I thought that recent developments with regards to drug testing in the Irish Bouldering League may be of interest on here.
Thread:
http://www.climbing.ie/smf/index.php?topic=1989.0Times Article:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/ireland/article5537787.eceUKC got hold of it also:
http://www.ukclimbing.com/news/#n45568A few thoughts, probably ill informed:
• This does seem a little disproportionate in the context of the IBL –a small, banterous, informal competition with little in the way of prizes / kudos
• The sports council’s stance does seem reasonable in the context of Olympic climbing (this is the first time I’ve heard of climbing and the Olympics!?)
• The times article seems a little unfair, with the gist of the thread being taken out of context a little
• I don’t see a problem with drugs testing in the international comps, sadly they appear to be a necessary evil
• It’s difficult to see how this could ever apply to climbing “pros” across the board, ie those that don’t compete. Many will have undoubtedly taken performance enhancing drugs (eg the Hubers?? Plenty of high altitude mountaineers…)
• From one point of view, I don’t think the above matters so much: non competitive pro climbers aren’t, strictly speaking, in direct competition with each other, nor are they sponsored on the basis of absolute ability. It’s clearly as much to do with image: witness Patagonia dropping Dean Potter after the delicate arch thing, in another sport or company Dean may have even received more sponsorship for being so publically rebellious.
• Still, I’m a little uncomfortable with the above, especially if “clean” climbers are being denied a little of the sponsorship pie as a result of being pipped to the post by those pumped on the ‘roids. Though I’m not really sure if this is realistically happening.
