Related case:
CAS 2018_A_5768 Dylan Scott vs ITF
September 11, 2019
In August 2017 the International Tennis Federation (ITF) has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the American tennis player Dylan Scott for the use of the prohibited substance Dehydrochlormethyltestosterone (DHCMT) ‘Turinabol’ after the metabolite 4-chloro-18nor-17β-hydroxymethyl, 17α-methyl-5-andros-13-en3-ol was found in his sample. Later in March 2018 the Athlete also tested positive for DHCMT.
After notification a provisional suspension was ordered. The Athlete filed a statement in his defence and he was heard for the ITF Independent Tribunal.
The Athlete argued - with an expert witness - that the metabolite found in his positive sample was not caused by the substance DHCMT but maybe caused by his use of the product Halodrol 22 months earlier. This product has a similar chemical structure to DHCMT and is not listed as a prohibited substance on the WADA List.
The ITF asserted that the Athlete’s theory about the ingestion of the supplement Quad (Halodrol) some 22 months earliers as the source was wholly speculative and unjustified by the scientific evidence. The IFT contended that the Athlete had not on the balance of probability proved the source of the prohibited substance. The ITF finds that undoubtedly the Athlete had been at fault as he deliberately had used a prohormone product Quad that also had an explicit warning on its label.
The Tribunal holds that it is clear from the evidence that the found metabolite is not exclusively and necessarily a metabolite of DHCMT. It may be produced in the body from the ingestion of other exogenous anabolic steroids. These include Halodrol, as relied upon by the Athlete. They also include the steroids known as Promagnon and Methylclostebol. It was noted that Methasterone, a steroid specifically named on the Prohibited List, might also produce this metabolite in question.
The Tribunal accepts the ITF scientific evidence and concludes that Halodrol, Promagnon and Methylclostebol are all substances with a similar chemical structure to DHCMT and that they all constitute Prohibited Substances for the purpose of the Tennis Anti-Doping Programme (TADP).
The Tribunal holds that there was an Anti-Doping Rule Violation and that the Athlete failed to establish that the violaton was not intentional. He also failed to demonstrate that his consumption of Quad 22 months earlier was more likely than not the source of his positive test in July 2017. In addition the similar concentration found in his positive sample in March 2018 makes the Athlete’s theory more unlikely.
Therefore the ITF Independent Tribunal decides on 9 May 2018 to impose a 4 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete starting on the date of the provisional suspension i.e. on 19 August 2017.
