Is Moderation Best for Pot Positives?

The revelation this week of the two month suspension levied against John Bogart by the USAPL for testing positive for marijuana stands in stark contrast to the penalty that was slapped on CPU member Willie Albert for the same violation.

Albert's initial suspension was for one year and was set to expire on April 11, 2009. However, Albert competed in another federation's meet before that date and had his suspension extended by another year, for a total of two years.

Which federation took the more appropriate action? Should suspensions have been handed down at all?

The IPF Anti-Doping Rules (pdf) allow for a certain amount of leeway when handing out penalties for doping violations. In fact, the code allows for standard penalties to be reduced to a mere reprimand. The test that the IPF uses in making that determination is whether the lifter intended to enhance his performance by taking the drug. Given the drug involved in the two cases above, can it reasonably be assumed that the lifters were using marijuana to enhance their performance? In powerlifting, does a reprimand seem like the appropriate response to a first positive test for marijuana?

At the USAPL forum, Rich Edinger comments: "Anybody who has read my posts over the last several years knows that I am adversely against using PED while competing in the USAPL. I am still against the use of steroids, HGH, and stimulants to enhance one's performance. (I guess reading 1000s of police reports in my job has convinced me that alcohol is much more harmful and damaging to society than marijuana. Never read one police report in which a man beat up his girlfriend while smoking marijuana). ) I just believe that the USAPL and IPF should reconsider blindly following the WADA in all situations: to wit: marijuana."

Andy Furnas' perspective: "While I agree that pot certainly would not be a performance enhancing substance, it would not be practical, from a mission perspective, for the IPF/USAPL to make exceptions regarding WADA's banned substances list.

If the USOC wanted to petition the IOC to pressure WADA to remove these types of "non-performance-enhancing" substances (or whatever the proper process would be), that would be reasonable. But we (IPF/USAPL) hang our hats on following WADA."

From the IPF Anti-Doping Rules:

10.4 Elimination or Reduction of the Period of Ineligibility for Specified Substances under Specific Circumstances

Where an Athlete or other Person can establish how a Specified Substance entered his or her body or came into his or her possession and that such Specified Substance was not intended to enhance the Athlete’s sport performance or mask the use of a performance-enhancing substance, the period of Ineligibility found in Article 10.2 shall be replaced with the following:

First violation: At a minimum, a reprimand an no period of Ineligibility from future Events, and at a maximum, two (2) years of Ineligibility.

To justify any elimination or reduction, the Athlete or other Person must produce corroborating evidence in addition to his or her word which establishes to the comfortable satisfaction of the hearing panel the absence of an intent to enhance sport performance or mask the use of a performance enhancing substance. The Athlete or other Person’s degree of fault shall be the criterion considered in assessing any reduction of the period of Ineligibility.

This Article applies only in those cases where the hearing panel is comfortably satisfied by the objective circumstances of the case that the Athlete in taking a Prohibited Substance did not intend to enhance his or her sport performance. Examples of the type of objective circumstances which in combination might lead a hearing panel to be comfortably satisfied of no performance-enhancing intent would include: the fact that the nature of the Specified Substance or the timing of its ingestion would not have been beneficial to the Athlete; the Athlete’s open Use or disclosure of his or her Use of the Specified Substance; and a contemporaneous medical records file substantiating the non-sport-related prescription for the Specified Substance. Generally, the greater the potential performance-enhancing benefit, the higher the burden on the Athlete to prove lack of an intent to enhance sport performance.

While the absence of intent to enhance sport performance must be established to the comfortable satisfaction of the hearing panel, the Athlete may establish how the Specified Substance entered the body by a balance of probability.

Comment viewing options

You certainly didn't get Willie's information from a reliable source. Get your facts straight before you post them.

All suspensions are posted on the CCES website.

Louis wrote:
You certainly didn't get Willie's information from a reliable source. Get your facts straight before you post them.

All suspensions are posted on the CCES website.

Care to expand on that? Are you saying that Albert came off of suspension in April of this year and was not issued a one year extension?

Would the CCES publish an IPF rule 10.10, 10.12, 14.11 etc. suspension?

