True Dopers or Negligent Athletes? An Analysis of Anti-Doping Rule Violations Reported to the World Anti-Doping Agency 2010–2012

Abstract

ABSTRACTBackground: The sanction that an athlete receives when an anti-doping rule violation has been committed depends on the specific circumstances of the case. Anti-doping tribunals decide on the final sanction, following the rules of the World Anti-Doping Code. Objectives: To assess the athletes’ degree of fault based on the length of sanctions imposed on them to feed policy-related discussions. Methods: Analysing data from the results management database of the World Anti-Doping Agency for anonymous information of anti-doping rule violations in eight selected sports covering the years 2010-2012. Results: Four out of ten athletes who committed an anti-doping rule violation received a suspension that was lower than the standard. This is an indication that tribunals in many instances are not convinced that the athletes concerned were completely at fault, that mitigating circumstances were applicable, or that full responsibility of the suspected violation should not be held against them. Anabolic agents, peptide hormones, and hormone modulators lead to higher sanctions, as do combinations of several anti-doping rule violations. Conclusions: This first analysis of information from the World Anti-Doping Agency's results management database indicates that a large proportion of the athletes who commit anti-doping rule violations may have done this unintentionally. Anti-doping professionals should strive to improve this situation in various ways.