NADA harps on 'quality testing' (Part I)

Statistics can be deceptive.

Take for instance the press release issued by the National Anti-Doping Agency in January this year: “There has been a significant increase in out-of-competition testing as compared to the previous year. Moreover, the percentage of blood testing has also gone up significantly.”

To have gone back to 2016, an Olympic year, when NADA tested the least number of samples since 2010 (a year after its inception) to focus on comparative figures is illogical, to say the least.

But, let us look at the numbers again, as we have done in the past. A total of 3174 samples in 2017 including 210 blood samples. There were 1495 in-competition tests and 1469 out of competition.

The NADA now claims, among other things, that there was an increase of 49% in urine samples collected out of competition which is more than the global percentage of 46. That may be true but the fact also remains that in athletics, which has been at the head of doping offenders in the recent past, the percentage is still very low at 28% of the total samples.

“There is an increase in out-of-competition testing, too, being 49 per cent for urine samples”, a NADA official has been quoted as saying in a report where the old comparison with the 2016 statistics is once again prominent.

It is true that it is not the number of samples that will determine the success of dope-testing but the quality of the testing as the NADA official pointed out. “Quality” here should not mean the way the samples are tested in the laboratory though that matters the most, but the way in which a National Anti-Doping Organisation (NADO) or any other testing agency develops and implements its in-competition and out-of-competition test distribution plan.

But do numbers also matter? They surely do as can be seen in the chart below:

NADA testing (2012-2017)
2012	Urine IC		Urine OOC		Blood IC		Blood OOC		Total samples	Total positive	%
	2403	positive	1410	positive	130	positive	225	positive	4168	138	3.3
		130		8		0		0
2013	2579	88	1494	5	42	0	159	0	4274	93	2.2
2014	1820	86	2225	13	14	0	281	0	4340	99	2.3
2015	3123	97	1611	13	177	0	251	0	5377	110	2.1
2016	1369	62	1330	11	24	0	108	0	2831	73	2.6
2017	1495	55	1469	16	68	0	142	0	3174	71	2.2

Source: WADA annual statistics 

“There is an increase in number of blood samples (we have tested) to 210 and that is more than conducted by Japan and South Korea,” the NADA official was quoted as saying.

Note the number of blood tests carried out in 2012 (355), 2014 (295) and 2015 (428) in the above chart. When NADA talks about last year’s blood test count having exceeded that of Japan and Korea, it is forgetting its own record in the past years. Statistics can be deceptive when viewed in isolation.

China, Japan testing figures

If we look at the top two countries in Asia in terms of sports achievements, China and Japan, we find that China tested 11049 samples in 2017 and Japan 5043. The figures for 2016 were: China 8233, Japan 5371 and that for 2015: China 13802, Japan 4827. China had 79 positive cases in 2017, 99 in 2016 and 43 in 2015. Japan had five in 2017, 12 in 2016 and 13 in 2015. India’s corresponding figures: 71, 73 and 110.

If the argument that 2015 was run-up to the Olympics and NADA perforce had to hike the number of samples (record so far at 5377) is to be accepted, then the question comes, what about 2016? Was the Olympic year irrelevant in terms of Games build-up and doping practices? Do athletes dope one year ahead of Olympics and allow every trace of the banned substance get washed away for eight or nine months in an Olympic year? The 2016 sample numbers were 2831, a low that has now helped NADA show higher percentages for 2017.

“If we take 1000 athletes who are playing somewhere and conduct tests, it has no meaning. There has to be more systematic testing which we have tried to develop,” the NADA official was quoted as saying.

That is correct. Dope-testing is not nuclear science. Athletes, doctors, coaches, other support personnel, federations and anti-doping agencies are fully familiar (or should be fully familiar) with the system; whom to test, where and when.

That is why there is a test distribution plan, that is why there is a Registered Testing Pool (RTP). An anti-doping agency charts out its yearly plans based on the vulnerability of the sport, the event, recent history, athletes’ rate of progression, qualification process if any, major competitions round the corner, and the resources available at its disposal.

Despite all the talk of “quality testing”, intelligence-based testing etc, in-competition testing is a must if not to catch the dope cheat at least to provide the deterrence value as well as to assure the ‘clean’ athletes.

“We will take care of the dopers, you compete without a care” should be the assurance NADA should be giving out to the “clean” athletes.

That has not happened. And that is where all these “quality testing” and target-testing become mere slogans. Everyone associated with sports or anti-doping in this country knows that athletics and weightlifting dominate the doping scene. It is a world-wide phenomenon.

A look at the figures below will reveal how NADA has illogically concentrated on institutional meets, college competitions and state-level meets while ignoring National meets and has yet talked about focusing on “top Indian sportspersons”:

The following account of testing conducted by NADA in 2017, as published by it, does not include international competitions, athletics meets that have been given separately below, selection trials and out-of-competition testing (A few details for a couple of months are missing since they are not available):
Jan 2017	Inter-Services hockey	New Delhi
	Chief Minister’s State-level weightlifting championship	Thanjavur
	Delhi University inter-college powerlifting, weightlifting & best physique championship	New Delhi
Feb	Inter-Services wrestling championship	Pune
	Inter-Services best physique championship
	Senior National taekwondo championship
April	Fed Cup Sr National bodybuilding & best physique championships	Goa
May	Under-19 football tournament	Hyderabad
	Under-19 football tournament	Vizag
June	Under-19 football tournament	Chandigarh
	Under-19 football tournament	Jammu
	Under-19 football tournament	Bengaluru
	Under-19 football tournament	Ranchi
July	Under-19 football tournament	New Delhi
August	Senior National powerlifting championship	Alappuzha
	Pro Kabaddi League	New Delhi
September	Inter-Services cricket championship	New Delhi
	Pro Kabaddi League	New Delhi
	Inter-Services aquatics championship	Bengaluru
	National Senior and Junior MTB Cycling championship	Pune
	Inter-Services boxing championship	Mumbai
October	Inter-Services wrestling championship	New Delhi
	All-India Police wrestling cluster	Pune
	National boxing championship	Vizag
December	All-India Railways weightlifting championship	Kapurthala

So, what has NADA done to support its argument that it is not a question of blindly going out there and testing the first sportsperson that appears at a stadium or a training venue but a more intelligent approach of focusing on sport that could be more prone to doping than others and on athletes who are striking world-class form out of the blue?

