This blogpost was originally written in February, after the women’s competition of the Olympics but before the Russian invasion of Ukraine swept it from the headlines.

I guess there is no happy or even unhappy ending to the Kamila Valieva story. But the ripples keep coming and there is simply no good resolution. The following comments, however, don’t address only the doping part. But first…

Here is an update for those interested, but not necessarily interested enough to watch all the coverage of it. Beware: you do have to be interested enough to read this long post!!

In her appeal to the Court of Arbitration, Kamila Valieva argued that the test was a mistake. According to her, her grandfather takes TMZ, the heart med that showed up in her drug test. She took it by mistake. Athletes are required to fill out medical forms listing all the drugs they use, whether for medical reasons or for performance reasons. And thousands of Olympic athletes do take PEDs, albeit usually the legal ones. Some of those legal today are later banned tomorrow when WADA deems it too helpful to athletes. On her list, Kamila listed two other heart meds which are currently legal, plus another drug that boosts immunity. In other words, she was taking a cocktail to help do all those quads. And if she is, I’m certain so do the other women skaters doing quads.

Separating the issue of across the board banning from the details of how it got into her system, I, for one, believe her. Yes, she could be lying. But no official seems to believe your average 15 year old would have known what to take and yeah, her grandfather just happens to have it. It seems perfectly probable that grandpa took his med, left his glass on the sink and left the bathroom. That afterward, she went in, added some water, took *her* meds, and put the glass down and left. It would explain why a smaller amount of the banned drug was found vs the larger amount of her legal drugs. It would also explain why the drug tests she took shortly before and after both came up negative. Now somewhere out there is a B sample. When a urine test is taken, it is split up, in the event the first reading is inconclusive or tainted—or in the event that for any other reason, needs to be tested again. I have heard nothing of what has happened to that sample.[As of mid-April, I still have heard nothing of the backup sample.]

There is also the issue of the skating academy where she trains being under investigation for its practices and now (after IOC President Thomas Bach saw the abuse her coach leveled at her in front of the whole world) will likely expedite that little matter. There is nothing on the record which suggests that any of her other students use. Or rather, that they use illegally. Your average viewer may not understand that distinction. Then again, we *still* don’t know if she herself has a medical condition or if the drugs are purely performance related.

Okay, that’s the details on the latest we know about how it allegedly got into her system. Now, what to about it? There is the hard line approach and the not-so hard line.

First, the hard line. This approach (the approach the IOC has practiced for over twenty years now) is that if you are found with any trace of illegal substance in your system—no matter the amount, no matter the reason, no matter the guilt or innocence of the athlete—it means an instant suspension until it is investigated. Athletes can’t compete. Medals are stripped. No exceptions. By this ruling, Valieva should have been instantly suspended the day the report came out and the gold stripped from the Russian team. That they may have been clean and never tested negative would be meaningless. That is the rule. Or so they say.

Second, the not-so hard line: do an investigation and let them compete on through. What if B proves negative, that maybe that first test was tainted. That happens a lot, enough that there is a reason for the B sample. What if she is found to have not used? By suspending her, the IOC costs her a gold medal. It is better to strip a medal than to cost someone possibly innocent a chance at the medal. Plus, the circumstances matter. While it probably cannot be 100% determined that her story is true, if her grandfather does indeed take the banned med, that combined with that drug being more of a trace than her legal ones, suggests her story is true. That this is the only way it could have got into her system, by this theory. Which makes her innocent. And anybody who thinks that could have given her any advantage doesn’t understand how any of this works.

There is also the matter of her being a minor. Most people suspended or who have medals stripped are adults. There is one major exception to that, which itself is complicated, and which I mentioned in another post last week. The 2000 All Around Gymnastics Olympic Champion was a Romanian named Andreea Raducan. She failed the drug test administered after her win. The reason? She was known to have a cold, and her team doctor gave her cold medicine, one tiny ingredient of which was banned. She hadn’t known, allegedly nor had he. Her gold medal was revoked. She was 16, therefore a minor. HOWEVER, while that medal was revoked, the gold she earned in team competition and the medal she earned in the vault competition, I think it was, she was allowed to keep. She had passed those tests. Years later, she tried to appeal, to get the All-Around medal back. Everyone sympathized with her. Everyone admitted that there was no chance the drug gave her an advantage. There was something else I can’t remember. They effectively found her innocent. But they did not reinstate the medal. In Kamila’s case, one competition she didn’t medal in. The other effects the whole team.

