PGA Tour Announces An Anti-Doping Suspension

The unthinkable has occurred: the PGA Tour went public with a performance-enhancing substance violation and suspension. No details beyond the length of suspension and the name of the player were released.

November 2, 2009

From the Office of the Commissioner:


The PGA TOUR announced today that Doug Barron has violated the PGA TOUR Anti-Doping Policy's ban on the use of performance-enhancing substances and has been suspended for one year. The suspension will commence immediately.  This is the first suspension under the PGA TOUR Anti-Doping Program.

"I would like to apologize for any negative perception of the TOUR or its players resulting from my suspension. I want my fellow TOUR members and the fans to know that I did not intend to gain an unfair competitive advantage or enhance my performance while on TOUR," said Barron.

The TOUR will have no further comment on the suspension at this time.

So a year suspension for what he says was an unintentional attempt? Sounds like the tour did not agree.

I know the commissioner has been very transparent in saying that he resisted this program because--"We had to deal with that from a defensive standpoint from an image perspective"--but you'd to at least think they wouldn't make the first suspendee apologize for an image chink in the press release?

How about, I'm sorry I did this to my body, setting a terrible example for the youth of America.

Or maybe even no comment beyond a simple apology?

Either way, maybe Barron started using some physique building stuff after this odd photo of him ran on ESPN.com a few years ago.

Anyone know why he wasn't wearing his shirt? **Jason Sobel explained the incident here.

PGA Tour Drug Testing Exposes Severe Performance Anxiety Issues

The buried lede in Leonard Shapiro's analysis of Tim Finchem's drug testing remarks was not this statement--"We may have had some test results that trouble us in other areas that we treat in a different bucket"--no, it's what Jim Furyk revealed.

He said he'd been tested at least three times during the last year, and the only problem with the program was that some players were initially unable to provide urine samples after they completed their rounds and were told they were being tested.

"I guess it's kind of humorous that some guys have had a hard time producing a sample," he said. "Guys have said 'I couldn't go, it took me two hours,' or guys have said, 'There were five people in front of me, so it took a long time.' But I haven't heard anyone really complaining other than the amount of time it takes."

They're human! Guys who can hit a little white ball 300 yards with ease as millions look on sometimes can't produce in front of five lab-coated scientists. I feel so much better about that time when I was 13 at Pauley Pavillion, and they only have two urinals in the entire freakin building and well, we won't go there.

By the way...five people? Really? No wonder this program costs so bloody much.

Here's what Finchem said when pressed about his distinction between no positive test results for one class of drugs.

Q. I just want to confirm, so you're saying there have been no positive tests, either recreational or performance enhancing --

COMMISSIONER FINCHEM: I didn't say that. I said we have had no positive tests with respect to performance enhancing. We may have had some test results that trouble us in other areas that we treat in a different bucket. But we don't publicize those. We treat those as conduct unbecoming.

We may in those instances -- I'm not saying this has happened or not, I'm just saying what the process is. If we get a test like that, we will consider it conduct unbecoming, and what are our choices? We can suspend a player, we can fine a player, we can do both of those and put a player into treatment. We could also add to that regular testing.

As I said last year, we have three kinds of testing. We have random testing, we have selective testing. That means we decide to test you because you haven't been tested for whatever reason. It's not random anymore. We're selecting you. And then we have regular testing. We have reason to believe that a player may be using an illegal substance or may have a substance problem and he's in a program and we want to test him. Or a player is playing under a TUE where he's allowed to have certain levels of a substance and we just test him on a regular basis because we want to make sure we get him the TUE, but you've got to play by the rules. So it takes on different forms.

With respect to conduct unbecoming, we don't announce that. With respect to performance enhancing, we would be announcing that.

Q. You can't confirm for us then that there has been any positive testing?

COMMISSIONER FINCHEM: I wouldn't say yes or no to that, no. I'll say this: We don't have a problem in that area.