(Contd. Part II)

Off to Spala again (Part II)

There is speculation about Nirmala Sheoran's comeback

How did the women fare in 2016? Nirmala Sheoran (left), the No. 1 woman and the only qualifier for individual 400m for Rio, sprung herself only at the inter-State, the final selection meet, and clocked 51.48s. It is not her style to be part of batches catching flights to foreign locations. She trained alone and, not unexpectedly, turned in a 53.03s in the Olympics to go out in the preliminary round.

The AFI has indicated that Nirmala could be competing again in the inter-State this month in a bid to make it to the Asian Games squad. Should such an athlete who apparently was unavailable for dope-testing by NADA the past few months despite being in its registered testing pool, be allowed to compete without being tested a few times? This is a question AFI and NADA have to answer after consultations. Since NADA does not disclose whether an athlete was tested or not during the preceding months, there is no certainty about Nirmala having been tested. At least one colleague suggested that she was tested last at the Asian championships in Bhubaneswar in July, 2017. She was recently dropped from its RTP by NADA.

Jisna trains at home, comes second

Jisna Mathew, P. T. Usha’s protégé, the recent Asian junior champion for a second time, was another athlete who preferred to train at home in the Olympic year. In fact, Usha doesn’t allow her athletes to go abroad for training, preferring to do it at her school near Koyilandy, in  Kozhikode District. Jisna improved her season best of 53.74s in New Delhi Fed Cup to a PB of 53.14s for the second place in the inter-State in Hyderabad. Was it a reminder to Ogorodnik and the authorities that his well laid-out plans of a long training programme in Poland had flopped? Though Ogorodnik's trainees did not compete in Hyderabad, Jisna had bettered their timings, barring that of M. R. Poovamma, with her PB. Anilda Thomas, though she was part of the Spala batch, was not considered to be from the Ogorodnik stable.

The other two, who formed the relay team were  Poovamma and Anilda. Poovamma had timings of 52.60s and 52.57s at home before she improved it to 52.31 in Bydgoszcz. She slipped slightly to 52.85s in Bengaluru in July.

Anilda clocked her PB of 52.40s in the Fed Cup in New Delhi. She couldn’t improve on that through an arduous season though there were a couple of sub-53s after that.

Two women trained at home, one clocked her best at home before going to Poland, and one improved marginally through the season. Among the others, Ashwini A.C., who was suspended for a doping offence in 2011, made it among the reserves. She was the lone survivor from “Yuriy’s batch”, identified so by athletes and coaches to recall the 2011 doping incident involving six women. Debashree Majumdar completed the six-member relay team as the last reserve. The others from  the Spala batch who could not make it into the relay team were : Jauna Murmu, Priyanka Panwar and Sini Jose.

A court case

Anu Raghavan, who was also at Spala, but whose PB of 53.54s came at home, fought a court case to displace Ashwini and get herself selected but failed only because time left for the proceedings to go on was too short. That was the story of our 400m runners in 2016. The relay team could not make it to the Olympic final, clocking 3:29.53 compared to the 3:27.88 in Bengaluru. The team’s Olympic qualification was almost certain through the season.

Is it the weather in Europe that then is supposed to provide the setting for Indian athletes to train prior to a major international championship? Or is it the food? These questions normally come up but there never had been a clear answer to these.

The weather of course has to be far better than the summer temperatures of India, especially in the northern parts of the country. But then Jakarta in August is not going to be cool for that matter.

The food in Spala was not the best that the athletes enjoyed, according to this report. The Indian athletes, as per this report, were apparently in favour of a little spicy food which they could not get in Poland last time. (However, the authorities seemed to have stuck to Spala this time, too despite apprehensions on the gastronomic front).

In any case, with nearly Rs 700 per day per head being given by Government as board expenses for athletes in national camps (apart from Rs 400-plus for supplements per head), there is no reason why India cannot provide nutritious, palatable, wholesome food to its athletes at camps. Recent complaint by the chief men’s hockey coach about quality of food and hygiene in SAI, Bengaluru, might give one the feeling it would be better to train in places like Spala or Yalta, but that situation has to be rectified; sooner the better.

The needle controversy

The international anti-doping agencies must have taken note of the expulsion of two Indian athletes in Gold Coast for breaching the “no needles” policy during the Commonwealth Games. The Indian athletes will need to exercise extreme care since the focus would be on them given the country’s record in doping since 2013.

In 2016, three top athletes, shot putter Inderjeet Singh, sprinter Dharmabir Singh and quarter-miler Priyanka Panwar were caught doping. Dharambir is serving an eight-year suspension since that happened to be his second. Priyanka too had been slapped with an eight-year suspension since she was also in the famous 2011 batch that received two-year sanctions. She has, however, appealed her suspension and the hearing is ongoing.

Another athlete, hurdler Jithin Paul, who was part of the Spala batch in 2016,  now slapped with a four-year ban for possession of meldonium, has also appealed the decision against him. Recovery of needles from personal kits and banned drugs from rooms of athletes can only point towards doping practices. Committees and hearing panels may eventually reprieve them but there cannot be a “clean” image after that.

Whatever be the reasons that force the AFI to send athletes abroad for training, along with coaches hired from foreign countries and based in India, for years in certain cases, the ultimate clincher would be medals. Government wants medals and nothing else. No medal could have been expected from Rio. But more than one place in the final would not have been too high an expectation either.

Last time in the Incheon Asian Games, the Indian athletes bagged only two gold medals, Seema Antil in discus and the women’s longer relay team. The count should drastically go up this time for Indian athletics to justify the high priority and the generous, if not lavish, funding that the Government has provided it. By the way, the constant harping on “world-class facilities” in reference to training locations abroad only exposes the archaic infrastructure we have in our country despite al the talk of 50 Olympic medals by 2024.

(Concluded)
Part I is here
Updated: 16 June, 2018: A reference to the  Jakarta Asian Games also having a 'no-needle' policy at the games village, venues etc, like the CWG had in Gold Coast, in its anti-doping regulations, has been removed since it would seem, at least for the moment, that there is no such policy in place.
Updated 29 June, 2018: Since the last update, the Indian Olympic Association has clarified that "no needle" policy would be there after all during Asian Games. The OCA Medical Commission had already informed NOCs of the regulations.