So, what to do?

Who knows? I found out today that the entire US team went to court to try to get their medal—a silver—before they left Beijing. It was rejected. I understand they want their medal. On the other hand, why not wait until the Russians are likely stripped and get the gold instead? It made no sense to me.

There are three other things I wanted to address (I TOLD you it would be a long post).

First, I cannot stand the way the two NBC commentators handled this. I’m a fan of both Tara Lipinski and of Johnny Weir. I believe they (mostly her) have done a great job as commentators, with a slight propensity for being overly critical. Johnny made some mistakes this Olympics that showed he is the weaker of the two. But anyhoo, I thought they both screwed the pooch on Valieva. 1. They failed to properly distinguish between deliberate intention by the athlete and a potential mistake, and between the athlete and potential deliberate intention by the coaches. Way too many comments veered too close to appearing to attack the girl. They must have received a lot of complaints, because they showed more sympathy later, but even then, didn’t make enough of a separation. 2. Their general coverage of her was poor. In the short program, Johnny mentioned her first jump, and maybe one other, and was otherwise silent. At the end, he said, “About all I can say is that was Kamila Valieva’s short program.” I’m sorry, that was horrible, unnecessary, and unprofessional. It was catty. Tara wasn’t quite that extreme, at least. Johnny didn’t say much more after the free skate. He claimed his heart was breaking over her situation, but for a man who oozes sympathy over literally everything, his voice didn’t match his words here. Tara’s did, but she still was critical. When Valieva finished fourth, Johnny’s response was literally “Thank God.” While I believe he echoed what many were already thinking, it was unprofessional to say it aloud. He went further, stating that he now questions everything he ever thought of Valieva and that he felt betrayed? Betrayed by whom? This child, who only sprang on the circuit this season? Betrayed by the Russian coach, who is under investigation? Just who personally betrayed this drama queen? Just a horrible job. They made this about themselves. Their job is to make the audience understand what is going on in skating, i.e. why one jump is worth more than another, or why one program is worth more points than another. Explaining how drugging ruins the sport for everyone is important, but not to the extent of beating a dead horse, and it is not limited just to skating. As commentators, they really “skated” over the line on this issue.

Second, I wanted to address the conspiracy theories that sprang up in the wake of Valieva’s drug test exposure, well, one main one. In her long program, Valieva fell from first place to fourth. She was clearly devastated by her performance and had clearly been thrown off by being in the spotlight, and the scandal. Millions of fans around the world have chosen to believe that the Russians made her throw it. That is ridiculous. What advantage would they gain? She is already up for a medal, the gold the Russian team won. Finishing outside the medals in women’s would change nothing. There would still be an investigation. Meanwhile, if they press, she might be found innocent. Why not wait and see if the Russian women sweep, and then she turns out innocent? That chance is thrown out the window if she throws it. There is zero advantage to her throwing it, but at least two reasons not to! The other conspiracies I never wrote about and no longer remember. But they were equally silly.

Three, the poor sportsmanship we saw after the three Russians were done. Valieva was told she need not face the gauntlet and she fled for protection. Trusova was refusing to play along with the medal ceremony, believing she should be the winner, having done more quads. And the actual winner, Sherbakova, was left standing by herself, clutching a stuffed animal, abandoned in the happiest moment of her life as her two teammates had hysteria. I’ve never seen anything like this before and I hope never to again. As for who should have won, in a clean program, Valieva. She matched the technical difficulty with an insane amount of grace. With her out, Sherbakova’s program, while not quite as difficult as Trusova’s, was much more artistically pleasing. And we go back to the frequent debate. Is figure skating about athleticism or beauty? Is it about what is done with the blades or with the rest of the body? The answer is, it is all of those things. Trusova had an impressive number of quads. But she has little grace as a skater, and could improve that with another year or two of experience. That night, Sherbakova was the best skater.

At the end of the day, we may never know what happened with Valieva, not the whole truth. And it may yet be a while before we know what will happen to her, her fellow teammates, and the wider issue of Russian doping. What we do know is that in that week, we watched what could easily have been the greatest skater any of us have ever seen, talented and flawless. And we watched while all this turned to travesty in the women’s competition, a complete circus. This is a tragedy of the sport, well above and beyond the original charge of doping.