Got that?

NY Times Flash: Viagra May Be Performance Enhancing...

...well, in ways you didn't know about. For athletes. In competition. Looking for an edge.

Ah...forget it. Here's what you need to know: Viagra may be headed for the WADA banned substance list. A development that could make the economic crisis look like small potatoes for the future well being of the Champions Tour. Shoot, from what I hear about some young guns' love for the little purple pills, the PGA and European Tours too!

Jere Longman writing for the New York Times explains how the effects of Viagra are being tested on athletes and the prognosis for the future.

Anne L. Friedlander, an author of the 2006 Stanford study, said that she expected Viagra would be banned for sports use. But, she noted, it does not benefit everyone. Only 4 of the 10 participants in her study responded to the drug. And Viagra merely elevated the performance of those four to the level of other participants less affected by altitude, rather than enhancing performance beyond normal, the way steroids do, Dr. Friedlander said.

Merely elevated? I wonder if the editors debated the use of the word elevated?

“That’s something to think about,” she said.

Well thank you. Oh, you meant...

Whether Viagra is allowed or prohibited, it remains illegal for athletes to use prescription medication not ordered for them, Mr. Tygart of Usada said.

That'll set 'em straight. Wait, that didn't come out the way I had hoped. Okay that's enough boner-pill humor for one week.

"We have been in constant touch with WADA since the beginning of our effort and WADA has been very supportive of the construct of our programme."

Still waiting on Peter Dawson's transcript to appear to determine what kind of softballs were lobbed by the wannabe and current R&A members in attendance,  but in the meantime we learned that Ty Votaw has the unenviable task of trying to package and sell the IOC on what golf does not need: another 72-hole stroke play event once every four years.

In the first wire story that went out on this with Olympics-related comments from Peter Dawson, I couldn't help but notice this little nugget:

Potential stumbling blocks include the need to move the date of the USPGA Championship to avoid a clash in dates, and the difference between golf's newly-introduced drug-testing programme and the requirements of the IOC and the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA).

"The distinctions between our policies and full WADA compliance are not significant," added PGA Tour commissioner Tim Finchem.

"We have been in constant touch with WADA since the beginning of our effort and WADA has been very supportive of the construct of our programme.

"There will probably be some issues, but we don't see any major hurdles in terms of reaching an understanding about what changes need to be made to bring us into total compliance."

Now, as you may recall it was pointed out here that Dr. Gary Wadler of the WADA was quite blunt in a recent New York Daily News story by Andy Martino that analyzed deficiencies in the PGA Tour's testing program.

For example, the drug salbutamol, found in asthma inhalers, is anabolic and can build muscle. Salbutamol is banned in the Olympics, but allowed in golf. Also, though human growth hormone is prohibited, neither tour administers the blood tests that would possibly detect it. All 33 WADA labs worldwide test for HGH, although the efficacy of the tests are in question.

Wadler also takes issue with the language used to describe the testing process. The PGA Tour manual says: "Once notified, you should report to the designated testing area as soon as possible. The collector may allow you to delay reporting ... however, you may be monitored."

"What do you mean, 'should' and 'may?'" asks Wadler. "These things have to be required. What if the player goes to the bathroom after being told to report? That's no good."

And here's where one can see this getting ugly...

In terms of public disclosure, the policy states that "the PGA Tour will, at a minimum, publish the name of the player, the anti-doping rule violation, and the sanction imposed" - a statement that is contingent on Finchem having sanctioned a player in the first place. Clearly, if a star player were to test positive for steroids, that player "may" face a punishment and public embarrassment - or he may not. Wadler also points out that amphetamines, commonly used as performance enhancers, are classified under the tour's policy as drugs of abuse, meaning that players, if caught using these PEDs, could be quietly sent to rehab. All of these shortcomings, Wadler says, could be cleared up if both professional golf tours would cede control of their programs to WADA.