Spala is the favourite base once more for quarter-milers (Part I)

Muhammed Anas (right) winning the Asian championships 400m gold in Bhubaneswar in July, 2017, chased by Arokia Rajiv towards the finish. The two are once again in the forefront of India's relay campaign for the Asian Games. _Pic Courtesy: G. Rajaraman

The Olympic Training Centre at Spala, Poland, is reputed to be one of the best in the world. It was described as one of the top two in Europe by the Athletics Federation of India (AFI) Secretary, C. K. Valson, in 2016 when a batch of 38 Indian athletes trained there in preparation for the Rio Olympics.

The Sportstar quoted Valson thus at that time: “The Spala Olympic Centre is in the top two training facilities in Europe and one of the best in the world. We are thankful to (Ambassador of Poland) Tomasz Lukaszuk for his support,” AFI Secretary General C. K. Valson said at a media interaction.

The batch included 400m runners in both sections, mainly making a bid to qualify in the relays for the Rio Olympics, racewalkers and javelin throwers.

Rio proved yet another disappointing experience for the Indian athletes, with only steeplechaser Lalita Babar making the final.

This time, in preparation for the Asian Games in Jakarta, India has again sent its 400m runners to Spala with the Russia-born American coach Galina Bukharina and support staff. Kiev and Yalta used to be the favourite training destinations of AFI squads in the past. Strife in Ukraine prevented such trips during the past few years. Spala has gained the latest AFI vote, it would seem.

Once again, the focus is on the relay teams and hence seven runners each in the 400m in either section have been chosen for the Spala stint. A group of javelin throwers are training at Kuortane, Finland, while the middle and long-distance runners are based at Thimpu, Bhutan.

Olympic qualification at stake in 2016

Unlike in 2016, when qualification for the Olympics was the prime target in every athlete’s sights, there should be no worries this time at least for the leading athletes. Most of them have made the cut-off marks prescribed by the AFI (not to be confused with qualification since there can be minor deviations in the AFI guidelines in contrast to, say, an Olympic qualification mark). Of course, there is this business of repeating or coming close to those marks in the Inter-State in Guwahati from June 26 to make sure of selection.

“if they are not competing regularly in Europe, then why have they gone there with our own coaches and support staff”, asked a coach familiar with training methods towards peaking for a major competition, in this case the Asian Games in Jakarta in August.

Despite such apprehensions, the Spala batch seemed to have started off well with almost everyone turning in a good effort in their first meet in Poland, at Gliwice. Particularly impressive were Hima Das who clocked a PB 23.22s in winning the 200m and Muhammed Anas whose 200m win came in a PB 20.74s. Both had clocked PBs in the Commonwealth Games 400m, Hima a stunning 51.32s and Anas a national-record-breaking   45.31 seconds.

The question will then be, how far can they reach this season?

Hima is an unknown potential who broke through from nowhere this season to clock some of the most sensational timings seen in Indian athletics in a long, long time. In her first season in the 400m she has taken her PB to 51.32s in just two meets. Only three other Indians, Manjeet Kaur, K. M. Beenamol and Chitra Soman, have clocked better. Not even the great P. T. Usha (NR of 51.61s in 1985 that stood for 15 years) has clocked close to Hima’s best!

Is the Assam junior the most exceptional athletics talent that we have seen in a long time? We will have to wait and see for a couple of more years at least to know how much Hima can improve in both the 200m and 400m at the Asian and world level if she continues to compete in these two events.

Anas has had a tremendous run from 2016. Just when one thought this year he might not be able to return the national records that he had been turning in in the 400m, he came up with that 45.31s in the Commonwealth Games.

But the topic here is not the improvement shown by Hima Das or Anas but the necessity of a training camp in Spala for our 400m runners accompanied by our own coaches in the light of what was achieved in 2016. The issue gets sharply highlighted when one looks at the field in which the Indians are competing in their main event, the 400m, in both sections.

Competing among themselves

At Gliwice, the top four men and the top five women in the 400m were Indians. They must have felt like being in a meet at Patiala, Chennai or Bengaluru! In Wroclaw where the Indians competed on June 13, the top three in the men’s and top five among women, in the 400, were Indians.

It is not that Poland lacks quality competition. On June 8, at Chorzow, the top two men in 400m ran sub-45. Third was Polish Karol Zalewski in 45.15s. In the women’s 400m, the top five timed sub-52s; there were three Poles in that. The top Polish woman, Justina Swiety-Ersetic (51.11s) beat none other than the great Allyson Felix (51.35s).

Let’s look back at what happened in 2016 in the run-up to the Olympic Games.

If the aim for the training at a foreign location is at least qualification followed by a season best performance in a global or continental meet, then the Spala exercise in 2016 was a failure. Mind you, despite criticism in the media against he being brought back after the “doping scandal” of 2011, Ukrainian coach Yuriy Ogorodnik was engaged, not just for the women’s 4x400m team but also for the men’s longer relay team.

Our top male quarter-miler Muhammed Anas returned two national record timings of 45.44s and 45.40s on two consecutive days in Bydgoszcz, Poland, in June, 2016. Less than seven weeks later after having attended a camp of around six weeks in Poland, he returned 45.95s for a sixth-place finish in the first-round heats of the Olympics and was eliminated.

Arokia Rajiv, who was the No. 1 quarter-miler in the country till Anas came along, had also bettered a national record that season. That was 45.47s in the Fed Cup in New Delhi on 29 April. Through about two months of hard training in Poland, Rajiv could not better that and failed to clinch a place in the individual event for the Olympics. The qualification standard stood at 45.40s. He timed 46.24s in winning the final trial in Bengaluru on 11 July. Anas and Rajiv are once again the leading figures in India's 4x400m relay team.

P. P. Kunhumohammed, the third best 400m runner that season, also had his personal best 46.08s in New Delhi in April. In June and July he had two timings of 46.24s in Bydgoszcz and Bengaluru.

Ayyasamy Dharun completed the quartet that clocked two national records that season, 3:02.17 in Erzurum, Turkey on 12 June, and that awe-inspiring 3:00.91 in Bengaluru on 11 July, the last date for qualification. That timing ensured that the team would go to Rio. Dharun also returned his PB of 46.30 in New Delhi in April and then went through an unsuccessful attempt to achieve the Olympic qualification.