My understanding from being close to the lifter, Albert, himself is that he got 2 years straight off the bat. Unless he and I are have mistaken, The one year was never added on after the fact. It has been suggested that had he appealed it in the first place it would have been radicaly reduced but he did not and carried on with his lifting in other federations. Regardless, the suspension handed to Will is much harsher than the one handed to Bogart and that was my initial curiosity when I read the Bogart post. Suspending a lifter for smoking grass is a tired and old story... There are MANY lifters that blaze regularly but merely limit their intake leading up to a contest. It is just an assinine rule that WADA won't get over.

Anonymous wrote:
My understanding from being close to the lifter, Albert, himself is that he got 2 years straight off the bat. Unless he and I are have mistaken, The one year was never added on after the fact. It has been suggested that had he appealed it in the first place it would have been radicaly reduced but he did not and carried on with his lifting in other federations. Regardless, the suspension handed to Will is much harsher than the one handed to Bogart and that was my initial curiosity when I read the Bogart post. Suspending a lifter for smoking grass is a tired and old story... There are MANY lifters that blaze regularly but merely limit their intake leading up to a contest. It is just an assinine rule that WADA won't get over.

I was the one who informed PLW of this..My mistake.Sorry.

I didn't realize Willie got 2 years initially.

The USAPL obviously handled the same situation better.

Basically, the CPU exec came down hard on Will and gave him the maximum penalty despite it being his first offense. For whatever reason, they really thought it was necessary to hold back one of the best lifters the CPU has.

Gratton wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
My understanding from being close to the lifter, Albert, himself is that he got 2 years straight off the bat. Unless he and I are have mistaken, The one year was never added on after the fact. It has been suggested that had he appealed it in the first place it would have been radicaly reduced but he did not and carried on with his lifting in other federations. Regardless, the suspension handed to Will is much harsher than the one handed to Bogart and that was my initial curiosity when I read the Bogart post. Suspending a lifter for smoking grass is a tired and old story... There are MANY lifters that blaze regularly but merely limit their intake leading up to a contest. It is just an assinine rule that WADA won't get over.

I was the one who informed PLW of this..My mistake.Sorry.

I didn't realize Willie got 2 years initially.

The USAPL obviously handled the same situation better.

You are both incorrect. The original suspension was for one year. A second year was subsequently added.

Staff wrote:
Gratton wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
My understanding from being close to the lifter, Albert, himself is that he got 2 years straight off the bat. Unless he and I are have mistaken, The one year was never added on after the fact. It has been suggested that had he appealed it in the first place it would have been radicaly reduced but he did not and carried on with his lifting in other federations. Regardless, the suspension handed to Will is much harsher than the one handed to Bogart and that was my initial curiosity when I read the Bogart post. Suspending a lifter for smoking grass is a tired and old story... There are MANY lifters that blaze regularly but merely limit their intake leading up to a contest. It is just an assinine rule that WADA won't get over.

I was the one who informed PLW of this..My mistake.Sorry.

I didn't realize Willie got 2 years initially.

The USAPL obviously handled the same situation better.

You are both incorrect. The original suspension was for one year. A second year was subsequently added.

Can you please supply the source for that. Thanks.

Anonymous wrote:
Staff wrote:
Gratton wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
My understanding from being close to the lifter, Albert, himself is that he got 2 years straight off the bat. Unless he and I are have mistaken, The one year was never added on after the fact. It has been suggested that had he appealed it in the first place it would have been radicaly reduced but he did not and carried on with his lifting in other federations. Regardless, the suspension handed to Will is much harsher than the one handed to Bogart and that was my initial curiosity when I read the Bogart post. Suspending a lifter for smoking grass is a tired and old story... There are MANY lifters that blaze regularly but merely limit their intake leading up to a contest. It is just an assinine rule that WADA won't get over.

I was the one who informed PLW of this..My mistake.Sorry.

I didn't realize Willie got 2 years initially.

The USAPL obviously handled the same situation better.

You are both incorrect. The original suspension was for one year. A second year was subsequently added.

Can you please supply the source for that. Thanks.

The organization which conducts drug testing for the CPU, the CCES.

