NZFBB killing the future of bodybuilding

[Andrew]

According the the Sports Disputes Tribunal website:

05 Results/decisions

Touch - 3 Positive drug tests(all Cannabis)

Rugby League - 4 Positive drug tests(2 Cannabis, 1 Epherdrine, 1 fail to supply)

Bodybuilding - 3 Postive tests(1 BZP, 1 Clen, 1 AAS)

Do you have the stats on how many where tested? i.e. pass/fail %

[Andrew]

According the the Sports Disputes Tribunal website:

05 Results/decisions

Touch - 3 Positive drug tests(all Cannabis)

Rugby League - 4 Positive drug tests(2 Cannabis, 1 Epherdrine, 1 fail to supply)

Bodybuilding - 3 Postive tests(1 BZP, 1 Clen, 1 AAS)

Do you have the stats on how many where tested? i.e. pass/fail %

[waldo]

I'll dig up the link form the Herald website, but about two weeks ago there was a listing in the sports section announcing the funding for 17 sports.

I've also got a great idea. Why don't you, Jazz, e-mail the NZFBB and ask for the answers instead of putting it all out there on a website that possibly only two of the NZFBB executive actually read? There's a thought....

[waldo]

Here's your link sunshine:

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/search/story. ... 027AF1014B

17 sports clear as day. I think that article pretty much sums up the criteria for High-Performance funding.

[Jazz]

The 05/06 paper can not be download yet. The 04/05 paper is at http://www.drugfreesport.org.nz/site/dr ... t_2005.pdf. The information you want is on page 7. The problem is on the tribunal's website the have the 05 Calender year, the reports are for the financial years so the numbers don't exactly tie up. However you could compare SPARC's list of funded sports with Drug Free Sports of tested list and you may find there are more than a couple of sports that SPARC funds that does not drug test.

Also would you care to give an opinion on NZFBB using the SPARC logo and claiming sponsorship from SPARC? You seem to be very selective in which parts of my posts you respond to.

[Jazz]

Here's your link sunshine:

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/search/story. ... 027AF1014B

17 sports clear as day. I think that article pretty much sums up the criteria for High-Performance funding.

You did not say high performance funding. Just funding in general. Huge difference.

[Andrew]

Also would you care to give an opinion on NZFBB using the SPARC logo and claiming sponsorship from SPARC? You seem to be very selective in which parts of my posts you respond to.

OK if you insist, If they are using the SPAC logo and claiming sponsorship and there not then surly SPAC would be dealing with this matter

I read the 2005 report you gave the link for and out of 34 sports 1519 athletes where tested and 17 failed, 7 of which where Bodybuilders (out of 40), this is probably not a surprise to most.

With figures like that you really can’t complain about a lack of funding

[Jazz]

You're right that would not be a suprise to most, if anybody.

I am only complaining about a lack of funding in that there seems to be an argument that by having drug testing it will get government funding. The two must go hand in hand, if there is drug testing then there should be government funding. If there is no drug testing then there should be no funding. By having the drug testing it actually makes the problem look worse and gives people opposed to body building ammo for their argument. If there was 0 tests and 0 positives that equals 0%, looks better than 40 tests giving 7 positives making 17.5%. The testing bring bodybuilding into a very bad light and all for what? certainly not any money

[Andrew]

Maybe it’s not about the money maybe it’s about trying to gain some more respect from the general public for the sport..Maybe

[waldo]

Here's your link sunshine:

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/search/story. ... 027AF1014B

17 sports clear as day. I think that article pretty much sums up the criteria for High-Performance funding.

You did not say high performance funding. Just funding in general. Huge difference.

You keep talking about implementing a high performance unit for Bodybuilding. I think there's a definate correlation there.

[MUSCLEROIDS]

This article is from a website

This has been propelled into such a huge issue in the media at the moment especially in the United States. There have been doping scandals , trials, speeches at congress the media has been having a fielday. Somehow the actions of sportspeople trying to better their careers by using performance enhancing drugs has overtaken issues like crime , health care, even the war in Iraq has taken a back seat . The governor of California Arnold Schwarzenegger an avid and publicly acknowledged user is pushing hard for their total ban. The outcome in the United States is unknown but it will have a profound effect on the rest of the world.

Performance enhancement has been around since the beginning of sports, training is even a form of performance enhancement. Sportspeople are always looking for that edge whether it be lighter running shoes, new training technique, right through to getting the newest research chemicals. Joe public has no idea how rampant drugs are in sport with their idols always condemning drugs and drug cheats, these are usually the worst offenders. Carl lewis at the 84' Olympic 100 metre sprint was well beaten by Ben Johnson. Johnson was then disqualified for positive drug test and Lewis promoted to first. Lewis went on to say he could see it in Johnsons eyes that he was on drugs. All these years later we find out that Lewis himself had failed 9 random drug test over his years of competing and yet none had ever been made public. He was a avid anti-drug advocate and was portrayed as a hero and inspiration on how to do it without drugs. So many questions come to mind how ? why ?

