track and field  . . .  the powers that be are going to mandate drug testing on a par with that of elite athletes or throw the affiliate out of WMA. Well there we all go -- unless, of course, WMA is going to pay for all this. Have they heard that there is a worldwide recession? What drug are they taking?"

She noted that she goes to her doctor annually and files requests for my asthma inhaler with WMA and feels for Masters who need items on the banned list because of doctor's orders.

Harada concluded: "WMA has a death wish if it attempts to enforce this rule."