Biogenesis / Troicki / Cilic / Doping in Tennis

[britbox]

RE: Biogenesis Scandal - Tennis Players on the books

I'm not getting defensive.. I find it pretty funny. He gets criticised for naming players in years old posts and when he refrains from it, it's repeatedly demanded that he starts naming them. When he doesn't, the response is "Sod it, let's start throwing cakes anyway... Pass me the Federer hot cross bun...."

Have to laugh buddy... I'm not taking this thread very seriously since it became more about what a poster isn't posting and might be thinking rather than discussing the topic at hand.

I wouldn't eat the Federer bun, if I were you. There might be something in it!

I think you're missing the point on why people are suspicious of Front on this one, but that's cool. I missed the point on something before and - wait, I tell a lie, I didn't! :snigger

I thought I was wrong on one occasion too, but realised I was mistaken.

 

[tented]

RE: Biogenesis Scandal - Tennis Players on the books

All right, let's try this.

Who has watched the video and/or read the accompanying article? (This is what Britbox used to begin the whole thread 100+ posts ago.)

http://espn.go.com/espn/otl/story/_/id/9508288/biogenesis-whistleblower-broke-open-scandal-says-ncaa-mma-nba-other-athletes-used-clinic-mlb-investigation

They're worth watching and reading.

Anyone have any thoughts on them they would like to share?

 

[Johnsteinbeck]

RE: Biogenesis Scandal - Tennis Players on the books

I provided my opinion of doping, you only have yours unless you can bring scientific evidence on how doping benefits tennis performance. I believe it's inconsequential or marginal at best.

Stop your analogy crap, don't compare what you can do with what I can do.......tennis it's a relative EASY sport compare to basketball when it comes to physical endurance. That's my point, are you in the inquisition of the tennis boards? Hold me to a higher standard whenever I make "common people" observation to what my experience is? This is easy, you DON'T stop in basketball...defense and offense; nowhere to hide. In tennis you can winged it the whole math on your returns and only put effort sporadically.

huge conspirators all around...it only takes people to talk. in elementary schools, little girls conspire to exclude a particular one from the group.......it's human nature

you don't stop in basketball?? most players stop at least every minute, for heaven's sake, and jog half the time. then there's always four other guys. and substitutes, so you get to sit on the bench for a while if you're running out of breath. after 12 minutes, you get a nice little break. 24 minutes and you get a big comfy break, time for a snack, maybe even a quick massage. then it's back on the court for another 2x12 minutes (including time on the bench).*

and tennis is an EASY sport? what matches are you looking at? i'd like to set you up with Novak on the other side and have you lunging for a couple of those balls, then try to get them back with interest. for an hour. and another. and sometimes for a nother two or three.

again, you're basically are saying that tennis isn't athletical. so these guys train and sweat like idiots just because they want to look good on the beach?


*in case anyone doesn't notice: of course i'm being sarcastic. like in every other professional sport, the athleticism in Basketball is incredibly evolved. no matter what the specific set of rules in a sport are, basically every sport that involves moving your body will have you benefit for strong bodily effort. the players who realize that will have an advantage, setting off a circle that will have others improve as well so that they can keep up.

 

[huntingyou]

RE: Biogenesis Scandal - Tennis Players on the books

I provided my opinion of doping, you only have yours unless you can bring scientific evidence on how doping benefits tennis performance. I believe it's inconsequential or marginal at best.

Stop your analogy crap, don't compare what you can do with what I can do.......tennis it's a relative EASY sport compare to basketball when it comes to physical endurance. That's my point, are you in the inquisition of the tennis boards? Hold me to a higher standard whenever I make "common people" observation to what my experience is? This is easy, you DON'T stop in basketball...defense and offense; nowhere to hide. In tennis you can winged it the whole math on your returns and only put effort sporadically.

huge conspirators all around...it only takes people to talk. in elementary schools, little girls conspire to exclude a particular one from the group.......it's human nature

you don't stop in basketball?? most players stop at least every minute, for heaven's sake, and jog half the time. then there's always four other guys. and substitutes, so you get to sit on the bench for a while if you're running out of breath. after 12 minutes, you get a nice little break. 24 minutes and you get a big comfy break, time for a snack, maybe even a quick massage. then it's back on the court for another 2x12 minutes (including time on the bench).

and tennis is an EASY sport? what matches are you looking at? i'd like to set you up with Novak on the other side and have you lunging for a couple of those balls, then try to get them back with interest. for an hour. and another. and sometimes for a nother two or three.

again, you're basically are saying that tennis isn't athletical. so these guys train and sweat like idiots just because they want to look good on the beach?

we agree to disagree on this one, I play both sports...there is no hiding on a basketball court. The physical output it's much higher.

