Parr & Evans on Dope Tests (2)
Parrthenon
By Larry Parr and GM Larry Evans
Intentional doping or refusing to take a drug test may result in a fine of
up to $100,000 and suspension from two to eight years. Both penalties are
effective career-enders in the highly competitive arena of international chess.
Is it possible for a FIDE medical official, after an unexpected midnight
tap on the door, to demand testing of a top player and his GM analytical
entourage during the middle of a coffee-laced night of opening analysis? Here,
the regulation is unambiguous (Article 3.5):
<The penalty for an offence committed by a competitor and detected on the
occasion of an out-of-competition test if the FIDE Medical Commission shall
determine that out-of-competition testing shall be introduced as determined by
the FIDE Medical Commission shall be the same, mutatis mutandis, and shall take
effect from the date the positive result was recorded or the date on which the
final judgement further to an appeal is pronounced, whichever is the more
recent.<
Is FIDE a body with a long tradition of obeying its own regulations and of
operating under a strict rule of law? Or is FIDE a body likely to plot obvious
entrapment set-ups and prejudicial use of its powers to test at any time or in
any place? We believe that the answers to both questions are self-evident,
given the sad record of this lawless organization. We note that this
anti-doping code went into effect on July 1, yet intrusive, unannounced testing
began in Argentina in May. FIDE is an organization that was so anxious to
establish a precedent for testing anyone – right down to young girls,
possibly humiliated in front of male officials – that it jumped the gun
contained in its own regulations by instituting mandatory testing without
official regulations.
Lawless? FIDE cannot even stay within its own Draconian edicts.
Lest anyone imagine that an Ilyumzhinov or an Abundo will have to prove a
case before ruining the lives of unwanted players, there is Article 4.1.
"Intentional doping can be proved," reads this paragraph, "by any means
whatsoever, including presumption." TRANSLATION: If an Abundo and his FIDE
Medical Commission say so, a Joel Benjamin or a Yasser Seirawan will not play
international chess again. "Presumption" is sufficient.
Is there a role for USCF officials, a possible way to cut themselves in on
the drug-testing swag? Indeed. Article 5.4 reads:
At all other events (except where doping control is carried out under the
rules of
another sporting body) the NCF [National Chess Federation] conducting the
controls or in whose territory an event is held shall be responsible for
conducting
doping control and shall adopt the procedures set forth in these
Regulations and shall
report the results thereof to the FIDE Medical Commission.
Among the "procedures" set forth in the FIDE regulations is the power to
test during out-of-competition moments and the power to demand extensive
medical documentation and the power to demand both blood and urine tests of any
competitor. Hated political opponents at the U. S. Open may be presented with
ruinous testing bills or be forced to withdraw from a competition and face
permanent ban from play for refusing to take drug tests.
Have there ever been USCF politicians who would have attempted to
exercise such power against, say, a much-hated Lev Alburt back in 1985 or 1986?
Did several such USCF politicians attempt to connive with anti-Semitic Soviet
officials to keep GM Alburt off the American team in a contemplated USA-USSR
"Summit Match"? Would these politicians have used the power of drug-testing to
wage a war of publicity against GM Alburt so as to discredit him at that
unhappy time?
Even if one answers these questions with a vigorous "No!" – in, we
believe, dishonest denial – such power should not reside in any chess
political figure.
Against the backdrop of these regulations, we have assurances that the
good men of FIDE, including the Medical Commission secretary Casto Abundo,
would never exercise such power, given that they would be restrained by –
well – whom? Kalmykian el presidente Ilyumzhinov, who proudly boasts a
one-party state without opposition newspapers? Kalmykian dictator Ilyumzhinov,
whose associates murdered dissident journalist Larisa Yudina and whose brother
Vyacheslav was sighted at the murder scene by a witness who has since perished
in an automobile "accident"?
