Don Catlin, one of the founders of athletic drug testing, tells The Guardian that tennis is wasting its time adopting a biological passport program. The ITF and the tours announced they would do so last week, as well as increase out-of-competition testing. Catlin is the president of Anti-Doping Research, a company in Los Angeles.
“I would tell them not to bother,” Catlin said. “They’re better off to increase the number of tests they do rather than spend it all on the passport. Doubling or tripling urine tests would be of more value than starting a passport because you need such a long lead-in. You need data over four or five years.”
The ITF’s anti-doping program budget was just given a boost by the Grand Slams and the two tours, increasing from about $2 million annually to $3.6 million.
“It seems it’s because there’s so much flak in the newspapers that they’re trying to do something,” he said. “A lot of it looks like grandstanding -- whenever there’s pressure, sport wakes up and looks to do something, but then they realize later that it’s not really [changed] anything.
“It’s always hard to be critical of someone when they’re trying to do something that’s worthwhile. But if you’re only taking two steps when 100 are needed, it’s not going to work. If you started with the top 100 male players, that would be a good representation, and then if you test them five times a year … but [tennis] probably can’t afford to do that or doesn’t want to. If you don’t start with something of that magnitude, you’re not going to get far.”
In a statement to The Guardian, the ITF defended its decision.
“The Anti-Doping Working Group has identified the introduction of biological passports as a key enhancement of the detection and deterrence of doping under the Tennis Anti-Doping Program,” said program chief Dr. Stuart Miller. “The implementation of the passport in accordance with the World Anti-Doping Agency recommendations, including the required budget, is now being discussed by the four parties in the program.”