Geez, what comes next? Will beer consumption a few days before a meet be considered an enhancement? Any dumbass knows that pot or beer does not improve athletic performance. If your high or intoxicated on the platform I can understand getting tested for that and suspended.

www.bigirongym.com

www.youtube.com/BigIronGym

i think its a joke, its a performance de-enhancer hes only hurting himself :)

We could get a new meaning for passing on an attempt now...pass, pass, puff. Ganja

Honetly who cares if either of these guys smoked weed at some party...if it helps increase strength then my hippy roomie in college would of been Deadlifting 1500+

C'MON MAN FOR WEED.I CAN SEE FOR PERFORMANCE INHANCING DRUGS BUT THIS?I KNOW IT IS ILLEAGEL BUT IT DOES NOTHING FOR PERFORMANCE IN THIS SPORT.IF YOU THINK IT DOES GET OUT OF THE STONE AGE.THIS IS WHY THIS SPORT IS SO TORN UP OVER BS.LIKE THAT 1,000 POUND BENCHTHAT CAN'T BE LOCKED OUT.WTF I REMEMBER WHEN IT WAS A BIG PUSH TO GET POWERLIFTING INTO THE OLY. BUT WITH ALL THE FIGHTING IT WILL NEVER BE.

Some of you (not all of you) talk one minute about wanting to be a "professional" power lifter and make a living at it. Should you then be held to the same standard as other professional sports (none of which permit pot use)? I guess what I am saying is that these are the elite performers of the sport (the IPF is the closest to professional we got)....should they be held to professional like standards. Or is this in your eyes like getting suspended from your flag football league for popping a positive for pot? So which is it??? Do we want to be held to professional standards or to remain "Bush league" forever?

Guess what, its going to stay "bush league" forever whether you like it or not. Lifters should not be held to the standards of professional athletes because powerlifting is a hobby sport that they spend tons of money out of their own pocket to compete in, often making huge financial sacrifices in the process. Professional athletes make millions of dollars and are supposed to be role models although that is a total joke! They shouldnt be testing any athlete much less powerlifters for pot, the only sport they should test for that in is competitive eating where it will help performance!

AY wrote:
Some of you (not all of you) talk one minute about wanting to be a "professional" power lifter and make a living at it. Should you then be held to the same standard as other professional sports (none of which permit pot use)? I guess what I am saying is that these are the elite performers of the sport (the IPF is the closest to professional we got)....should they be held to professional like standards. Or is this in your eyes like getting suspended from your flag football league for popping a positive for pot? So which is it??? Do we want to be held to professional standards or to remain "Bush league" forever?

So your saying that professional athletes never smoke weed or get caught with it in their system?? Football players? Basketball players? LOL. Ricky Williams of the Miami Dolphins took a well documented hiatus from football to smoke pounds of weed but yet he didnt receive a 2 year ban? If the tested professional atheletes as closely as they do sometimes in powerlifting, at least half of the leagues players would be banned... now would that be good for business? Powerlifters should not be held to the same standards as Olympic athletes because the sport is not in the games, there aren't multi-million dollar sponsorhip dollars or extensive national TV coverage. THIS IS WHY IT IS SUCH A JOKE TO SUSPEND ANY LIFTER FOR HAVING TRACE AMOUNTS OF WEED IN THEIR SUSTEM.

AY wrote:
Some of you (not all of you) talk one minute about wanting to be a "professional" power lifter and make a living at it. Should you then be held to the same standard as other professional sports (none of which permit pot use)? I guess what I am saying is that these are the elite performers of the sport (the IPF is the closest to professional we got)....should they be held to professional like standards. Or is this in your eyes like getting suspended from your flag football league for popping a positive for pot? So which is it??? Do we want to be held to professional standards or to remain "Bush league" forever?

pretty sure no one expects to do powerlifting as a living

This stuff is stupid. Pot does not help any lifter and therefore should not be a reason to suspend a lifter. This is pure communism. I am a pastor who once was a serious pot head, and I know all too well what the effects of pot are. I don't support pot use, but this is a strength sport not a legalistic commune where every personal decision is under supervision. It is beyond me why anyone would lift in these feds.

