Golf, Drugs And Denial

PT-AH058_Golf1_20071130160022.jpgIt occurred to me in reading John Paul Newport's WSJ column summarizing the latest on drug testing in golf that the people who touted the sport's nobility really sound more and more absurd as you hear doctor's quoted about the potential benefits of performance enhancing drugs.

'Clearly a golfer doesn't want to develop the physique of a Division I linebacker. That would be detrimental," Dr. Yesalis says. "But a 170-pound player could use low doses of steroids or a testosterone cream to help him add 15 pounds of lean, flexible muscle to his body. Please tell me how that wouldn't help him to hit the ball farther."

In such low doses, Dr. Yesalis said, steroids would have negligible if any effect on a golfer's ability to concentrate or stay calm -- another contention frequently made by those who argue that golf and doping are inherently incompatible.
I found this surprising. So much for my argument about testing to protect the children. Sort of: 
Nor would they necessarily be detrimental to the golfer's long-term health. Synthetic hormones like human growth hormone, or HGH, which also would be banned under the Tour's testing protocols, are routinely prescribed by doctors for middle-age people looking to build or retain strength.

For golfers, one of the prime benefits of low-dose steroids or HGH would be to let them practice longer. Long sessions at the range produce microtears in the body's tissues. Especially as players get older, slow recovery from these sessions is an obstacle to performance. Banned drugs could speed up the recuperation.
And...
The tradition of golfers playing by the rules and even calling penalties on themselves is undoubtedly one of the game's grandest and most admirable attributes. But given the increasing sophistication of every other aspect of player performance these days, from advanced physical and mental-game training to precise, technology-aided club fitting, how long can it be before at least a few players give in to the temptation of better living through chemistry? If they haven't already.

"The procedure is strict and more than a little humiliating."

112807doc.jpgThe WSJ's Skip Rozin pens an op-ed piece on the ins-and-outs of drug testing, focusing on the standards labs face. Here's something the PGA Tour's finest have to look forward thanks to all of that hard work they've put in at the gym to help them hit it longer in spite of their equipment:
The procedure is strict and more than a little humiliating. The athlete is accompanied to the testing area by a trained collector of the same gender and provides the sample within plain view. Quoting from WADA regulations: "The athlete must remove all clothing between the waist and mid-thigh, in order that the witness has an unobstructed view of sample provision." The athlete then watches as the sample is split into two bottles--labeled "A" and "B"--sealed in a package to be shipped to the lab. 

"Somebody's built a better mousetrap already."

Okay, the George O'Grady line about testing Tiger first and if he's clean, why does it matter, was cute. One of those fun comments that seems so clever at the time, and upon further reflection, remarkably short-sighted.

Sadly, Jim Litke of AP (who normally gets it right) takes the bait again in wheeling out the tired argument that pro golfers are God's gift to integrity because they call penalties on themselves, therefore, they would never pop a pill or light up a joint. And furthermore, there really aren't that many benefits to using performance enhancing drugs in golf.

I'm going to get political for a moment, so you know where to send your hate mail.

Climate change. Let's assume cynics are right and it's all a bunch of malarkey. Yet, the only people against adopting cleaner energy to help with the problem and perhaps even make it harder for our friends in Dubai to build another mile long shopping center, are those who stand to benefit from the status quo. To a majority of folks, cleaner energy is both a common sense solution to the problem and simply the right thing to do.

Now, if the folks in professional golf love children as much as they claim, isn't drug testing the right thing to do if you want to deter kids from using potentially harmful performance enhancing drugs, even if everyone on the PGA Tour is clean as a whistle and always has been? 

I continue to be amazed that in debating this issue, the notion of discouraging the next generation from harming themselves consistently gets missed.  

"Right now, we'll have to punt on that question"

Steve Elling weaves together an interesting contrast between the PGA Tour's announced drug testing policy and the LPGA's, which appears a bit more organized and a whole lot tougher. Check this out:
A player who tests positive after a tournament faces disqualification, having their results expunged and the revocation of their winnings -- not to mention a lengthy suspension. If a player fails a test administered during the week she won an event, the runner-up will be declared the victor. If two players tied for second behind a player who tests positive, the one who recorded the lowest score on Sunday is declared the winner. If multiple runner-ups posted the same score in the final round, officials will match scorecards to determine the default winner. Bizarre as that scenario sounds, the PGA Tour hasn't determined how it will solve a comparable issue and will wait until February to address the various hypotheticals of testing. "Right now, we'll have to punt on that question," spokesman Bob Combs said Wednesday. The men's tour won't start testing until July.

