On June 22, 2024, SwimSwam reported that 2020 Olympian Michael Brinegar would not be competing in the 1500m Free prelims of the 2024 US Olympic Trials after the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) ruled in favor of the United States Anti-Doping Agency (USADA)’s allegations of blood doping during a three month period in 2022. This means that Brinegar is facing a four-year ban.
Hear Brinegar’s side of this 2-year process and the effect it has had on this athlete who still claims his innocence in the situation.
Related Articles:
- US Sprinter Erriyon Knighton Cleared for Paris Olympics Following Failed Drug Test
- World Champion Runner Norah Jeruto’s Doping Suspension Lifted Over Claims of Ulcers and COVID-19
SWIMSWAM PODCAST LINKS
- Click here to listen and subscribe on Spotify
- Click here to listen and subscribe on Apple Podcasts
- Click here to listen and subscribe on Podbean
- Click here to listen and subscribe on Google
- Click here to listen and subscribe on YouTube
- Click here to listen and subscribe on Listen Notes
- Click here to listen and subscribe on Stitcher
- Click here to listen and subscribe on iHeartRadio
- Click here to listen and subscribe on Amazon
- Click here to listen and subscribe on Pandora
In the SwimSwam Podcast dive deeper into the sport you love with insider conversations about swimming. Hosted by Coleman Hodges, Garrett McCaffrey, and Gold Medal Mel Stewart, SwimSwam welcomes both the biggest names in swimming that you already know, and rising stars that you need to get to know, as we break down the past, present, and future of aquatic sports.
Opinions, beliefs and viewpoints of the interviewed guests do not necessarily reflect the opinions, beliefs, and viewpoints of the hosts, SwimSwam Partners, LLC and/or SwimSwam advertising partners.
MB should read my posts from the original SwimSwam article
Coleman: thank you for handling the interview with delicacy and professionalism. Not an easy one. And yes, if possible, these stories should be told.
Three comments, and I do not know the answers:
1. Why did CAS/WADA, ex post facto, say the arbitrator was not “experienced enough” when they selected her from a pool of people THEY approved of!, and certified?
2. Is he a pawn or sacrificial lamb in some wider WADA game with USADA?
3. Does WADA and CAS have that much arbitrary power? To me, if this was USA, it looks like they violated his right to due process up and down. How can they suddenly change the time period when he “violated”?
Something is going on, it doesn’t pass the smell test.
Thank you for that. When telling stories like these, I do my best to get someone’s perspective out there without getting in the way of it.
Coleman: as any good interviewer should. My assessment is Mr. Brinegar is burned out emotionally by this process. Remains to be seen how much CAS and WADA can legitimately discharge their duty by him and “the process”. How are violations of their own process and timing for response be legitimately presented. Sure would be nice if they(WADA/CAS) were required to post a time line of their “process”, along with all rules. I doubt, if the process is legitimate, that “we can do what we want whenever we want and the facts and athlete be damned” is either a rational or coherent reason in any court world-wide.
It’s odd to me that USADA pushed it passed the initial arbitrator. I have to feel that is uncommon.
I was pretty critical on the last one of these but I have to say I think Coleman did a nice job here of staying very neutral the whole time in terms of affect.
In my opinion this one is a lot tougher to judge because it’s not based on a positive test. Brinegar has presented an explanation that sounds plausible, at least to me. Of course I’m no expert on hematology and I haven’t seen the actual numbers. This plausible explanation is not the same as “proving innocence,” but maybe it ought to be enough to allow him to compete. It’s hard to say without hearing the other side’s argument.
I watched the whole interview.
I can’t imagine what this long drawn out process did and has done to your mental fitness. Sounds like you got dealt a pretty bad hand. Best wishes pushing forward for a better resolution!
[Note to Michael: if you do anymore video interviews (Zoom calls), I would encourage you to get a halo lamp — about $25 online — to put more light on your face. Doping for performance enhancement is a “dark subject,” and it doesn’t help your cause to have your face half in the shadows. I don’t mean this as a snarky comment, but rather a helpful one as you move forward. Good luck!]
Or just turn around so that the window isn’t at your back.
What bothers me the most is the lack of transparency and timeliness. If USADA is confident enough to make the decision then they should be prepared to divulge the reasoning and information at that time. Without that aspect, they do nothing but invite questioning and doubt regarding their actions. In cases where an athlete is ultimately able to prove their innocence, the delays as he describes are unacceptable due to the massive affects they have on the athlete, their careers, and everyone involved.
Credit to him for going on video and giving his side. I would like to see the evidence against him in detail.
Blood passports are generally pretty reliable, they were honed in cycling where there’s a much bigger pool of pro athletes develop it on than any other endurance sport.
The thing that makes me question it is that EPO’s a hell of a drug for an endurance athlete, watching the ease at which peak Lance Armstrong and his peers used to race up mountains is comical compared to modern cyclists. If Brinegar was seriously blood doping, can’t see how he wouldn’t be destroying everyone.
Dude should have just said he ate a Chinese restaurant!
*at a*
He said what he meant and he meant what he said
Their excuse was the kitchen was contaminated months after the fact. It sounds like it’s plausible that eating the place would work too.
At work, don’t have time to listen to this. Did he dope or nah?
It’s unclear.