George

AY wrote:
Some of you (not all of you) talk one minute about wanting to be a "professional" power lifter and make a living at it. Should you then be held to the same standard as other professional sports (none of which permit pot use)? I guess what I am saying is that these are the elite performers of the sport (the IPF is the closest to professional we got)....should they be held to professional like standards. Or is this in your eyes like getting suspended from your flag football league for popping a positive for pot? So which is it??? Do we want to be held to professional standards or to remain "Bush league" forever?

You're only kidding yourself. Every other highly paid professional sport has athletes that smoke pot, take uppers, downers, steroids, and other drugs, never getting caught even when they are tested.
Now with the Tiger Woods story coming out it turns out that even golf has a sordid side, including drug usage. A PGA pro took speed so he could make it through 18 holes after a hard night of partying.
If you think the IPF is clean and as close to professional as it gets just because they test, again, you're only kidding yourself. I have seen many USAPL/IPF referees behave in very unprofessional manners.
It's a hobby; not a profession.

I agree with the "this stuff is stupid" post. It is stupid, just like pot. We would all agree that weed is not a performance enhancer. If anything, it would inhibit performance. But lets step back and look at how our American culture so badly wants to make pot o.k. We try and make it mainstream, like it is no better or worse than alcohol. It is still an illegal drug that some doper grows on a hidden farm somewhere. Then sells it making tax free money when every other hard working, tax paying American is paying through the nose. But not that dope seller! He gets to enjoy the benefits of America for free. My opinion is that the liberally forced acceptance of weed is just one more thing that continues to erode the moral fiber of America, ultimatley making us no better than a third world nation of degenerates looking to do as little as possible, yet get as much as they can for free. Screw weed, and screw those idiots who choose to smoke weed.

Mick Manley wrote:
www.bigirongym.com

www.youtube.com/BigIronGym

i think its a joke, its a performance de-enhancer hes only hurting himself :)

Haha, the dude benches 724lbs. Care to explain how he's hurting himself?

Anonymous wrote:
I agree with the "this stuff is stupid" post. It is stupid, just like pot. We would all agree that weed is not a performance enhancer. If anything, it would inhibit performance. But lets step back and look at how our American culture so badly wants to make pot o.k. We try and make it mainstream, like it is no better or worse than alcohol. It is still an illegal drug that some doper grows on a hidden farm somewhere. Then sells it making tax free money when every other hard working, tax paying American is paying through the nose. But not that dope seller! He gets to enjoy the benefits of America for free. My opinion is that the liberally forced acceptance of weed is just one more thing that continues to erode the moral fiber of America, ultimatley making us no better than a third world nation of degenerates looking to do as little as possible, yet get as much as they can for free. Screw weed, and screw those idiots who choose to smoke weed.

the logical response would be to legalize it, regulate it, and tax it...

"According to WADA, prohibition of a substance is based on three questions: does it enhance performance, is it dangerous for the athlete, and is it against the ‘spirit of sport’? If the answer is yes to two of the questions, the substance is banned. Conceding that cannabinoids are dangerous to the athlete (smoke inhalation can never be good), the debate rests on performance enhancement and spirit of sport questions. Given Rabin’s comments we figured data must exist showing the power of pot in sports.
An oddity worth noting is that marijuana is only sometimes banned. During competition, athletes testing positive will suffer punishment but testing positive out of competition (during training) is okay. The rationale for this depends on whom you talk to. Some argue the ability of cannabinoids to calm nerves, thus enhancing performance, only works directly before a competition (unless you found some especially sticky stuff). Others argue it’s an example of WADA waffling on how marijuana aligns with the ‘spirit of sport’."

"Most theories on potential benefits from marijuana surround its ability to alleviate stress and relax. A study of French sport students showed that "good sleep” was one reason listed for marijuana usage and that participants in extreme sports—those where competition included elevated levels of physical dangerous—reported higher rates of usage." http://www.popsci.com/scitech/article/2009-02/pot-performance-enhancer?page=1

Leagalize, regulate and tax would be a certain victory to the pot smokers of America. To me, the difference between alcohol and pot is huge. I can have a beer or two, or a glass of wine with dinner. No problem. Is there an equivalent to pot smoking? I do not know, I don't smoke. You are stoned, or not. Pot is a most unfortunate curse and an embarrassment to America.