In the March 2001 Chess Life, American FIDE representative Bill Kelleher
gave readers the anodynic "probably" analysis. American local tournaments will
"probably" be exempt. Urine rather than blood tests will "probably" be
sufficient. Drug testing will "probably" not have a great effect on the
players.
Since then, we have learned, given the FIDE anti-doping regulations of
July 1, that the Medical Commission is free to enforce testing at any
tournament it wishes – subject, once again, only to availability of resources
and the degree of resistance offered.
Mr. Kelleher also wrote soothingly with a view to reassure and, perhaps,
to blunt budding opposition, "Beta-blockers are also on the list of proscribed
drugs. Players who take them for medical reasons will need a letter from their
doctor."
Just a "letter" from the good ol’ family GP. Innocent and fuzzy
enough, right?
Wrong! The small print on the web page of the FIDE Medical Commission is
far franker. The Schach-docs will not find a "letter" from the good ol’
family GP or even a "letter" from a highly expensive unfamily specialist to be
anywhere near compliance:
Anyone else with a material condition requiring use of any prohibited
substance,
should contact the FIDE Medical Commisson Secretariat office ASAP, to
obtain
a waiver from the IOC Medical Commission. Documentary evidence provided,
should include, AT A MINIMUM [our emphasis], records of tests taken,
affidavits
from prescribing physicians, consultants’ reports, etc."
THAT is "at a minimum." The maximum?
We have no idea. The FIDE Medical Commission may bar unwanted
grandmasters from competitions without ever making a finding that doping has
occurred through the bureaucratic device of demanding endless expensive expert
medical reports.
Screw privacy?
Screw privacy!
SCREW THE USCF, IF NECESSARY
The most striking aspect of the politician-led campaign for drug testing in
chess is neither the attack on reason nor the attack on privacy. After all,
power and money have always trumped reason and privacy among politicians.
Getting gain by producing pain is to be found in politics everywhere, though
Third World despots such as Ilyumzhinov have a freer hand than politicians
leashed by Western constitutional protections and traditions.
For us, the most striking aspect of the campaign is the enormous dangers
that the advocates of drug testing are willing to visit upon the U. S. Chess
Federation in exchange for insinuating chess into the Olympic Games –
somewhere, alphabetically, between bobsledding and curling – during one of
the coming decades. The sheer disproportion between the enormous damage
created and the unlikely benefit to be produced is thought-provoking, if
nothing else.
Assaults on reason, violations of sexual and health privacy, permanent
bureaucracies, unrestrained power in the hands of unaccountable international
officials, and entirely predictable USCF customer disaffection and later legal
actions weigh no more in the minds of these drug-testing advocates than a
diaphanous tail feather of a hummingbird. Their lead weight on the scales is
the vague dream of Olympic participation at some level during some future
decade.
Clearly, an interesting and hitherto recondite process is at work here.
In the view of certain USCF leaders for whom chess has long been a
resume- and social-enhancer as well as an avocational income supplement, the
Federation is either on its last legs as the leading force in American chess or
on its last legs period. Indeed, few would deny that the Federation is
shrinking as a company and that numerous Internet chess businesses are
occupying a market vacuum.
The smart idea is to use the cachet of USCF office as a bridge to other
chess endeavors in the future. The condition of the USCF bridge, so long as it
still spans the necessary legal river below, is relatively unimportant. The
important point for those who dream of quasi-diplomatic glory as Olympic
officials hobnobbing among those who have favors to dispense is that there be a
chess umbrella organization that will protect their status as accredited
Olympic chess officials.
If the USCF were to designate a separate chess entity as having official
relations with the U. S. Olympic Council (which we believe to be the plan),
then even the collapse of the USCF itself would leave the positions of American
Olympic chess officials unaffected. If true, the USCF’s health is
unimportant. What becomes important for these would-be Olympic oficials is
getting chess recognized as some kind of sport no matter what the cost to the
USCF and to grandmasters and amateurs.