I wonder how many PGA Tour players will be willing to see the drug testing program turned over to the much tougher WADA so that three Americans can play 72 holes of stroke play every four years? I'm guessing not many.

"Then someone confused equipment advances in golf with juicing as an explanation for soaring drive lengths."

Troy Phillips in the Star Telegram gives PGA Tour execs a column that'll turn them into bobbleheads this morning, doing a nice job of piecing together how drug testing came about but naively assuming that it's the silliest "witch hunt" ever.

Yes, the dumbest, most unnecessary witch hunt in sports is finally here.

For more than a year, it has been forthcoming. It was inevitable in 2006 when Woods issued a challenge that golf should test to validate its cleanliness in the sports era of steroid/performance-enchancer cheats.

Then and now, golf had no steroid issues. No regular drug issues have surfaced. Aside from John Daly’s massive alcohol consumption and consequential stupefying behavior, even booze seems barely a concern on the Tour, if at all.

So, how did golf get here?

Maybe it started when baseball, cycling and track and field scandals, as well as national drug surveys indicating widespread steroid use among high school athletes, became a high-profile issues in sports.

Then someone confused equipment advances in golf with juicing as an explanation for soaring drive lengths.

Someone? I think that would be the Commissioner, actually.

Finchem Asked To Take Drug Test By Policy Board?

Rex Hoggard drops this little mini-bombshell on the Golfweek Tour Blog:

According to a member of the Tour’s Policy Board, Finchem was asked to be the first person tested and before an opening ceremony for the AT&T National tournament he obliged.

I don't know about you, but I got the impression from his press conference that this was an executive decision to better understand the process, not something he was asked to do. 

Gee, I wonder who approached the Commish and said, "Uh, Tim, we think you need to be tested too."

Cink? Toms? Faxon? Ogilvie?

"Athletes screening their urine for steroids are more than likely doing so to monitor their use of steroids."

Thanks to reader Tony for this Andy Martino story from the New York Daily News that takes a much tougher look at the PGA Tour's testing procedure than any I've read.

A couple of highlights, starting with this from the PGA Tour's Ty Votaw.

Asked why golfers would be less prone to temptation than athletes in other sports, Votaw cites etiquette. "We think the culture of our sport is such that if a rule exists it is adhered to," he says. "It is a culture that has served us very well - athletes who call penalties on themselves, etc. Other sports don't have that same sort of cultural value system."

And that's why the product delivers such value. A core values and skill set mention would have been nice Ty.

Okay, here's the part that's going to ruffle some feathers.

While some players are applying for exemptions, one big name seems eager to prove he is clean. Tiger Woods said Monday that he had himself tested twice in the last six months to make sure that his nutritional supplements were free of banned substances. Woods did not say when or in what lab the testing took place. But BALCO founder Victor Conte is skeptical that an athlete would feel concerned enough about his or her nutritional program to conduct a self-test.

Hey, the man does know a thing or two about cheating! Sorry, continue...

"Most nutritional supplements have a two-year expiration date," says Conte, who says he has no knowledge of Woods' nutritional program or his self-tests and is speaking in general terms, "so there are far less contaminated supplements on the market at this time. It seems that it is now more likely that athletes screening their urine samples for steroids ... would be doing so to confirm that the steroids they previously used had cleared their system. Athletes screening their urine for steroids are more than likely doing so to monitor their use of steroids."

And there's this from Dr. Gary Wadler of the WADA:

For example, the drug salbutamol, found in asthma inhalers, is anabolic and can build muscle. Salbutamol is banned in the Olympics, but allowed in golf. Also, though human growth hormone is prohibited, neither tour administers the blood tests that would possibly detect it. All 33 WADA labs worldwide test for HGH, although the efficacy of the tests are in question.

Wadler also takes issue with the language used to describe the testing process. The PGA Tour manual says: "Once notified, you should report to the designated testing area as soon as possible. The collector may allow you to delay reporting ... however, you may be monitored."