Anonymous wrote:

Ricky Williams of the Miami Dolphins took a well documented hiatus from football to smoke pounds of weed but yet he didn't receive a 2 year ban?
Williams was suspended three times: twice for four games and once for an entire season. His fines totaled to $1 Million. He was forced to repay a significant portion of his signing bonus and forfeited almost $10 Million in salary. He wasn't punished, was he????

why woud you test for pot I would understand testing for speed or coke but pot give me a freaking break if a guy shows up a meet high on pot and wins the meet than fair play to him

Whatever the rules state that is what you should abide by. Simple

If you are entering a competition and know there is testing or plan on breaking a record which will ensure you are drug tested why would you not cut out your marijuana use weeks or a month or two before the meet. Looking at the CCES web site it looks like its a two year suspension and one year if you appeal it.

Look if you can't cut your marijuana use back before a meet you got bigger problems and if you are to stupid to appeal a decision you deserve the suspension.

isbell wrote:
Whatever the rules state that is what you should abide by. Simple

Exactly.

If you don't like your fed's rules, you have two choices:
1. Lift in a fed that has rules that you agree with. Or,
2. Work within your fed to get them to adopt rules that you agree with.

It doesn't really matter if you think smoking pot has a performance effect. If your fed's rules say it's a ground for suspension, choose one of the two options above. Until you do, it really doesn't matter one way or another whether you think a suspension that is based on the rules is fair.

Ricky Williams wrote:
pass, pass, puff.

It's puff, puff, pass.

Anonymous wrote:
Leagalize, regulate and tax would be a certain victory to the pot smokers of America. To me, the difference between alcohol and pot is huge. I can have a beer or two, or a glass of wine with dinner. No problem. Is there an equivalent to pot smoking? I do not know, I don't smoke. You are stoned, or not. Pot is a most unfortunate curse and an embarrassment to America.

Unbelievably ignorant. If you have no basis for comparison - STFU. There are levels associated with smoking ganj from feeling relaxed to being stoned. And, it does vary depending on the quality.
Over 50 deaths a day in America are alcohol-related and pot is the embarrassment??
I smoked until 1987 and stopped once my first child was born. It is unfortunate though. I never thought of myself as 10 ft. tall and bullet proof on pot as I did drinking tequila. Why is pot illegal again?

Opinions should be limited to the informed.

The key to the hole thing is it is elleagel.Just like someone comeing to the USA with out the right paper work or no paper work its elleagel.You have got some little kids looking up to someone that is doing something elleagel and they get cought and kicked out of a fed or the police bust them,Do you want your kids looking up to them ,I dont.I cant understand why some people are haveing such a hard time understanding this.

You have to be kidding me with the whole illegal speech. So alcohol and tobacco both legal with 100X worse side effects legal but ok. Its a money thing wake up, so a lifter can be pounding shots of jack all night and need a liver transplant when hes 50 or still worse smoke a pack a day and get lung cancer but smoke a little bud and your the devil. Go do your own research and then tell me if you had to choose one of the 3 tobacco alcohol or pot which one you would want your child to choose. Obviously we wish it was none of them but for the purpose of the argument after you do the research you will realize its pot illegal or not. Find out who was truly behind making marijuana illegal and it will blow your mind the industry and the reason.

Just shows all you cant even pick your nose or the IPF/USAPL Will ban your ass.
With all the rules you cant tell me all of the games they play ,are fun.

Scott i didt know that the USAPL tested for pot thanks for leting me know.I dont do drugs got nothing to hide.I might just join them next year.Thanks

On the comparision of pot, tobacco and alcohol, you make it sound like you have to do them. You don't have to do any of it. That said, last I checked, weed was illegal. It is grown illegally, sold illegally, and consumed illegally. Isn't that enough? Not only that, by saying it is Ok is just telling the kids that are too stupid to make up their own minds, that sitting around your friends house getting stoned is totally ok. To me, it makes for a pathetic person who does not contribute in any way, shape or form to America being better than any other country in the world. But you stoners go on ahead and justify why it is ok to smoke, because it is better than tobacco or alcohol.

not sure how it works in the USA and Canada, but
how it works in Australia and New Zealand is that the powerlifting federation does not have a say in the penalty imposed.
The Drug testing is undertaken by an independent government agency who does the testing for all WADA sports, the penalty for a failed test is also decided by that agency.
www.asada.gov.au
The individual lifter does have the right of appeal during the sentence process, and the national federation can choose to support the lifters appeal, however the decision is made by the government testing agency

This is exactly how it should be, I would be reluctant to allow drug testing by a powerlifting body that could make decisions on who and what to test without independent oversight. As that's the way drug testing becomes a sham.