It was unfortunate that the men’s relay team got disqualified for a faulty exchange  in the heats after finishing seventh in 3:02.24.(Britain was the other team to be disqualified in the same heat).

That disqualification apart, what did the male quarter-milers achieve from their Spala sojourn that was inexplicably shortened when the team was asked to come home and compete in the inter-State meet in Hyderabad? The original plan was to train in Poland right up to August.

Back in 2010 when the question was raised about an extended camp in Yalta, Ukraine, a Government official had rather suggestively remarked that it seemed the Black Sea breeze was very beneficial for our athletes. Spala might yet beat the record of Kiev and Yalta in 2010.

(Contd part II)

NADA cuts its Registered Testing Pool by more than half in athletics

Representative pic_ courtesy G. Rajaraman

Last November, the National Anti-Doping Agency (NADA) seemed to have drastically changed its policy regarding ‘whereabouts’-based testing.

From a passive agency, content to have a Registered Testing Pool (RTP) for the sake of having such an arrangement, with 42 track and field athletes providing the bulk of the list, it seemed ready to crack down on the dopers with an enlarged list. As many as 64 track and field athletes were included in a pool of 178.

In the Asian Games year, one would have expected NADA to pursue the dopers more vigorously than any time in the past with its beefed-up RTP in athletics as well as in other sports. Of course, the athletics list was far from perfect but that was something that could have got rectified during the course of the year.

Even as the media was focusing on the “disappearance” of quarter-miler Nirmala Sheoran, who was in the NADA RTP list of 64 in athletics last year, came the news that the list had been revised and the Haryana athlete’s name was no longer there.

But the bigger shock was when one accessed the NADA website on May 29, 2018. From an impressive list of 64 in athletics the figure had shrunk to 25! The overall total was 113, which was 65 less than the previous year.

Could NADA be doing this in the Asian Games year, with the games less than three months away in Jakarta? That was the question that many of us asked among ourselves.

The case of Nirmala Sheoran

Would NADA have tested Nirmala during the five-month period she was in its RTP? Why should NADA exclude her at all since her past strategy suggested she could spring a surprise any time by competing in a selection trial before a major international competition? Or else, has she retired? The fact that the Athletics Federation of India (AFI) continued to plead ignorance about her whereabouts even after it entered her name in the preliminary list of entries for the Asian Games showed how things could reach comical proportions in India.

NADA does not post much on its website though one would have expected it to use that facility to the maximum for the benefit of the athletes, coaches, support personnel, the federations and the media.

The NADA rules demand that NADA publish the names of the tested athletes and the dates of testing. “14.4 Statistical Reporting: NADA shall publish at least annually a general statistical report of its Doping Control activities, with a copy provided to WADA. NADA may also publish reports showing the name of each Athlete tested and the date of each Testing.”.

To the best of one’s knowledge, NADA has never published the names of the athletes tested, in clear violation of its own rules, and that of the WADA Code. It does have a testing statistics record on its website, but only for the year 2016 at present. When will we see the rest from 2009 onwards?

Such statistics like the names of the athletes tested, and testing dates, would be reassuring to “clean” athletes since they can have the comforting thought that the authorities are keeping track of prospective dopers. Such lists would also give an opportunity to the media to point out who are all not being tested at all or not being tested in time. WADA expects anti-doping authorities to test their RTP athletes around three to four times a year, out of competition.

By cutting down its testing in athletics, NADA has managed to avoid the top-three position that the country had occupied for three successive years from 2013 among the leading ‘doping nations’ of the world. In 2016, India, with 69, ranks only sixth jointly with Russia for the anti-doping rule violations (ADRVs).

Misses target of 5000 samples

NADA, on the advice of NITI Aayog had targeted at least 5000 samples for 2017 and even talked about touching 7000, but eventually it ended up with only 3594 samples including 282 blood samples.  Even then, it trumpeted its achievement by announcing that it had exceeded the target of 3000 samples that WADA had fixed. The drop in number of positives from previous years was understandable (lesser number of samples tested), no matter that NADA made it out as though it was because of its tighter controls and better education programmes.

Athletics has suffered in the process. NADA skipped the Open Nationals last year and also missed the inter-university meet and the National cross-country championships. It collected less than 25 samples from the National inter-state meet, according to athletics officials.

This year, NADA has once again started on the wrong foot. The Federation Cup junior championships at Coimbatore, presented NADA with an excellent opportunity to ‘screen’ young athletes prior to their selection for the Asian Juniors in Japan.

NADA missed the first day in Coimbatore! It has become some sort of routine to miss the opening day of an athletics championships for NADA. On the second day, when Gurindervir Singh clocked a junior national record of 10.47s in the 100m, officials looked around for dope-testers. None was in sight.

The 100m was postponed from the opening day due to bad weather. Gurindervir was told to wait as a two-member NADA team set up shop by second afternoon. But they wouldn’t test him, according to AFI sources, no matter that AFI officials told them to test since he had bettered a national record and ratification, at least in the understanding of the officials, required a dope test clearance.

No one told them to test sprinters!

The NADA team then told officials that they were told to collect just 20 samples. And the junior men’s 100m was not in the list that it was given by NADA, New Delhi! Apparently, the distance events were marked but not the sprints!

Twenty urine samples from an athletics meet having 44 events (men and women) after taking the trouble to send a team was a waste of effort and funds.

Is it the resource crunch that has now reduced the RTP list from 64 to 25 and forcing NADA to test 20 athletes from a junior national meet?  

The top woman quarter-miler this season in India, Hima Das, who clocked a sensational 51.32s in the Commonwealth Games last April, the best time in Asia till then (since bettered by Bahrain’s Nigeria-born Salwa Eid Naser (50.51s) in the Diamond League in Rome in May), is not in the latest RTP. Also missing are two of the national-record-setters this season, A. Dharun (400m hurdles) and Tejaswin Shankar (high jump).

Other prominent athletes missing in the RTP included Ajay Kumar Saroj (Asian champion in 1500m), M. Sreeshankar (long jump), who was leading the Asian junior lists and Indian senior lists for 2018, at the time of writing, with 7.99m, top woman sprinter Dutee Chand, all the four woman 400m runners behind Hima Das, in the year’s lists, plus woman steeplechasers Sudha Singh and Chinta Yadav.