"That (report) got some attention" **

The first reactions are in on the PGA Tour's Tuesday announcement and it's apparent there are a few questions that need to be raised.

Gary Van Sickle analyzes the changes (or lack thereof) to the FedEx Cup and notes the inclusion of marijuana and cocaine on the banned list. He also isn't too wild about the Tour's decision not to deal with FedEx Cup points.

Steve Elling asks what took so long to rejig the schedule. Of course, with not even a cosmetic change in the points structure and no decision on tweaks to the playoff points structure, you have to wonder if the particulars of a drug testing program have overwhelmed the boys in Ponte Vedra.

I find it inexplicable that the playoff points volatility was not addressed. Now, Elling points out in his piece that this will be revisited in February, as does Doug Ferguson in his recap, but a major sports organization of the Tour's caliber should not be tinkering with a playoff format midseason.

Buried late in Elling's column is this little shocker regarding the change in FedEx Cup payout and Finchem's gabfest with writers following the PGA Tour's media summit:

Finchem said governmental pressures contributed to the tour's decision to back away from giving the FedEx winner's bonus out in deferred payment. Instead, next year, the winner will receive $9 million in cash and $1 million in deferred payment. Elected representatives in Washington, D.C., are taking a long, dim look at large deferred payment plans, Finchem said.

One publication reported that if Woods won six FedExs Cup titles, he would have a $1 billion nest egg by the time he retired, based on earnings projections.

"That (report) got some attention," Finchem laughed.

Should be interesting to see if anyone pursues this angle.

I wonder if this hits at some of the complaints players like Sean Murphy have had about the deferred compensation? 

Has The USGA Got It's Groove Study Results Back?

...on the news that the PGA Tour is honing in on a drug testing program and penalties for violators.

Who would have ever thought, based on Commissioner Finchem's reluctance, that the PGA Tour would adopt a comprehensive policy and appear close to putting it in place before the USGA officially deemed U-grooves non-conforming or finished its golf ball study?

Things sure have been quiet on the groove front considering the USGA first announced this in February.

Might the R&A be getting cold feet? Has a manufacturer (other than the Ping dudes) threaten to sue after reading the USGA's documentation? Or did all of the manufacturers actually use their brains and realize that what seemed like a fun idea (new irons and wedges for everyone!) was actually setting a disastrous precedent by rolling back equipment and opening the door for the end-of-the-world scenario: a ball rollback?

Thoughts? 

Leaks On First FedEx Cup Tweaks

Golfweek's Rex Hoggard has the scoop on the changes under consideration, one of which sounds excellent, the other I'm not so wild about.

During an Oct. 16 meeting in Scottsdale, Ariz., commissioner Tim Finchem told the 16-member PAC that the FedEx Cup, which he proclaimed a “success” in its first year, needed only “minor tweaks” in 2008. Sources told Golfweek.com one of those possible adjustments would be reducing playoff fields; the other would be altering the schedule so that the FedEx playoffs and the Ryder Cup Matches (Sept. 19-21 at Valhalla Golf Club in Louisville, Ky.) would not be staged in five consecutive weeks.

Instead, under one proposal, top competitors would play the first two playoff events (The Barclays, Aug. 21-24, and Deutsche Bank Championship, Aug. 29-Sept. 1) as scheduled, have a week off, play the third playoff event (BMW Championship) and then the Ryder Cup. The Tour Championship, now scheduled for Sept. 11-14, would be moved to Sept. 25-28, on the heels of the Ryder Cup.
Okay, that's a winner. That off week should make it tough for guys to skip an event. Should. 
Among the changes for ’08, the Tour is considering reducing the number of players that qualify for the circuit’s four-event “playoff” series. The proposal presented to PAC members was to trim playoff field sizes to 120 players for The Barclays (144 were eligible this year); 90 for the Deutsche Bank Championship (from120); 60 for the BMW Championship (from 70); and the traditional 30 for the Tour Championship. That’s a reduction of 64 total spots from this year’s playoffs.

The trim from 144 to 120 is a no-brainer, but I don't know about you, but I'm growing bored with all of these limited field events, their typically lackluster finishes and reduced playing opportunities. Granted, Tiger's partially to blame for being so much better than everyone and blowing away those limited fields, but I'd vote for leaving the other field sizes as they were while ramping up the point system volatility.