What will be the reaction of American chess organizers to the imposition
of costly drug testing and to the prospect of losing tens of thousands of
tournament entrants who wish to have nothing to do with signing commitments to
take whatever drug tests that the FIDE Medical Commission may elect to impose?
What will those players, who look forward to certain major tournaments as
annual vacations, decide to do if even their hope to recoup a portion of their
expenditure by winning a class prize becomes dependent on passing a drug test
or, mayhap, several drug tests during a single competiton? Will they continue
to attend tournaments in which they could forfeit class prizes or have to pay
for expensive drug tests if they are to receive prize money?
Writes Bill Goichberg, America’s largest tournament organizer:
When FIDE issued its startling pronouncement at the end of 2000 that, with
about one
week notice, all FIDE rated tournaments were required to use the "new FIDE
time
control," I received several emails from players asking if CCA tournaments
advertised
as FIDE rated would use the new control. I replied that I didn’t think
it was really
required and that if it was, we still wouldn’t use it. Likewise, let me
assure everyone
that there will never be "anti-doping tests" at any CCA tournament. We
will hold our
[tournaments as we] always have, and submit them to FIDE for ratings and
sometimes
title norms because there is nowhere else for players to go who wish to
become GMs
or IMs, but we fully expect our events to be rejected by FIDE within a
year or two
because we will not accept their control.
Under FIDE regulations, the USCF could face penalties for continuing to do
business with Mr. Goichberg and other tournament organizers, who understand
that fast time limits and drug testing spell business death for them. We do
not believe that these organizers will pass quietly into the sweet night of
income oblivion. They will establish a competing rating system instead.
Schism.
There will be numerous absurdities. "As a grand climax," writes Mr.
Goichberg without (in truth) much necessary foresight, "perhaps at the closing
ceremony [of a given tournament] the official FIDE anti-doping service will
announce that the GM who apparently won the event has been disqualified for
puffing on his asthma steroid inhaler."
Yah, it will happen.
Lawsuits? Numerous American anti-discrimination laws are there to be
violated. "Any competitor," says the fine print on the FIDE Medical Commission
site, "who is a Diabetic using Insulin, those with Exercise Induced
Bronchospasm (Asthma), or a Cardiac condition requiring Beta-Blocker
medications, should file the following form PRIOR to competition with the FIDE
Medical Secretariat Office." Tournament directors will need to have legally
vetted legal disclaimers for all players to sign and will require legal advice
to establish elaborate procedures for guarding against legal actions from
outraged tournament customers.
What will happen if one of the tournament assistants at, say, the U. S.
Open fails to cover a legal base involving an asthmatic, who suffers an attack
after an intrusive, nerve-wracking blood test – say, a second or third such
test during a given competition? Impossible? Read Article 1.6 of FIDE’s
anti-doping regulations.
Lawyers, forms, tests – tournament costs will skyrocket and so will
entry fees. As for the truly vicious Soviet absurdity of press "Commissars"
– this self-discrediting idea could only come from FIDE and its
dictator-president.
Screw the USCF?
If necessary.
WHAT IN THE NAME OF FIDE IS OUR POLICY?!!
"Our desire to have the opportunity to raise the stature of chess
to an Olympic
sport outweighs our aversion to drug testing. It’s not that
we’re for drug
testing for the sake of testing, but if it’s required as part
of the game of chess
becoming an Olympic sport, then we see it as a necessary evil."
– George
De Feis, USCF Press Release No. 38 of 2001
"The Delegates believe that drug testing is unnecessary in chess
and urge FIDE
to limit testing only to events where it is absolutely
essential for qualification
into the Olympic games." – ADM passed by USCF Delegates at
the 2001
U. S. Open
"USCF’s FIDE representatives are instructed to actively campaign
at all FIDE
meetings against the practice of requiring drug testing at any
chess tournament
or match."—ADM-64 passed by USCF Delegates at the 2001 U. S.