The four athletes currently in the RTP of the International Association of Athletics Federations (IAAF), 400m runner Muhammed Anas, shot putter Tejinder Pal Toor, long jumper Nayana James, and shot putter Manpreet Kaur, have been removed from the NADA list. Rightly so, since the earlier duplication was merely a waste of resources. Manpreet is facing an anti-doping rule violation charge at present. Javelin thrower Devinder Singh Kang, who was in the IAAF list earlier has now been removed but retains his place in the NADA list. He is facing his second doping charge, for a steroid, having been given a reprimand in the first, a charge of marijuana use.

TOPS athletes being spared?

One would have thought that all the athletes included in the TOPS would automatically be placed in the NADA RTP. That has not happened. The TOPS athletes would be taking home Rs 50,000 per month as stipend alone.

Already, various groups of athletes have spread out for training to Poland, Finland and Bhutan. More foreign visits and training bases could be in store before the Asian Games. Has NADA the funds to test at least the TOPS athletes or its RTP athletes in foreign locations with the help of WADA or other NADOs? If not, what is NADA supposed to do with its funding received from the Sports Ministry? Test athletes in Rajasthan powerlifting meet or Delhi best physique meet? Or Bengal state athletics or Jharkhand athletics?
A registered testing pool allows the testing authority to keep track of its athletes throughout the year. Athletes are expected to provide their whereabouts on a quarterly basis including a specific location for testing every day where an athlete would be present at least for one hour during a specified time for testing. Missing a test or failing to file his/her whereabouts information can be flagged by the authority in case of no valid explanation. A combination of three missed tests/filing failures in a 12-month period may attract a suspension of up to two years.

Athletics was not the only discipline that got neglected in the revised RTP list of NADA. Weightlifting had its list cut from 26 to just five, wrestling from 37 to a mere four and badminton from 14 to three!

Weightlifting, with athletics, had been topping the Indian doping charts for the past few years. The latest furore over the positive test reported for 2018 Commonwealth Games gold medallist Sanjita Chanu, in an out-of-competition test done in the US last November, has once again brought the doping focus back to the weightlifting.

All the leading sports federations can claim in the coming months that their sport is ‘clean’ and they believe in ‘zero tolerance’ towards doping. The truth is fewer and fewer top-level athletes are getting tested. Or else they could be based abroad and beyond the reach of NADA when it matters most. Just before the Asian Games, NADA will, as usual, start searching for athletes to complete the formality of testing. The SAI and the Ministry may claim “every one of our selected athletes had been tested prior to departure”. Those smart dope cheats among them would have got the traces of drugs washed out weeks before!

(Updated 07 June, 2018)

Another ‘sabotage’ theory shot down by CAS

The Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) has upheld an appeal by the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) and imposed a four-year suspension of Indian weightlifter Geeta Rani for an anti-doping rule violation committed at the National Games in Kerala in 2015.

The CAS also ordered the National Anti-Doping Agency (NADA) and the weightlifter to share the arbitration costs to be determined by the CAS office.  In addition to this CAS also ordered that NADA contribute 5000 Swiss Francs (approx Rs 3.4 lakh) toward the legal expenses of WADA.

In what had turned out to be a bizarre case of alleged ‘sabotage’ that was never proved, both the disciplinary panel (NADDP) and the appeal panel (NADAP) gave Geeta Rani a two-year suspension instead of the standard four years stipulated for a steroid offence.

Geeta Rani, gold medallist in the over-75kg category in the 2006 Commonwealth Games in Melbourne, had tested positive at the National Games for steroid methandienone. She alleged that another weightlifter, Nanshita Devi who was her competitor had spiked her drink leading to the positive test.

Khajan Singh’s statement crucial

Crucial in the hearing held before the ADDP headed by Mr. Jasmeet Singh were the depositions of five witnesses including Khajan Singh, former Asian Games silver-winning swimmer and DIG, Sports, CRPF, who was overall in charge of the CRPF camp in New Delhi.

Coaches and other weightlifters completed the set of five witnesses brought in by Geeta Rani at the hearing. They all had praise for the international weightlifter, an Arjuna awardee, but could not convincingly support the charge against Nanshita Devi.

Khajan Singh stated that he had made some informal enquiry and found that ‘sabotage’ was a possibility. He said Geeta Rani was “cheated”. On cross-examination, Khajan said: “It was an informal verification rather than an inquiry of a literal sense.”

The CAS arbitrator pointed this out in his order and stated further that Khajan Singh’s inquiry did not reveal how the prohibited substance actually entered the athlete’s system. He also could not show how a “third-party attack by Nanshita Devi might have happened.”

Other witnesses did not find anything suspicious about the behavior of Nanshita Devi.

The panel came to the conclusion that the athlete had been unsuccessful in showing “any act of sabotage or any reason for Nanshita Devi to take a step that would so adversely affect the career of the athlete.”

‘Sabotage’ not proved

Despite its own admission that “sabotage” had not been proved, the panel concluded that the weightlifter was able to show that the ingestion of steroid was unintentional. Accordingly, it ordered a two-year suspension. (An earlier blog piece on that decision is here)

The appeal panel headed by Justice G. C. Bharuka (retd) ruled that since the athletes left their belongings including water in a common change room it was quite “probable” that spiking could have taken place. This inference, it stated, was sufficient to hold that the athlete could not be held guilty of committing anti-doping rule violation intentionally!

NADA could have filed a counter appeal before the Bharuka panel but it did not. It also apparently did not have much to argue against the findings of the ADDP or the arguments made by the appeal panel.

The sole arbitrator of CAS, Prof. Dr. Martin Schimke, Dusseldorf, Germany, quoted from previous CAS panel orders to state: “Mere raising of unverified hypothesis or allegations and speculations as to how the prohibited substance entered the athlete’s body is in no way sufficient proof of how the substance entered such system.”

The sole arbitrator further wrote: “In light of the above and contrary to the findings in the Appealed Decisions, the Sole Arbitrator finds that the Athlete has failed to establish the way in which the Prohibited Substance entered her system and therefore has failed to satisfy her burden of proof with respect to the origin of the prohibited substance. In addition, there are no other exceptional circumstances and /or evidence submitted which could justify the assumption of lack of intent. The violation of the anti-doping rule must therefore be deemed intentional.”