Hoggard also details the first rumored drug policy penalties:

The Tour’s anti-doping policy is expected to have plenty of teeth. According to one PAC member who wished not to be identified, potential punishments for positive tests would be a $5,000 fine for the first offense; a one-year suspension for a second positive test; and a lifetime ban from the PGA Tour, and presumably all members of the Federation of PGA Tours, for a third strike.

The proposed anti-doping legislation announced late last month has  universal support among i the game’s  governing bodies. A positive test and resultant punishment would apply to all of the game’s major championships, as well as on all of the world’s primary tours.

Included among the Tour’s “model prohibited substances and methods list,” are anabolic agents, such as testosterone, as well as beta-blockers, which diminish the effects of adrenaline and narcotics. 

"The sport that already lost complete control of the equipment manufacturers who have juiced the tools and taken a certain element of skill out of the game is now trying to regulate what its performers put into their bodies."

Scott Michaux in the Augusta Chronicle is the first major columnist to note that we have equipment on steroids and golf is opening up a major can of worms with drug testing first. He doesn't quite go all the way and ask why the folks in charge aren't taking a look at equipment in conjunction with the drug testing, or perhaps asking if they may be encouraging performance enhancing drug use by attributing distance gains to athleticism, but he still earns big points for at least noting that it got away from certain governing bodies.
In short, golf was forced to act like every other sport in the modern era.

One simple question - why?

It doesn't make much sense. The sport that already lost complete control of the equipment manufacturers who have juiced the tools and taken a certain element of skill out of the game is now trying to regulate what its performers put into their bodies.

If this was just about illegal steroids, it would be understandable. The whole idea of creating artificial strength - at a potential cost to personal health - is unseemly. Since other sports are failing every day to try to regulate that brand of performance enhancers, why not join the club for appearances sake.

But golf is stepping into an even murkier realm trying to regulate drugs that decrease heart rate, sharpen attention or increase stamina - basically all the things the pharmaceutical companies have trained us to do in our everyday lives. This is where the whole system leaves the rails.

"Why are so many players lifting weights if strength doesn't help?"

eqar01_golftechsteroids.jpgIf you've followed the steroid story in golf, you know that most players and certain administrators believed there was no problem and no benefit in using performance enhancing drugs. Others have said that may be true and everyone may be clean, but how can you know without testing? Still another school has said there is evidence that certain drugs or steroids could be beneficial, and if nothing else, a policy should be in place.

And then there are blowhards like me who have found the "we play golf, therefore we are honest" response downright offensive. Especially considering that we've seen a big jump in distance in recent years that most of golf's administrators attributed to increased athleticism. Yet somehow with those dubious claims, we are to expect today's youth to sit idly by and just work hard in the gym?

So if nothing else, you test, for the children!

Yet no matter where you stand, I think it would be hard to come away from reading Matthew Rudy's piece in the October Golf Digest, still insisting that beta blockers can't possibly work or that designer steroids will not help a golfer. Yes, it's clear Rudy has a bias: he talked to many people and heard an overwhelming consensus, then reported it.

I highly recommend reading the story, but because this is my clipping archive and you never know when Golf Digest's archives will vanish overnight, here are some of the highlights along with clips from Dr. Grant Liu's excellent guest sidebar on antidepressants.

But a wide cross section of scientific experts, trainers and instructors say [Gary] Player is neither crazy nor wrong. Many of them not only believe performance-enhancing drugs would significantly help golfers, but that far more than the approximately 10 pros Player estimated to be taking drugs are using them to recover from injuries quickly and hit the ball longer.

How many more? As many as half of the top 100 players in the world, according to one prominent trainer.

Even if the true number is closer to zero than 50, it's clear that the idea of professional golf not needing to worry about steroids is as outdated as the notion that golfers aren't athletes. "The reality is that the public is slowly coming to the view that performance-enhancing substances are prolific in sports," says PGA Tour Commissioner Tim Finchem, who is expected to announce a set of anti-doping rules for the tour later this year. "Whether we have an issue or not doesn't matter if people think we have one."

And this on the specifics, which will help those players who immediately shrug off the steroid concept thinking that today's designer drugs are only designed to make you bigger.