These days it comes down to how much money you have backing you . The best Scientists and Dr's are employed for one simple reason to help the athletes win. New drugs are invented all the time that cannot be detected because of this the drug testing organisations are adopting a new policy of inventing performance enhancers so they can be one step ahead. A fair Olympics would be having no drug testing at all , this way the countries that can't afford the top Dr's, scientists and masking agents can still use performance enhancers without worry of disqualification. The first Olympics where drugs made everyone equal.

MUSCLEROID

[Outlaw53]

First of all, what a ripper thread. The passion & input is sensational. Great stuff.

O.K, as an Aussie who is not familiar with NZ BBing, how does one get a Pro Card in NZ? Here in Aust, Pual Graham runs a Pro Qualifier, where the winner becomes an IFBB Pro. It is not tested. I don't believe it should be either. Save the testing for the World Championships, but testing at a Pro Qualifier wouldn't make much sense to me.

If you don't have one, why not start a NZ Pro qualifier? Just don't turn it into the cock-up that we've got over here. For some dumb-arsed reason, the Pro Qualifier is always run about 5-6 weeks after Tony's Aussie Pro Show.

It's just fucking stupid. Every year it's the same. This year is no different. Pro Show March 10th, Pro Qualifier April 22nd?

Run a Pro Qualifier a week before the Aussie Pro Show so your winner can jump on stage for his first Pro contest.

Don't be too hard on yourselves, you guys appear to be a lot better organised than us lot over here.

[Pseudonym]

But Outlaw, being hard on ourselves is what Kiwis do best! :grin:

[Musculo]

how does one get a Pro Card in NZ?

With great difficulty! Hence why we have so few!

Basically you win a regional, win a national title, win the overall at Nationals ie Mr New Zealand. Pass your drug testing (vital key) and then apply to the NZFBB for a pro card as they give the recommendation.

I agree those wanting a pro card shouldn't be tested but because of the funding the NZFBB receive then having a class not drug tested (I am pretty sure) is out of the question. I know from being on the committee for over five years that the pro qualifier class has come up from time to time. The drug testing had been decided on just as I was elected onto the NZFBB but in all honesty I really wonder how benificial it has been to the federation. People do love seeing freaks on stage.

[Outlaw53]

If you guys get government funding, then there is no way you would continue to get it without drug testing.

If you are not getting government funding then I can't see why you would need to test the winner of a Pro Qualifier if you decided to run one.

Seriously, you guys have got it made in the shade.

The Aust government wants nothing to do with BBing. If your's is funding NZ BBing then good for you.

We'd kill for that kind of support over here.

[nzlabrat]

Outlaw53 the NZFBB don't get any government funding at all for doing drug testing. It would be good if they had one show per year but with a new name like the one the AUS use ( NPFC-IFBB ) if they use the name NZFBB then the drug testing guys will turn up to test.

So as I see it the NZSDA is funded be the NZ government and if all the sports that sign up to it don't pay for any testing.Thats why NZFBB sign up for the free testing.

I will be coming over to your show this year.

We'd kill for that kind of support over here.

MUSECLEROIDS.

[Outlaw53]

Outlaw53 the NZFBB don't get any government funding at all for doing drug testing. It would be good if they had one show per year but with a new name like the one the AUS use ( NPFC-IFBB ) if they use the name NZFBB then the drug testing guys will turn up to test.

So as I see it the NZSDA is funded be the NZ government and if all the sports that sign up to it don't pay for any testing.Thats why NZFBB sign up for the free testing.

I will be coming over to your show this year.

We'd kill for that kind of support over here.

MUSECLEROIDS.

Mate, it would be my pleasure to have you compete in the CCI next year.

You won't be tested though, I hope that's O.K? :grin:

You'll win some kick arse prizes though & make plenty of new friends.

Look forward to seeing you in July.

Things are starting to sound as arse-about over there in NZ as they are over here in Aust. :?

[Musculo]

NZFBB receive funding from SPARC http://www.sparc.org.nz

How is SPARC funded?

SPARC receives revenue from two main sources - the Lottery Grants Board and direct Vote funding from the Government. SPARC invests funds in three key areas - Sport Development, Physical Activity (primarily through the Push Play campaign) and High Performance.

Although the funding is only a small amount it wouldn't be granted unless the NZFBB had adopted the drug testing.

[Jazz]

NZFBB receive funding from SPARC http://www.sparc.org.nz

How is SPARC funded?

SPARC receives revenue from two main sources - the Lottery Grants Board and direct Vote funding from the Government. SPARC invests funds in three key areas - Sport Development, Physical Activity (primarily through the Push Play campaign) and High Performance.