The IPF or it's affiliates cannot simply decide to
not test or penalise for a substance on the WADA list.

There are two substances on the 2009 WADA list which are prohibited in certain sports in competition: Alcohol ( banned in Motocycling and Karate for example ), and Beta blockers ( banned in snooker and shooting as examples )
Neither substance is banned for powerlifting

Cannabis is banned in ALL sports, In competition only ( however I understand it stays in your system a long time )
Neither are banned in Powerlifting competition tests.

This is funny. Communism? I’m not sure the usapl has anything to do with common ownership of goods or state-owned means of production. Perhaps you meant authoritarianism. However, membership in the usapl is completely voluntary and all criteria, including drug testing, are well known in advance. I also liked the moral fiber argument. Would it be more morally correct (I shudder just typing that) if all joints were rolled with pages from the Bible?

Anonymous wrote:
Leagalize, regulate and tax would be a certain victory to the pot smokers of America. To me, the difference between alcohol and pot is huge. I can have a beer or two, or a glass of wine with dinner. No problem. Is there an equivalent to pot smoking? I do not know, I don't smoke. You are stoned, or not. Pot is a most unfortunate curse and an embarrassment to America.
N one has ever sat smoking pot all afternoon and then gone home and killed his family. Alcohol can't make the same claim.

Anonymous wrote:
On the comparision of pot, tobacco and alcohol, you make it sound like you have to do them. You don't have to do any of it. That said, last I checked, weed was illegal. It is grown illegally, sold illegally, and consumed illegally. Isn't that enough? Not only that, by saying it is Ok is just telling the kids that are too stupid to make up their own minds, that sitting around your friends house getting stoned is totally ok. To me, it makes for a pathetic person who does not contribute in any way, shape or form to America being better than any other country in the world. But you stoners go on ahead and justify why it is ok to smoke, because it is better than tobacco or alcohol.
In several states it is regulated. It is grown legally, sold legally and consumed legally.

JUGGERNAUT:They tried to stop alcohol it was called prohibition.Maybe you heard of it.And you are right about tobacco and boze is not any better. We have enough idiots out ther driveing while drunk.we dont need any more idiots driveing while under a controled substance of any kind.No matter how you put Pot is a bad deal as all drugs are a bad and everyone knows it.You get cought go to jail who cares.

I am well aware of prohibition I am wondering if you know during that time if it stopped people from drinking. Of course it didn't people just went to underground clubs speakeasies and continued drinking making overnight millionaires for the people who supplied them with there booze. The true lose was for the American government that lost out on all those tax dollars for those years. Plus the waste in government dollars in enforcing a law that no one obeyed. Do you know what one of the first things Franklin Roosevelt did when the 21 amendment repealed the 18th he said its time for a drink. Something that was illegal with a flick of a pen became perfectly acceptable. So people are going to smoke pot regardless history proves it just cause a flick of a pen makes it illegal or legal doesn't change the side effects or my opinion of a particular drug or herb. Just like with alcohol there will be responsible drivers and idiots but making alcohol illegal didn't stop people from driving drunk.

The point of prohibition is a good one. But I see no value whatsoever in smoking pot. But at the same time, pot does give losers something to look forward to and be happy about. My question for the pot smokers would be are you OK with your kids sitting around with their friends, taking a couple of nice, long pulls of that joint? Would you sit around with your kids when they are older and get high with them?

Funny how everyone pictures anyone that smokes pot as a non functioning, long hair hippy sitting around the living room all day. Yall watch too many after school specials.

Not considering them long haired hippies. America would be a better place without the pot.

i have a good one for u know it alls. if the wada is used by all y is it that when u do a usapl meet and u get drug tested they DO NOT TEST FOR POT but u do a meet in the ipf or break a ipf record they do?