If Novak it's on the other side of the court, he would win in 15 minutes 6-0, 6-0

 

[Front242]

RE: Biogenesis Scandal - Tennis Players on the books

one more try, though: what about that "doping benefits mental fortitude"? sorry, but i really think it's BS. doesn't make sense to me. Front, you've hinted before, if i recall correctly, at having more info on that - i'd appreciate it, or anyone else's input, because i really can't imagine any benefit for tennis there.

Well it's not really info, just observation. I mean you can see that guys lifting huge weights in the gym do get mental stimulation as well as huge strength increases from massively amplified testosterone. So I mentioned before in that respect it's basically a case of their brains telling them "I can do this". They feel like Superman. Translate that to tennis and if you're taking stuff for stamina like EPO your added lung capacity also makes you feel superhuman and of course it helps greatly mentally. You know even if you fall behind, if you play smart and run your opponent ragged you'll likely outlast them physically and turn things round.

alright, thanks. so if it's just observation, i can fully discard this, because i think it makes little sense in the translation to tennis. i just don't see it.

how much will knowing you can outlast an opponent physically help you in a sport where, with a little luck, your opponent might blast you off the court in an hour or two? and if you're feeling superhuman due to your great juiced-up physical abilities, how will you cope when the guy actually sends winners to your left and right for a while, which can always happen in the sport? the "i can do this" mentality will only take you so far as you can actually do it, and you'll have to face reality sooner or later. a juiced-up bodybuilder who can, due to his doping ways, can push more than ever before and more than anyone else of course will seem quite confident. a tennis player who still has to struggle and fight against his top-ranked opponents? why would he be so overly confident - or more confident than any other guy who just happens to be winning a lot?
also, the thing about increased aggression is not just an observation, that's a fact - and i really think this side-effect could be very counterproductive in tennis (note: it would also mean that primarily defensive players are per evidence less likely to be doping, so i'll take that as a note).


so while aggressive doping might have side effects on the psychological side, i really don't see how that would be a systematic advantage in any way.

An easier answer than you might have suspected. It's simple. A game plan of 100% non stop barrage of offensive shotmaking is extremely difficult to sustain and everyone of the top players knows this. The margins are so small going for lines all the time that more often than not the guy blasting winners left, right and centre has to come back down to earth, drop serve, lose focus, a set and before you know it you're back on level terms score wise. Then the doubt sets in. Why couldn't I sustain this barrage of winners? I'm feeling tired and puzzled now that my gameplan isn't working and this other guy is so damn fit. What do I do? Meanwhile said fitter guy is staring over the net at the broken man, a quivering bowl of jelly who's since lost all his willpower and his game plan that started off great has now gone down the toilet and the fitter of the two is able to run the mentally exhausted, confused guy (who was leading before) ragged while he struggles to come up ideas since the lull in performance cost him dearly and got him back on level terms scorewise. And in the ensuing panic he's clueless as to how to respond to an energizer bunny exhausting him running him all over the baseline like a headless chicken simply because his superhuman stamina prevailed.

And it prevailed because of the knowledge that the offensive barrage from his opponent couldn't last forever so he knew he had to take advantage at the first opportunity. Knowing he had the gas in the tank to do so is a huge mental advantage. So there, drugs for stamina greatly aid the mind. If you want examples of greatly aided physical endurance helping from the onset, think only of such fitness that you can run down everything that would normally be a winner, thereby frustrating the hell out of the opponent from the get go, causing them to misfire like an 80 year old man with erectile dysfunction.