"What do you mean, 'should' and 'may?'" asks Wadler. "These things have to be required. What if the player goes to the bathroom after being told to report? That's no good."

The soft language continues in the manual's section on penalties. The PGA Tour policy states: "Sanctions may include disqualification, forfeiture of prize money/points and other awards, ineligibility, and fines. Sanctions for drugs of abuse (marijuana, cocaine, etc.) ... may include rehabilitation or medical treatment."

In other words, the word "may" - rather than the more definitive "will" - opens a window for Finchem to exercise his own judgment about sanctions if a player tests positive. The policy later defines specific penalties for first, second and third violations, though once again under the heading "sanctions on the players may include."

Hey, just looking out for the product!

In terms of public disclosure, the policy states that "the PGA Tour will, at a minimum, publish the name of the player, the anti-doping rule violation, and the sanction imposed" - a statement that is contingent on Finchem having sanctioned a player in the first place. Clearly, if a star player were to test positive for steroids, that player "may" face a punishment and public embarrassment - or he may not. Wadler also points out that amphetamines, commonly used as performance enhancers, are classified under the tour's policy as drugs of abuse, meaning that players, if caught using these PEDs, could be quietly sent to rehab. All of these shortcomings, Wadler says, could be cleared up if both professional golf tours would cede control of their programs to WADA.

"I hope Gatorade Tiger passes the test"

Doug Ferguson reports on the initial drug testing and talks to one of the first to get a "pink slip," Charles Howell, who had to get rehydrated after stomping around steamy Congressional for 5+ hours.

"I hope Gatorade Tiger passes the test," Howell said. "Because I put two bottles in me."

Finchem Takes One For The Team: Undergoes Drug Test, Results Not Pending

Helen Ross provides the overview of the big day, while you can read the spellbinding Finchem transcript here.

Let's go to the script...

Q. Is it important for you to go first?

COMMISSIONER TIM FINCHEM: No, I don't think it's important to go first. I think it's important for me and certain of our executives who are involved with the program to understand exactly what the procedure is, because by doing that, you can kind of see what player reaction will be, what players questions will be, and it's just a good, healthy learning experience. I don't view it as anything meaningful from a symbolism standpoint, but just I think it's important that we understand it in the detail of it.

Q. Did it go as efficiently as you thought it would?

COMMISSIONER TIM FINCHEM: It did. I was very pleased with the way it went, and I think that we have every reason to be optimistic that we're not going to have logistical problems; that it's not going to be a big disruption and it's not going to take much time.

The people that are doing it are quite professional, well organized, buttoned up, and that also conveys a sense of integrity to the process; because as we all know in this area, the integrity of the process is very, very important.

I'm glad they're buttoned up. That could cause problems if they weren't.

Q. Do you know how long it took you?

COMMISSIONER TIM FINCHEM: Nine and a half minutes. And I asked some questions.

Questions? You mean like, "Have you ever seen..." oh I better stop.

Q. Yesterday or today?

COMMISSIONER TIM FINCHEM: Let's just say I've been through it. I don't know that it's necessary to get really specific.

Yeah, TMI could get ugly here, especially if you had asparagus for lunch.

Q. Secondly on drug testing, do you think that when this is up and running for a year, that if there are no positive tests, as it relates to performance-enhancing that this will take care of any naysayers?

COMMISSIONER TIM FINCHEM: Any naysayers? That's impossible. I think the thing in the whole world of drug testing and anti-doping is that if you're not getting positive tests, somebody is going to write a blog that says your testing is screwed up: How can that be?

Write a blog? Such hostility to the blogosphere Commish. We're hurt. It's also possible someone will write a column, or an essay, or even a Haiku wondering why everyone is so clean and yet, throwing so many more clubs than they did prior to July 1.

You have a testing program; you must have had a problem to begin with or you wouldn't have done it. There's going to be naysayers regardless of what happens.