Open
USCF Executive Director George De Feis claims that "we" see drug testing as
a "necessary" evil. The USCF Delegates, the controlling legal body of the
Federation, claims that "we" see drug testing as "unnecessary." The Delegates
have also ordered our FIDE representatives to campaign "actively" at "all" FIDE
"meetings" against "requiring drug testing" in "any" chess tournament or match.
We believe that the Delegates are on record as saying the following: Drug
testing must, at the very least, be radically limited and that our
representatives are to formulate and implement a campaign to stamp out such
testing completely. Moreover, the campaign is to be "active" and to be pursued
at "all" FIDE meetings.
The reaction of our Zonal president is that he intends to do as he will
without such campaigning at "all" meetings and then submit his record to the
Delegates. The political calculation is that the Delegates will ratify even
bald defiance of their clearly stated policy.
Larry Parr, one of the authors of this paper presenting the case against
raping reason, violating privacy and further undermining the USCF through drug
testing, recalls a time in the mid-1980s when Policy Board members seriously
attempted to understand policy as directed by the Delegates and to follow it.
Some of this soul-searching was, of course, boilerplate for the spectators.
Still, the point is that there was a time when USCF leaders felt obliged to put
on an act.
The lawless spirit of FIDE has been one of the corrupting influences in
USCF governance. Numerous American officials in FIDE have banked on their
political clout to overcome resistance from Delegates, who often understood
perfectly well that their resolutions were being flouted. An enormous amount
of cynicism has undermined the vigor of governance and the morale of those
Delegates involved.
We object to the Zonal president’s frank avowal that a Delegate
policy, which is ever so clearly stated and even demanded, will not be
followed. We object to the notion that healthy governance is deliberately
disobeying a policy in the expectation that a majority of one can be assembled
to sustain such a violation. We argue that the perceived necessity by numerous
American FIDE representatives to flout what they understand to be the will of
the Delegates and of the USCF members at large has been a pernicious virus
undermining the governance process.
OUR POLICY PROPOSALS
The purpose of this Committee is to present ideas and recommend policies to the
USCF Executive Board. We propose that the Committee adopt the following
resolutions for transmission to the EB:
1. Resolved: FIDE’s anti-doping regulations issued on July 1, 2001, are
fatally flawed, and the USCF is to dispatch a circular letter to FIDE and all
its member nations stating our opposition to the regulations and our intention
not to implement them.
2. Resolved: the USCF finds proof of guilt by "presumption" to be
completely unacceptable, and the USCF is to dispatch a circular letter to FIDE
and all its member nations stating our rejection of this regulation and our
intention never to implement it.
3. Resolved: the USCF believes that "all" means entire or every one
rather than "not" all and that the USCF is to dispatch a circular letter to
FIDE and all its member nations announcing our intention to campaign actively
at all FIDE meetings against drug testing and our intention to seek out
aggressively other national federations as allies in this struggle.
4. Resolved: the USCF values reason, privacy and its own financial health
more highly than potential inclusion in the Olympics at some undefined point in
the future.
5. Resolved: the USCF calls on FIDE to disestablish its Medical
Commission forthwith and to use its human resources to advance the game of
chess.
6. Resolved: the USCF regards healthy relations with America’s
tournament organizers as more important than the prospect of chess being
included in the Olympic Games.
7. Resolved: the USCF regards membership retention and growth as more
important than the prospect of chess being included in the Olympic Games.
RULE OR RUIN
The advocates of drug testing are openly contemptuous of the views of the USCF
membership and of this nation’s chess greats. Theirs is a strategy of rule
or ruin.
Our would-be Olympic chess officials are prepared to drive customers away
from the USCF and to create an organizational schism in American chess to
achieve their status as Olympic officials for chess.
We urge this committee to advise the USCF Executive Board that drug
testing in chess involves paying a price in terms of human decency and privacy
and disaffection with the USCF that is wildly disproportionate to any claimed
gain.