In a candid message shared on social networks, Daniil Gleikhengauz, a noted choreographer and the person leading the Eteri Tutberidze group behind Kamila Valieva’s performances, acknowledged that the coaching staff bears responsibility for a banned substance appearing in the skater’s system.
Gleikhengauz explained that he cannot fathom how the substance found its way into Kamila’s sample. He asserted that none of the coaches would advise an athlete to take any prohibited substance, and he is convinced Kamila did not use it knowingly. He described his own involvement in the process, noting that he participated in interrogations and hearings via video connection. He expressed willingness to keep cooperating to uncover the truth. He added that, regardless of other considerations, the staff bears fault for failing to shield the athlete. These statements were accompanied by a sentiment of sadness and personal pain for him.
The head coach of the group, Eteri Tutberidze, had previously spoken about the perceived purity of her athletes and the training program.
On January 29, the Court of Arbitration for Sport issued a four-year ban against Kamila Valieva after confirming the presence of a restricted substance in her blood, a ruling tied to anti-doping regulations.
Despite the suspension, Valieva participated in the Beijing Olympic Games, where she contributed to a team effort that culminated in a gold medal for the Olympic team competing in the event. The following day, the International Skating Union announced the official podium placements, with the United States earning gold, Japan receiving silver, and Russia taking bronze in the team competition.
Observers noted the moment when Valieva and the officials were seen as medals were presented, highlighting the ongoing scrutiny surrounding the case and the broader discussion about fairness and anti-doping ethics in elite skating.
Further commentary has focused on the implications for coaches, athletes, and national teams, as well as the enduring question of how doping controls intersect with high-stakes competition at the sport’s highest levels. Analysts suggest that the episode could influence future testing protocols, athlete education, and the standards governing coaching staff responsibilities in major events. Attribution: CAS decision; ISU statements; coaching affiliations and public responses were reported by multiple sources covering the case.