But on balance, among people who follow the sport and know these athletes, I think a rigorous testing program will add credibility to the general notion, which I think we all recognize, there are not that many people who believe that there is any significant issue here prior to this rule going into effect. Credibility requires that we have the program.

Thatta boy, that's a better answer! And hey, how about a comment that you're doing this testing stuff for the kids? Big family values Q rating points in that.

"Since I was given to understand the actual collection procedure was where the technician may be in imminent danger of being shot in unmentionable places by Frank Lickliter II..."

Jim Moriarty submits himself to a drug test, does his best to fail, but isn't faced with the horror that Tour players are howling about: drug technician supervision in the loo.

"I rationalized this by thinking of drug testing like testing a driver."

Bob Harig talks to several of the PGA Tour's finest about drug testing and it's wonderful to see how little has changed. They police themselves, the only positive test will be an "accidental positive" and it's really going to stink that they can't use Vick's Vapor Rub anymore.

The Commish of course, is all over the map:

"My position hasn't changed. We have to work hard through that. The idea of testing doesn't change the culture of responsibility of players knowing the rules, playing by the rules, calling violations on yourself. I rationalized this by thinking of drug testing like testing a driver. You're testing it because somebody put it in a player's hands. Drug testing, you are testing a player because maybe they put something in their body. In both cases, I don't expect or anticipate situations where players intentionally violated.

"If that were to happen, it's a bad situation. But we're worried about it happening by mistake. We're not presuming guilt here. If we look at it that way, I think we can maintain the culture of the sport."
Here's the we-can't-catch-colds-anymore stuff...

"I think the first time somebody tests positive for something, it'll be something like Vick's cough syrup," said Brandt Snedeker, who as a college golfer at Vanderbilt was subject to random drug testing by the NCAA. "We've all turned into label readers in the last few months. Guys take supplements, and there are certain things you can't have."

"The only thing that irks me a little bit," said tour player J.J. Henry, "is I had a cold three weeks ago and I had to go look through this little book and was wondering if I could take this cough suppressant or if I can't. There are things like that you can't take. I guess we'll get adjusted. It's sort of like taking your shoes off now when you go through security at the airport. Unfortunately, you just have to do things.

"I'd like to think our sport is clean, and I'd like to think as golfers we appreciate the integrity of our sport. I'm not worried about it, but there is a little gray area that we are going to have to deal with."

Yada, yada, yada. 

"The admission that HGH will be omitted from the testing threatens to undermine the credibility of the new system."

The Telegraph's Simon Hart says that plans to start drug testing without covering HGH, the most prominent of performance enhancing drugs in sport.

The introduction of random drug-testing was seen as a way of silencing the whispers about drug use in the sport, but now it has emerged that when the system goes live on July 1 the golfing authorities will not even be testing for HGH, despite evidence that it is one of the most widely abused performance-enhancing drugs in sport.

The omission opens the door for potential cheats to avoid steroids but to take the hormone without fear of being caught. Although HGH appears on golf's list of banned substances, both the European and PGA Tours have confirmed that players will only be required to submit urine samples. However, HGH can be detected only by taking blood samples.

"At this time the policy will involve only the collection of urine samples," European Tour spokesman Mitchell Platts said. "Blood sampling may or may not be added at a later date."

HGH could theoretically give players a physical edge because it enables people to train harder and for longer and to recover more quickly. With so much emphasis in the modern game on power and length, it is easy to see how some players might be tempted.

The admission that HGH will be omitted from the testing threatens to undermine the credibility of the new system. When Player made his allegations, he named HGH specifically as a drug he had heard was being used by at least 10 top golfers.

More importantly, God forbid, this could impact the all important quest to get golf in the Olympics. I can't believe Hart could miss such a key point! 

The story is accompanied by a Paul Casey commentary in support of testing and Lewine Mair's perspective on the testing process.