Personally I don't think marijuana should be on the banned list but it is and rules are rules. If Willie and that other guy entered a meet knowing they would be tested for breaking a record and couldn't cut back there marijuana use leading up to the meet then to bad. Willie probably isn't the sharpest but he probably figured he wouldn't be tested because, according to dave gratton, the CPU rarely tests their athletes. Thats a whole other topic.

Could the inconsistency in suspensions be due to one athlete appealing the decision and the other not appealing the decision. It shows on the CCES site that athletes that appeal marijuana doping violations get there sentence reduced from 2 years to one year.

Anonymous wrote:
Not considering them long haired hippies. America would be a better place without the pot.

America would be a better place without alcohol, over-used painkiller perscriptions, random acts of violence and baseless opinions. We have deviated - as always - from the original question. Should a more moderate approach be taken we testing for pot? Of course it should. And the legal and/or illegal take doesn't hold water. Several legal substances are tested for and thresholds established.
Ganj - just like most everything - should be used in moderation.

Wills suspension is a testament to how weird the CPU is. Everybody complains that they aren't competitive at the worlds, and then comes along a guy who has a legit chance for a medal and they give him the harshest possible suspension.

Yes they were right to suspend him, but jeez, people don't get suspended that long for steroids.

The only problem with this I can see, is that Willy still wants to go back and rock a medal at worlds, then when he does, all these guys saying crap behind his back are gonna start kissing his ass pretending they were with him all along.

Long live the CPO.

Beartrip Wills suspension was dished out from the CCES if Will didn't have the tools to appeal the decision that's his own issue. Had he appealed it like most people would have he could have compete a year ago. This has nothing to do with the CPU. Yeah people do get suspeneded that long for steriods. Check the CCES web site if ygou are uncertain about these things.

He is just a powerlifter bear trap nothing more.

Anonymous wrote:
...Would you sit around with your kids when they are older and get high with them?

I do...but we don't inhale.

what i find funny is that you people are talkn about people smokn somthn illegal when a good majority of you are already doin somthn illegal 'juice'

Puff, puff....give ! Don't fuck up the rotation !

Sure Willie may not be the brightest, but I train with him allo the time and he would be medaling at IPF worlds no doubt about it. Sure bust Willie for weed, but what about the guys who know they can use steroids all year round without fear of ever getting tested. Pretty weird if you ask me...

Steroids, Pot bust them all. But make the punishment the same.Thats the righteous thing to do. One is just as bad as the other.And if you get busted for it, dont cry about it. you knew what would happen to you befor you did it.You took a chance and lost. I dont feel sorry for you to bad you wern't cought sooner.

From what I understand Willy is in a non tested pro division so who cares if he uses marijuana or steriods. Its not cheating...in fact why would he not use as they are not banned and he would be giving up a huge advantage not using....unless he is Mr. Ethics. Look if you compete in the CPU/USAPL you don't use anything not even in moderation. That's their rules. If you want to have fun, use whatever you want and put up some huge numbers you compete in the other federation. No ethical dilemas there.

Rabbit Hole wrote:
Beartrip Wills suspension was dished out from the CCES if Will didn't have the tools to appeal the decision that's his own issue. Had he appealed it like most people would have he could have compete a year ago. This has nothing to do with the CPU. Yeah people do get suspeneded that long for steriods. Check the CCES web site if ygou are uncertain about these things.

He is just a powerlifter bear trap nothing more.

Buddy, I'm Willies friend and I can barely stand him, still the way he gets treated bothers me.

However, all that stuff you said about the cces I don't really get as I just steer away from all that. Its good to know the CPU wasn't jerking him around and that they'll be happy to get him back when they can.

And believe me, when Will feels like it, and maybe bothers to get a suit that isn't 4 years old or a new shirt, he's gonna really do something crazy in single ply.

Suspensions should be handed down because those are the rules and lifters should be educated about the rules of their federation before they enter a contest. These two broke the rules and deserve the suspensions. As for the arguement about moderation where do you draw the line? Probably much simplier to just not use marijuana going into a contest and using after in the off season. When marijuana is legalized than the CCES will change their rules and elimate marijuana as a banned substance.