It's easy to lump steroids into one general "they make you more muscular" category, but different performance-enhancing drugs produce dramatically different effects. Drugs that athletes would use for help fall into four main categories: anabolic steroids, synthetic hormones, beta-blockers and stimulants.

Anabolic steroids like synthetic testosterone are the workhorses of the performance-enhancing drug world. "When you put your body under constant physical stress, it releases substances called corticosteroids," says Dr. Charles Yesalis, author of Anabolic Steroids in Sport and Exercise. "They're the most powerful anti-inflammatories in history. But corticosteroids break down muscle tissues as they work."

Anabolic steroids block the muscles from being broken down, allowing an athlete to train longer, recover faster from that training and build more muscle mass. For a golfer, that means being able to hit more practice balls -- and do it more often.

Powerful injected anabolics like stanzolol and deca-durabolin can produce body builder-type gains when taken in conjuction with an aggressive workout regimen. Testosterone creams that are spread on the body before a workout help generate smaller amounts of lean muscle.

Hormone drugs like HGH and EPO have had a central role in the ongoing controversy in baseball. HGH is synthetic human-growth hormone -- the substance responsible for bone growth and tissue health -- and it is commonly prescribed for its anti-aging effects. EPO is the synthetic form of a natural substance in the body, erythropoietin, that promotes red blood-cell production and increases the cells' ability to carry more oxygen -- both of which give an athlete more endurance.

Fast forward to this, along the same lines...

Some drug experts, trainers and other teachers call the idea that a golfer wouldn't benefit from getting stronger naïve. "Tell me a sport where a good big man doesn't beat a good little man," says Yesalis, who has researched steroid use in sports for almost 30 years. "Why are so many players lifting weights if strength doesn't help? Tiger Woods started training seriously when he came out on tour, and he's put on 15 to 20 pounds of muscle. I don't hear anybody saying getting stronger hasn't helped him."

Dr. Jim Suttie, former PGA Teacher of the Year, gives a qualified endorsement of that view: "There's no doubt steroids build muscle and increase strength," says Suttie, who holds a Ph.D. in biomechanics. "Bigger muscles mean more explosive core strength, more explosive hip strength, more arm strength." Suttie believes players taking steroids would be able to hit the ball longer -- provided they didn't get too bulky and lose flexibility.

The first piece of any golf doping regimen involves ambitious weight training and cardio work. Anabolic steroids have no effect on a player who isn't adding muscle by working out.

Hey maybe all the guys were working out to keep up with their...oh just kidding.

The chemical component most commonly mentioned by trainers and experts interviewed for this story was a 5 percent testosterone cream, applied just before each workout. A week's supply of that cream would cost approximately $40. "That level of steroid would have minimal side effects," says Yesalis. "Certainly nothing that would prevent a golfer from being able to concentrate on the course. At least five different studies have shown that doses far, far larger than this cause no psychological response."

Experts estimate a player could generate 10 percent more clubhead speed using testosterone cream in addition to working out. That translates into roughly 30 more yards of carry for a tour player swinging at 110 miles per hour with a driver. Managed with expert supervision, a player could get the benefits from that relatively small amount of testosterone without even triggering a positive result on a drug test.

"The best players aren't going to be testing positive for steroids," says Randy Myers, who trains more than a dozen tour players. "Small doses of impact drugs -- HGH, things like that -- that's what the modern athlete is doing. It's barely testable, and it doesn't bulk you up. It builds explosive muscle, which is what all golfers want."

Doubters, doesn't that pretty much say it all?

Doctors routinely prescribe HGH to middle-age men to help fight muscle loss and increase suppleness -- two things that would obviously help a player prolong a competitive career. HGH is widely available on the Internet illegally without a prescription, or an athlete could visit an anti-aging clinic, where a physician-supervised HGH and nutrition regimen can run more than $15,000 a year. "You've got a small window of opportunity in sports, and players are threatened with the loss of millions of dollars if they don't perform," says Yesalis. "You don't think that would tempt somebody to go to the 'dark side,' so to speak? As competitive as golf is, people are going to be doing this just to keep their job."

Myers says he believes no more than a handful of tour players are using performance-enhancing drugs, but that group includes players who could be doing so unknowingly. "There are trainers out there that nobody knows anything about," says Myers, who has trained tour players since 1989. "There's a lot of money at stake, and players pay bonuses to trainers, teachers and psychologists for things like major championships and money-list finish. There's a lot of pressure on trainers, for sure, to not just show results, but show them fast."