Evidence needed to back charge

Had there been a little more care taken by either of the panels in India the CAS situation could have been avoided. Both Indian panels found no evidence to support a charge of “sabotage”. Both could have accepted, as CAS did, that “sabotage” was always a possibility but an athlete needed evidence to prove such a charge.

NADA finds itself with an additional financial burden which it could not have bargained for. At a time when its resources are beings stretched, it is a setback for the agency which at least now onwards should attempt to present a more detailed case in such instances. An “informal inquiry” by a superior officer of the athlete in question in a police force was considered good enough to establish an allegation that there could have been a “sabotage”. There was no serious attempt by NADA to rebut the arguments put forward by the athlete.

This is the second time CAS has overturned a ‘sabotage’ decision by an Indian panel.  Wrestler Narsingh Yadav was exonerated of a steroid charge prior to the Rio Olympics in 2016 by a panel which accepted his argument that his amino drink was spiked by someone acting on behalf of his close competitor.

Yadav was scheduled to compete in Rio Olympics when CAS overturned the Indian decision and slapped on him a four-year suspension. The wrestler is waiting for a CBI enquiry to be completed and hoping that the investigation would establish his innocence and the ‘sabotage’ theory, possibly leading to a re-opening of the case.

Meldonium has a new name!

What is Mnaapohat? 

Google cannot make anything out of it. Yet, news reports  on Feb 23 have carried that word in relation to the Jithin Paul doping suspension for ‘possession’ of a banned substance.

Since Paul, we know, was charged with “possession” of meldonium, we quickly presume Mnaapohat is either meldonium or else some substance that might contain meldonium.

So, let’s check the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) Prohibited List 2018. A lot many names there are as unpronounceable as Mnaapohat is, but there is no Mnaapohat.

Mnaapohat indeed is meldonium. On a query from this correspondent, James Ellingworth, who writes for AP Business and Sports, mainly covering Russia and countries around that region, conveyed that it was, as suspected, MILDRONAT in Russian. Mildronat of course is Mildronate, the name under which meldonium that is manufactured in Latvia since 1970, is marketed in Russia and several other former Soviet states.

Mildronate was the name with which Maria Sharapova was familiar when she was charged with a meldonium violation in 2016. She served a 15-month ban, reduced from two years on appeal, and is back on the circuit. Meldonium, however, continues to be identified with the Russian tennis superstar.

NADA could easily have got someone to read out an obvious Russian label and mentioned it in its report, that the substance recovered was meldonium.

Paul, national 400m hurdles champion in 2016, Asian Games participant in 2014, and who was also part of Indian 4x400m relay teams in the recent past, has been slapped with a four-year suspension for “possessing” meldonium injection vials.

This is the first time NADA has brought forward a charge of “possession” of a banned substance by an athlete and, as it turned out, succeeded in getting a sanction. The athlete’s lawyers have indicated that they would appeal. Paul only has one appeal at the national level left. After that WADA and the International Association of Athletics Federations (IAAF) will have the right of appeal at the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS).

NADA raid

NADA made the charge that when its officer 'raided' the hostel room occupied by Paul and the 400m runner P. P. Kunhumohammed, he was able to confiscate four different substances, viz Carnitene and  Mnaapohat from Paul and Actovegin and Stimol sachets from Kunhumohammed.

It has not been explained in the order how the recovered substances were attributed to either of the two athletes.

There is a dispute about the quantity of the banned substances as shown on the envelopes in which they were placed and which were signed by the athletes.

L-Carnitine boosts endurance and enhances weight loss while Actovegin, extracted from calf blood, is supposed to help improve stamina. Stimol helps fight fatigue. These three substances are not banned by WADA. Meldonium or Mildronate (Mnaapohat as mentioned in the NADA report as well as the order of the panel) on the other hand, is banned.

Paul claimed that there never was anything called Mnaapohat that was recovered from his room shared with Kunhumohammed. The latter also corroborated that version and so did another athlete, Jeevan K. S. who was reportedly present in the room when the NADA ‘raid’ took place. The athletes claimed that Mnaapohat was never written on the envelopes in their presence. Paul claimed that Mnaapohat was inserted into a small space on one of the envelopes after he had signed it.

NADA claimed otherwise. It dismissed over-writing of number of injection vials as “clerical error” which the panel headed by Mr. Kuldip Singh accepted.

'Procedures not proper'

Paul’s lawyers argued that search and seizure procedures were not conducted as per established practice. They said Paul was never given a copy of the seizure memo giving details of the impounded material. This, they said, was denial of “natural justice”.

NADA also inspected the rooms of shot putter Om Prakash Singh and coaches Radhakrishnan Nair, Mohammed Kunhi, Ashok Kumar and Bhupinder Singh but found nothing, according to the order.

A few important questions arise:

Why did NADA not involve independent witnesses during its search and seizure operations at the NIS, Patiala? At least an NIS officer, a coach from any other discipline, and a police officer or a lawyer might have helped.

Why did it not make a video-recording of the seizures?

Why did it not get all athletes sign on all envelopes?

Why did it not have a separate envelope for Mnaapohat (meldonium), the only substance that was in the Prohibited List?

It is not clear whether NADA has the authority to raid and seize drugs and other substances from the rooms of the athletes or whether law-enforcement agencies are required to be present. May be just a representative from the office of the Drug Controller General of India might have helped. The order does not provide an insight into this aspect.

“Possession of a banned substance” by an athlete or support personnel is difficult to prove.

Code definition

Take for instance the definition that the WADA Code has:

“Possession: The actual, physical Possession, or the constructive Possession (which shall be found only if the Person has exclusive control or intends to exercise control over the Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method or the premises in which a Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method exists); provided, however, that if the Person does not have exclusive control over the Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method or the premises in which a Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method exists, constructive Possession shall only be found if the Person knew about the presence of the Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method and intended to exercise control over it. Provided, however, there shall be no anti-doping rule violation based solely on Possession if, prior to receiving notification of any kind that the Person has committed an anti-doping rule violation, the Person has taken concrete action demonstrating that the Person never intended to have Possession and has renounced Possession by explicitly declaring it to an Anti-Doping Organization. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in this definition, the purchase (including by any electronic or other means) of a Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method constitutes Possession by the Person who makes the purchase.”

