Value added? Usada is way more expensive, dummy. The added value is in limited disclosure.
USADA is more expensive, because VADA is funded. The VADA funding is questionable, because nobody knows where it comes from.
But USADA and VADA are not compareable in their costs. When you talk about the costs, make sure that you are comparing the same number of tests. The whole USADA organization is way bigger, because they have their own whereabouts system and doctors available 24/7 for questions regarding drug testing and medication.
Maybe because VADA actually reports to the commission before they report to daddy haymon? Do they use USADA facilities or are they using WADA facilities that USADA also uses? And what does it matter what facilities they're using?While USADA doesn't use CIR testing, VADA does. Why trust an organization that doesn't report drugs tests? :lol1:
1. You always report to the teams, then to the commission
2. Their are independent facilities, but WADA accredited
3. It matters which facilities are used. WADA accredited labs usually have better analytical testing methods with higher accuracy and have testing methods for drug testing which are not generally available. That's why it is so expensive and that's how you are actually catch drug cheats, like for example in the CERA cases.
4. USADA uses CIR for boxing.
What was the USADA cost for Mayweather-Maidana I/II, Mayweather-Alvarez, Mayweather-Guerrero, Mayweather-Cotto, Mayweather-Ortiz, or Mayweather-Mosley? Or any of the other fights that USADA has handled the testing for?
My guess is that the number probably wasn't over $100k.
To hear you tell it, if VADA had been in charge of the testing for Mayweather-Pacquiao, you'd have folks believe that said testing could've been properly handled and administered for $20k.
gtfoh
There are actually check from the Guerrero and Canelo fights which Mayweather posted (which came from Goldenboy), where each time 250k$ were deducted for drug testing.
VADA wouldn't do it for 20k$. You don't get 20k$ drug testing (even when heavily funded by someone who is funding VADA...) with 19 tests per athlete, blood and urine and with CIR.
If all you've got to hang your hat on is that Dr. Goodman's organization is willing to shell out the extra cost to send her samples to a WADA-accredited lab for CIR testing of every sample, you're not hanging on by much (from what I've read CIR testing is only used to check the confirmation of an already tested positive sample, often in appeal situations).
Only two WADA-accredited labs in the country, both of them out west.
CIR is not used on every sample because it's a little bit more expensive and the labs don't have the capacity to test every sample for CIR.
Expense has nothing to do with it. VADA contracts out to random sample collectors, who apparently operate without much formal actual sampling criteria (evidenced by the "Rios pisses into a random drinking cup, while he waits on the collector to return with the specimen cup" situation), while also not having ANY testing facility, anywhere.
Yes, USADA may actually be more expensive; when you're locking in formal sample collectors, formal collection protocols, and formal relationships with labs across the country for full testing of various samples, that extra cost is worth it. penny wise, pound foolish, tbh.
Most organisations are using sample collection companies, who have DCOs (Doping Collection Officers) spread around the country/world to be able to test athletes shortly after they have been selected for a random drug test. That way only the sample has to travel, but not the DCO, which dramatically reduces the cost.
A big problem is, that there is not a process which is testing the knowledge and abilities of the DCOs of the collection companies, especially in less developed countries.