Accompanying the piece was this sidebar from the University of Pennsylvania's Dr. Grant Liu who breaks down what today's "mind enhancers" can do.

A class of drugs called "mind enhancers" poses a greater potential for abuse in golf than do steroids. Mind enhancers, such as antidepressants and anti-anxiety agents, are legitimate drugs with medical uses, but their effects make up a veritable wish list for the ambitious golfer. They can increase focus, dampen emotional extremes and reduce anxiety. Plus, they're more available than steroids, and there's less of a stigma associated with taking them.

BETA-BLOCKERS / example: Inderal / These blood-pressure medications are sometimes used by performers to deal with stage fright. The golf application would be to battle nerves or the yips. These drugs have been studied in Post-traumatic Stress Disorder, and could help golfers get over a crushing loss.

Oh but Nick Price, like, 15 years ago used them and he said they didn't help, so forget it!

AMPHETAMINES / example: Adderall / This group of stimulants promotes alertness and focus and is commonly prescribed to treat Attention Deficit Disorder. They're often used illegally by students taking the SATs or final exams. The golf goal could be better concentration during a round.

ANTIDEPRESSANTS AND MOOD DRUGS / example: Prozac /These mood elevators and stabilizers combat stress and depression and help people control emotions. Think of the golfer who dramatizes mistakes, like the missed three-footer.

No, not us golfers.

BENZODIAZEPINES / example: Valium / This class of anti-anxiety drugs is prescribed to treat phobias, such as fear of crowds or closed spaces. In golf, fear of on-course situations or consequences can be crippling. Imagine a Ryder Cup rookie needing to take the edge off on the first tee.

And this definitely says it all...

Would golfers really take these drugs? Consider that many people today use medications to enhance their appearance, performance or lifestyle. For example, Viagra, indicated for erectile dysfunction, is used by 20-somethings to increase sexual prowess. Botox, a drug for neurological disorders, is commonly injected to smooth wrinkles.

"If Tiger Woods' test comes back negative, what does it matter what the rest of them are on?"

The European Tour's George O'Grady held court at Royal Montreal and dazzled writers with some prime one-liners on various issues, including the performance enhancing drug issue. Steve Elling reports:

O'Grady estimated that drug tests will cost $1,000 per player, which makes the possibility of testing an entire European Tour field all but impossible. The PGA Tour will have that luxury, conversely, if it elects to head in that direction. Many of the particulars on testing and penalties are still in flux and financials will doubtlessly play a huge role in how much urinalysis is done on the various worldwide circuits.

"So it's not so simple as pissing into a pot and moving on," O'Grady said. "We cannot write off a million pounds. We don't have that kind of money."
And this beauty...
 Prodded by a reporter, O'Grady also unleashed a half-serious zinger with regard to the drug testing program, which is being initiated as much to protect the sport's reputation as it is to catch what's assumed to be a tiny handful of cheaters, if any.

Just test Tiger Woods and be done with it.

"From what I understand, he would be the first in line to volunteer for testing," O'Grady said. "If Tiger Woods' test comes back negative, what does it matter what the rest of them are on?

Can you imagine the notoriously cautious and professionally stiff Finchem uttering any of the above? Didn't think so.

 

Newsflash From The City: Dick Pound Is Still Not Happy!

From the wires...

World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) chief Dick Pound praised golf for aiming to rid the sport of doping, but balked Thursday at the World Golf Foundation's use of its own performance-enhancing substances list.

"Two or three months ago, the PGA was denying that there was ever a problem in golf," Pound said in a conference call. So, "there is quite a lot of progress that's been made."

Actually, they still suggest it's not a problem, and without testing, who is to argue with them?
"It's very disappointing to us, however, that they would not use (the WADA) list" of banned substances, he added.

US PGA Tour commissioner Tim Finchem earlier announced that golf's top professional players would face random drug tests beginning in 2008.

The list of banned substances is similar to one released by the women's LPGA Tour in March, including most muscle-building steroids and adrenaline-diminishing beta-blockers.

But it does not include substances that, Finchem said, do not enhance performance in golf.

"I don't understand that, unless it's simply organizational testosterone - they can't be seen to accept anyone else's list," Pound lamented.

"My question to golf would be: Is there anything on the list under the world anti-doping code that you think your players should be able to take?