The order does not give us an idea about how “possession” was established. Was the athlete having “exclusive control” of the substance or the premises? (Forgetting for a moment the claim of the athletes that meldonium was never recovered from the room No. 11 of the Milkha Singh Hostel at the NIS)

On the other hand, if the athlete contends that NADA “framed” him and the meldonium that was tested at the laboratory was obtained by the agency, then the question of its origin will come. Was it purchased online since it is not easily available in India? Can it be traced to a location abroad?

This is not the first time NADA has “raided” hostel rooms of athletes at Patiala and Bengaluru. It has happened in the past, though no charge was brought up and we don’t have details of anything that had been impounded if at all.

The question also would arise why NADA should be interested in ‘framing’ an Indian athlete in the national camp. Why not “frame” several others also?

Conspiracy?

There is a mention about a “conspiracy” being alleged by the athlete in the order.

“Athlete further submits that he has been targeted. There are utterances in the camp that there is a conspiracy to unsettle the 4x400 meter men relay team which (h)as performed well during the last 8-10 months”.

This is shocking. Why should there be a conspiracy to unsettle an Indian team? And why just the 4x400m relay team?

The general impression has been NADA has not been diligent in testing track and field athletes, out of competition or in-competition, in recent times.

Obviously, NADA would tighten its “seizure” procedures from now on. Witnesses are a must; a detailed inventory is a must. Instead of just getting signatures on an envelope, NADA would do well to also prepare a separate document, even if hand-written on the spot, and mention drugs recovered and get it signed by athlete/s, witnesses and the NADA officer making the seizure.

Just as this case at the disciplinary panel stage was interesting it would be interesting all over again if an appeal is filed.

Will AFI stick to its selection norms for CWG?

An early Indian track and field season is set to start_Pic courtsey G. Rajaraman

The Commonwealth Games has a quota system for the first time. For 2018, it is a “hybrid and transitional” model. For 2022, it would be through a full quota system. The games in Gold Coast in April would be based on a qualification and 

‘’open-entry’’ system.

Athletics, for example, will continue to have an upper limit of three athletes per event with only the road events (marathon and racewalking) having minimum entry standards. Yet, the overall numbers per country would be determined by an allocated quota.

In the new system of quota allocation for the Commonwealth Games, athletics, at 37, has been sanctioned the maximum number of entries for India by the Commonwealth Games Federation (CGF) under its revised formula, according to a TOI report.

Initially, as per the report, Indian athletics had 30 quota slots but now there are seven more. Strangely, there is also a men-women break-up prescribed by the CGF, 24 men and 13 women. These numbers look lop-sided at the moment, keeping in mind the current standards and the performances four years ago.

3 medals in Glasgow

The last time at Glasgow, the Indian athletics team was 32-member strong. It returned a tally of one gold (discus thrower Vikas Gowda), one silver (discus thrower Seema Antil) and one bronze (triple jumper Arpinder Singh). Around eight to ten medals were projected from the athletics team on that occasion.

Having had a tough time explaining its selection process to the courts, the media and the public last year when a few “automatic” qualifiers (by becoming Asian champions) were excluded from the team to the World Championships in London, the Athletics Federation of India (AFI) has, for a change, announced the selection criteria for the Commonwealth and Asian Games this year in advance.

Unfortunately, while announcing what it termed “qualifying guidelines” for selection to the Commonwealth and Asian Games, the AFI did not specify the ‘qualification period’. Chief coach Bahadur Singh has since explained the rationale.

As explained in an earlier piece , there is nothing rigid about AFI’s selection criteria (for want of a better expression, we will call them ‘selection criteria’). In the past, too, the federation had announced such norms but when the eventual teams were chosen, there never was any guarantee that the criteria would be adhered to.

With the Sports Minister apparently keen to have a sizeable contingent, the AFI might not have to chop and change the team and we can hope that it would fill up the 37 places offered. How it would go about it, is to be seen only.

Will all 37 athletes achieve the norms laid down by the AFI or will there be concessions? If there is concession in one event, can another athlete in another event be expected to keep quiet? Or will he/she approach the courts as Kerala’s P. U. Chithra did last year and Anu Raghvan, also of Kerala, did in the Olympic year?

High criteria

The AFI has kept the CWG criteria high, rather very high in certain events. For example, the women’s 100m. At 11.15s, it looks beyond the reach of even Dutee Chand, who, however, is determined to not only make it to the team but also do her best at the Gold Coast games.

The hitch for Dutee could be not just the criterion but lack of support from the federation as she put it according to this report

In 17 of the 42 individual events at the games, the AFI-stipulated guidelines are better than the Indian national records.

The following are these norms (national records within parenthesis):

Men: 100m 10.16s (10.30s, 10.26s unratified), 200m 20.35s (20.66s), 400m 45.30s (45.32*), 5000m 13:25.00 (13:29.70), 10,000m 28: 00.00 (28:02.89), 3000m steeplechase 8:20.00 (8:30.88), 400m hurdles 49.45s (49.51s), pole vault 5.45m (5.14m*), hammer 71.00m (70.73*), decathlon 8000 (7658).

Women: 100m 11.15s (11.30s, 11.24s unratified), 200m 22.60s (22.82s), 5000m 15:09.00 (15:15.89), marathon 2:30:14 (2:34:43), 100m hurdles 13.05s (13.38), hammer 68.72m (65.25*), javelin 62.50m (61.86m).

(* denotes yet-to-be-ratified performances)

In at least two other men’s events the targets may prove to be stiffer than others, the 1:46.00 in the 800m and the 2:12:50 in men's marathon.

Apart from Sriram Singh who clocked 1:45.77 in the Montreal Olympics final in 1976, the only other Indian athlete to clock a sub-1:46 in the 800m is Jinson Johnson who timed 1:45.98 in Bengaluru to make the grade for the Rio Olympic Games. All others have timings above 1:46 in the all-time lists. Johnson’s second best (1:46.43) is also below the CWG standard.

There is no one close to late Shivnath Singh’s 1978 marathon timing of 2:12:00. Thonakal Gopi (2:15:25) who could be a contender for the CWG slot, irrespective of his timings, and Kheta Ram (2:15.26) are the next best.

In several other events, too, the task for the Indian athletes look a lot tougher than that could have been the case had the CWG come later in the season rather than in April. To once peak in March and then again towards July the same year for the Asian Games is a daunting task, though our athletes are not totally unfamiliar with such double ‘periodisation’.