Although the funding is only a small amount it wouldn't be granted unless the NZFBB had adopted the drug testing.

Being a former committe member perhaps you could tell us just how much that small amount of funding is. The pure fact is according to SPARC's yearly report they have not funded the NZFBB in the last two years.

Also the NZFBB has no documents nor an results that are obvious that there would be a development program or a high performace program. The push play campaign does not really tie in to competitive sports. Given this which area would the NZFBB be suitable for SPARC funding.

If people wish to keep saying the drug testing and SPARC funding go hand in hand could someone please post proof of this. I have perviously in this thread posted a link to SPARC's annual report which shows they have not funded the NZFBB for the last two years.

[Musculo]

From memory I think the first year was about $5000 and then a smaller amount each other year. MasterTel could probably verify the last few years of figures since hes still on committee. I think if you are a NZFBB member you can request copies of the financial reports and/or that information.

Unfortunately though bodybuilding is seen as a small sport in the big scheme of things, I don't think we will ever see the recognition nor receive any funding it fully deserves. Even gettting promotion through the media of television and newspaper is difficult.

The main difference between IFBB here and in Australia is that the IFBB are all private promoters any money they make goes into their pockets where as here its a non-profit organisation so the money all goes back into the pool. As for drug testing they don't drug test there (I certainly found that out the first year I went to Australasians!). I often wonder if adopting the drug testing for the IFBB was detrimental to the finanical success but I guess those that have been on both sides of the coin could give better opinion on that one.

[MasterTel]

Yes, Musculo - I'm fairly certain that Jazz is correct in saying that the NZFBB have not received $$$ from SPARC for the past two years. SPARC have, however, offered their services to assist the NZFBB to apply for funding from other organisations.

At our next Executive meeting (due for early Feb 2007) I intend initiating a discussion about where we stand in regards to the drug testing policy and our requirement to have it to receive financial assistance.

One consideration for having drug testing (other than funding from SPARC or elsewhere) is that we have it because the majority of members want it? A lot of NZFBB members I have discussed this with are in favour of drug testing.

[Kiwi]

MasterTel - Has the NZFBB applied, as many sporting club do, to the usual sporting/pub charity pokie funding schemes? if so - how has it got on?

[Musculo]

Kiwi, each individual promoter can apply for funding from the machines. Criteria is a lot stricter than it was 3 or 4 years ago and a lot harder to come by. I did however get funding the last two shows I ran in the South Island to cover the cost of the venue. They wouldn't cover judges travel, accommodation, meals, trophies etc

NZ judges are lucky that they get all those costs covered as in Australia they don't. Judges there are lucky if they get a free meal on the day of the judging! Craig will back me on that one!!

[MasterTel]

Yes, Kiwi, the NZFBB does apply for, and receives, funding from pub charity organisations. As Musculo correctly states - this is mostly done by the individual event organisers , like myself.

We need to obtain two quotes for whatever expense we would like funding for, get the NZFBB secretary and president to complete the application, then submit it and hope for the best. The types of expenses I apply for generally are venue hire, sound/lighting, trophies, poster design/printing and judges travel/accommodation. This year NZ Community Trust generously provided $6,000 for the Wellington champs I organised in October plus I think another $3K or $4K combined for at least two other comps. I also received $2K for the 2005 Wellington champs. I haven't seen the breakdown for the $6K recd for the Wellington champs yet, but last year the breakdown of the $2K was $1K each towards venue hire and sound/lighting (towards the full combined cost of approx $8K).

So this money is applied for and received for several of our events, and despite taking time to accumulate quotes and prepare the applications, it is valuable income and generally easier to obtain than the effort required to find a similar amount of sponsorship income.

[Outlaw53]

Musculo is correct.

IFBB in Aust is run by promoters. Members don't get a vote or a say. That's why we get no funding. I prefer your way personally.

What's this Poker Machine funding thing?

I don't think you guys realise how well organised you are over there. From an outsiders point of view, you are doing a great job.

The fact that your judges get their expenses paid for is mind-blowing! It doesn't happen over here. Us poor old judges are expected to give up our day, bring our own food & pay for a parking spot.

I close my gym down for the day when I judge. I'm not complaining personally, because I would go out of my way to support a good show, but it's a love job & nothing else. Lucky I love it I suppose.

I pay for my judges accom & meals for the day, but that's it. When the CCI is pulling in a few more $$$ I'll try & do a bit better. I just reckon it's bad manners to expect someone to help you out all day & not even feed them!

As for testing & non-testing, I have no preference & wouldn't presume to tell any of you what to do, but the fact that you can have a democratic vote & decide for yourselves is fantastic.

Once again, very interesting thread.

Cheers.