"And if there is, then golf should indicate what they think their athletes should be able to take that the rest of the athletes around the world can't."
It's hard to get as worked up as Dick when you see that they have added some pretty significant stuff to the golf list, as Doug Ferguson reported:
The list of banned substances includes anabolic agents, hormones, stimulants, narcotics, beta blockers and masking agents. Golf did not adopt the World Anti-Doping Association list because Finchem said it would cause an additional administrative burden and “we do not consider the substances in any way impactful as a performance enhancement.”

Thomas Bonk talks to Dr. Gary Wadler, a member of a World Anti-Doping Agency committee, who is much more upbeat about the testing list than Pound:

"I applaud the PGA Tour and all of the other bodies in professional golf," he said. "I've said on many occasions, there's no sport that's inherently immune to doping. It's a sad commentary, but it's true."

And...

The number of prohibited substances and methods represents only a small percentage of what is banned by WADA. Its lengthy doping list is a 19-page document. While WADA chair Dick Pound said the entire list should have been adopted by professional golf, PGA Tour Commissioner Tim Finchem said some substances were not included because of high testing costs and their irrelevance to golf.

Wadler said the inclusion of hormones on the banned list could be interpreted as testing for human growth hormone, which he said needed to be on every professional sports anti-doping list.

"It sounds to me as if they should not try to reinvent the wheel when that wheel has already been invented, so it sounds as if they used the World Anti-Doping Agency's prohibited list as a guide, and that's good," he said.

"Will they really be minding their pees and queues?"

Steve Elling raises an essential question to the drug testing policy: will there be full or even partial disclosure?

Given how the testing issue relates to the PGA Tour, the most economically influential circuit in the history of the game, not to mention the most public-relations paranoid, here's something else to keep in mind.

Will they really be minding their pees and queues?

Make no mistake, the implementation of drug testing is mostly about maintaining appearances, not that there's anything wrong with that, per se. Thankfully, there has been zero evidence that any notable player has taken performance-enhancing substances over the years. Still, the tours decided to be "proactive," as they put it.
And... 
For years, Finchem has been prodded about revising the PGA Tour's absurd policy relating to the disclosure of fines, suspensions and player discipline. For example, Woods has been known to brag -- that probably isn't the right term, exactly -- that he has been fined more often than any other player in history for using four-letter words during TV broadcasts.

As the world tours study over the coming weeks how best to sanction players for potential performance-enhancing violations -- the sanctions darned well better be meaningful, starting with a first offense -- the folks in Paranoia Vedra might want to weigh this related issue as well.

Fast forward...

If Finchem's emissaries are pointedly asked whether a player has been suspended because of a blood-doping violation, how will they answer? Forget player privacy issues. Finchem can't afford to be so fiercely protective of the integrity of the tour and its individual contestants.

Competitors, if not fans and sponsors, have the right to know who's playing by the rules. Without working myself into a 'roid rage here, the bottom line on this drug-testing beaker is as clear as the glass container itself.

In an individual sport like golf, protecting a cheater is the same as the act of cheating itself.

Use the juice, get cut loose. Then make sure everybody knows about it.

"But for the problems in other sports, I doubt we would be at this point."

The press conference on the "anti-doping" policies demonstrated that our governing bodies and assorted tours are on the same page. But I continue to be fascinated by Commissioner Finchem's stance on how this all came about. 

Q. If you don't mind me paraphrasing, you've always said that there was no evidence of any performance-enhancing drug use, and the honor system of golf, etc. All that said and wherever you are today, do you consider this a landmark day for golf or a sad day for golf?

TIM FINCHEM: Well, I think that as everybody else has spoken, it's a day where we are going to be proactive in light of the realities of what's happening in sport. But for the problems in other sports, I doubt we would be at this point.

But certainly the problems in other sports have created a growing perception among fans that athletes generally in many cases, in the minds of many fans who utilize substances that in other sports are banned. Now we don't ban substances in our sport, but when you combine that in the reality that for example, in the case of The European Tour, they have to undergo testing protocols because governments are requiring that they do; as does the LPGA in some instances, all of these things argue for moving forward.

I think it doesn't mean we like it and it does mean we are concerned about shifting the culture of the sport from one where you know the rules and you play by the rules, and if you violate the rules, you call a penalty on yourself; to if you engage in testing, perhaps creating the specter that an organization doesn't trust what the player says, which is certainly not the case.