May prefer Asian Games

Many of the leading athletes may find it more profitable to concentrate on their Asian Games preparations than strain themselves in aiming for the stiff CWG marks. A medal in the Asian Games is easier to achieve than in the CWG in a majority of the events for Indian athletes.

The personal bests of some of the active athletes and the AFI guidelines for the CWG are listed below just to provide an idea about the tough task that awaits the Commonwealth Games aspirants:

Men: 100m-criterion 10.16s (Amiya Mallick 10.26s, V. K. Elakiyadasan 10.31), 200m-20.35s (Elakiyadasan 20.92s), 5000m-13:25.00 (G. Lakshmanan 13:35.69), 10,000m-28:00.00 (G. Lakshmanan 29:16.21), 3000m steeplechase-8:20.00 (Avinash Sable 8:39.81), Pole vault-5.45m (S. Siva 5.14m), Decathlon-8000 points (Abhishek Shetty 6991).

Women: 100m-11.15s (Dutee Chand 11.30s, also a ‘doubtful’ 11.24s in Almaty in 2016), 200m-22.60s (Srabani Nanda 23.34s), 1500m-4:10.00 (P. U. Chithra 4:17.92), 5000m-15:09.00 (L. Suriya 15:39.18), 10,000m-32:30.00 (Sanjivani Jadhav 33:14.16), 100m hurdles-13.05s (Purnima Hembram 13.72s), 400m hurdles-56.00s (Anu Raghavan 57.21s), triple jump-13.90m (N. V. Sheena 13.58m), shot put-17.00m (Navjeet Kaur Dhillon 15.89m), hammer-68.72m (Sarita Prakash 65.25m).

There are others who look capable of achieving these criteria, given the fact that they have either been consistent around such marks or achieved comparable or better marks last year. They include (with marks in 2017):

Men: 400m-45.30s (Muhammed Anas 45.32s), 110m hurdles-13.55s (Siddhanth Thingalaya 13.48s), high jump-2.25m (Tejaswin Shankar 2.26m), Long jump-8.00m (Ankit Sharma 7.96m), triple jump-16.60m (Arpinder Singh 16.75m), shot put-20.20m (Tejinder Pal Singh Toor 20.40m), discus-62.00m (Vikas Gowda 62.35m)

Women: 400m-52.00s (Nirmala Sheoran 51.28s, Jisna Mathew 52.65s, M. R. Poovamma 52.66s), Pole vault-4.00m (Vakharia Khyati 4.10m), high jump-1.90m (Swapna Barman 1.87m), long jump-6.45m (V. Neena 6.54m, Nayana James 6.55m), Heptathlon-5826 (Swapna Braman 5942, Purnima Hembram 5798).

It is not clear at this point whether the Union Sports Ministry would stick to the sixth-place criteria it announced for multi-discipline games in 2015. Except for that in the men’s 5000m (sixth place 13:22.32 as against AFI norm of 13:25.00), all other marks fixed by the AFI for CWG are better than the sixth-place result of the Glasgow Commonwealth Games. In fact, in many events, if the sixth-place criteria were to be applied then there could be more qualifiers than the AFI would be able to accommodate!

Tough to fill up 24 places

Hopefully, the AFI would stick to its guidelines especially after the uproar that the Chithra exclusion caused at the time of the London World championships. Filling up 24 places in the men’s section might be difficult, though, unless the AFI is planning to enter both the relay teams.

The men’s 4x100m guideline has been pegged at 38.35s (fourth place of 2014 games) which is better than the national record of 38.89s that India clocked at the 2010 Commonwealth Games in New Delhi for a surprise bronze. The best by an Indian team in recent times has been the 39.86s that it clocked in Almaty in 2016. The norms in the men and women’s 4x400m, 3:02.17 and 3:32.45 respectively, should be attainable.

Javelin thrower Neeraj Chopra, one should presume, has already clinched his place in the Gold Coast-bound team with his performance of 82.80m at Offenburg, Germany, on Feb 3. The selection criterion is 81.80m. He seems to have stuck to his German base, at least for the time being, instead of coming under the guidance of former world record holder Uwe Hohn who is in India.

Talking of javelin, it is disturbing to note that Devender Singh Kang, who was the lone Indian athlete to make the final at last year’s World Championships, hit a ‘low’ with an effort of 75.87 (gold) at the Asian Games test event at Jakarta this month. Kang had registered a personal best 84.57m at Patiala last year when he also had six other marks over 80 metres. Kang is currently facing an anti-doping rule violation charge though he has not been provisionally suspended which is the case with national women’s shot put record-holder Manpreet Kaur.

Racewalkers selected

The AFI has named four racewalkers for the Commonwealth Games after the National championships in New Delhi. National record holder K. T. Irfan and Rio Olympian Manish Singh Rawat in the men’s 20km, the new national champion Baby Soumya and former national record holder and the most experienced woman walker Khushbir Kaur in the women’s 20km have gained selection. All of them easily surpassed the AFI guidelines. 

Soumya’s improvement from a 1:41 walker to a 1:31 walker is significant. If the Kerala woman maintains form she, along with Khushbir, should be among the medal contenders in Gold Coast.

Indian athletes will have only limited opportunities to make the cut for the Commonwealth Games. The first one comes in the form of the Indian Grand Prix at Patiala on Feb 27. Then there will be the Federation Cup from March 5 to 8. That will be the final ‘selection trials’ for the Commonwealth Games. As in the past, the federation is making it mandatory for athletes to compete in the Fed Cup to gain selection. Those who have achieved the guidelines would be expected to maintain their form close to those marks during the meet. At least on paper, that is the argument. It need not always materialize that way.

Sometime ago, the AFI had held out the threat that those who stayed away from camps would not be eligible to compete in the ‘selection trials’. It is to be seen whether this remains just a threat or not.

The 2016 season produced some stunning performances just in time to make the qualification for the Rio Olympics. We know what happened afterwards. It is to be hoped the Rio Olympic qualification race or even the 2017 World Championships one will not be repeated in attempting to make the Gold Coast cut. One also expects the National Anti-Doping Agency (NADA) to do a thorough job of monitoring the performance of the athletes getting ready for the two games this season. Keeping away from championships, as NADA did last season, will prove disastrous. Inflated performances at home invariably get exposed on the bigger stage.