So we are going to have to work hard on that point, but we are where we are given the way of the world and I think it's a positive day for golf because we are, A, together; B, we are spending a lot of energy to do it right. We are learning from watching what the other sports have done that in some cases have not been perhaps the right thing to do. It's taken them awhile to get it right, and we've been quite deliberate about where we're headed. And all of these things I think are positive. I think that's a positive message for the game.

"We are where we are given the way of the world." 

Okay, I can see that. Just like Jake could see the logic of Elwood trading the Blues mobile for a microphone.

However, let's ponder this for a moment. And to longtime readers, I apologize for sounding like a broken record.

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 Model Prohibited Substance and Methods List"

Catchy, wouldn't you say?

Not much to glean from the statement, which was sent out by the R&A and PGA Tour. The USGA's version is still awaiting approval from legal.

STATEMENT REGARDING GLOBAL ANTI-DOPING POLICY IN GOLF

Leading Golf Organizations Come Together to Develop Anti-Doping Policy for Golf

St.  Augustine,  Florida  – The major governing organizations in golf today announced  that  they have agreed in principle to an anti-doping policy for professional  golf  on  a  global  basis  that  will be accomplished in two phases.

The  first  phase  of the policy, which has been completed, encompasses the development  of  The  Model Prohibited Substance and Methods List discussed later in this statement, a copy of which is attached.

The  second phase of the Policy, which is anticipated to be completed prior to  the  end  of  this  year,  will  include  general standards for all the fundamental  elements of an anti-doping program for golf organizations that become  signatories  to  the  Policy,  while providing flexibility for such signatories  to  develop  specific  policies  and  procedures  necessary or appropriate  for  their  organizations.   Such standards will encompass the Model  Prohibited  Substance  and  Methods  List, as well as medical waiver procedures, testing protocols, results management, penalties, sanctions and reciprocity of outcomes.

Leading  golf  organizations  who  have  lent their support, leadership and cooperation  for  the  development  of  the  Policy  as  a  result of their representation  on  the Board of Directors of the World Golf Foundation and who will, subject to approval by their governing boards, become signatories to the Policy include:

      Augusta National Golf Club
      European Tour
      Ladies Professional Golf Association
      PGA of America
      PGA TOUR
      The R&A for The Open Championship
      United  States  Golf  Association for the U.S. Open, the U.S. Women’s Open and the U.S. Senior Open

Other  leading  golf organizations who have agreed to become signatories to
the Policy include:

      Asian Tour
      Australasian Tour
      Canadian Tour
      Japan Professional Golf Tour
      Sunshine Tour
      Tour de Las Americas

The  Model Prohibited Substance and Methods List (modified as necessary for individual  golf  organizations)  will  be incorporated into the respective tournament  regulations of a number of signatories to the policy, effective in  2008.   Player education and outreach on the Model Prohibited Substance and  Methods  List  is  ongoing and will be given increased emphasis by the signatories of the Policy moving forward.

An Anti-Doping office of the World Golf Foundation will be created in 2008, and  will,  among  duties,  coordinate  and  share  information  with  golf organizations with respect to medical waiver procedures and therapeutic use exemptions  under  the  Policy.   Disciplinary procedures and penalties for violations  of  the  Policy  will  be  controlled  and  administered by the signatories  to  the Policy, and disclosed to other signatory organizations for  consistency and coordination purposes.  Testing protocols will also be within  the  purview  of the individual signatory organizations and will be developed  and approved by each organization on an individual basis.  It is anticipated  that  signatories  who  will  be testing under the Policy will commence and activate their testing programs in 2008.

Drug Testing To Be Announced Thursday?

From Doug Ferguson's notes column:

The PGA TOUR will make it official this week that it will have a drug policy in 2008.
 
Golf has been under increasing pressure to come up with a policy against performance-enhancing drugs, and PGA TOUR commissioner Tim Finchem said earlier this year that while there is no evidence of steroids, drug testing in sports has become a reality and it was prudent for all golf organizations to deal with them collectively.
 
"I think we're at a point where to maintain confidence in the public and the fans, we have to take this step, even though there's great speculation about the extent to which substances can help you in this game," Finchem said two weeks ago in Boston.
 
A conference call to discuss the policy was planned as early as Thursday, although it was not clear what Finchem would announce. He has said any policy would start with an education plan and a list of banned substances, although testing might not begin until at least the second half of next year.