 

[Johnsteinbeck]

RE: Biogenesis Scandal - Tennis Players on the books

you don't stop in basketball?? most players stop at least every minute, for heaven's sake, and jog half the time. then there's always four other guys. and substitutes, so you get to sit on the bench for a while if you're running out of breath. after 12 minutes, you get a nice little break. 24 minutes and you get a big comfy break, time for a snack, maybe even a quick massage. then it's back on the court for another 2x12 minutes (including time on the bench).

and tennis is an EASY sport? what matches are you looking at? i'd like to set you up with Novak on the other side and have you lunging for a couple of those balls, then try to get them back with interest. for an hour. and another. and sometimes for a nother two or three.

again, you're basically are saying that tennis isn't athletical. so these guys train and sweat like idiots just because they want to look good on the beach?

we agree to disagree on this one, I play both sports...there is no hiding on a basketball court. The physical output it's much higher.

If Novak it's on the other side of the court, he would win in 15 minutes 6-0, 6-0

alright then. i'm just amazed that we're on such different pages on this one. i too play both sports. maybe it's because i'm tall-ish, but i really can deal much better with basketball. i've gotten cramps in my legs playing tennis - never have had that happen in basketball, not even during tourneys that'd have me doing a couple of matches in a day. but i'm aware that my amateur version really doesn't give me a glimpse into how demanding either sport can be on a professional level.


never mind the tennis vs basketball part - i really don't get why you claim that tennis isn't physical. isn't it obvious that, given a certain period of time to evolve and professionalize, every sport will have it's athletes maximize their physical potential? i mean, even freaking ice dancers are incredible physical specimen, with impressive strength and stamina (and yes, they could, under certain circumstances, probably benefit from PEDs. probably not so much as to make it worth the risk, but they certainly could benefit, be it for the 2 mins of competition or the relentless hours of training).


so i'll try this aspect again: since you're, like me, a fan of Rafa, you might have seen the pics of him in the gym, hitting the weights, or outside, mtb-riding. we know the stories of Andy Murray's brutal fitness regime. we see how ripped Novak is. i've heard tales (for example by Koubek, who got to train with him) about how physicall demanding Roger's training is.... if tennis were as easy and comfortable a sport, where you can basically relax for an hour or two - why on earth would they go through all that? and how would these obviously extremely fit guys even break a sweat, let alone get as soaked as we often see them?



seriously, am i the only one who is just baffled by this argumentation? come on, there must be someone else out there who also feels like there might be a bit of athleticism and physical demand in our sport!

 

[huntingyou]

RE: Biogenesis Scandal - Tennis Players on the books

I provided my opinion of doping, you only have yours unless you can bring scientific evidence on how doping benefits tennis performance. I believe it's inconsequential or marginal at best.

Stop your analogy crap, don't compare what you can do with what I can do.......tennis it's a relative EASY sport compare to basketball when it comes to physical endurance. That's my point, are you in the inquisition of the tennis boards? Hold me to a higher standard whenever I make "common people" observation to what my experience is? This is easy, you DON'T stop in basketball...defense and offense; nowhere to hide. In tennis you can winged it the whole math on your returns and only put effort sporadically.

John you are good guy, can you please read my bold letters and tell me honestly when I said tennis is not a demanding sport or worse yet; athletic?

 

[Johnsteinbeck]

RE: Biogenesis Scandal - Tennis Players on the books

alright, thanks. so if it's just observation, i can fully discard this, because i think it makes little sense in the translation to tennis. i just don't see it.

how much will knowing you can outlast an opponent physically help you in a sport where, with a little luck, your opponent might blast you off the court in an hour or two? and if you're feeling superhuman due to your great juiced-up physical abilities, how will you cope when the guy actually sends winners to your left and right for a while, which can always happen in the sport? the "i can do this" mentality will only take you so far as you can actually do it, and you'll have to face reality sooner or later. a juiced-up bodybuilder who can, due to his doping ways, can push more than ever before and more than anyone else of course will seem quite confident. a tennis player who still has to struggle and fight against his top-ranked opponents? why would he be so overly confident - or more confident than any other guy who just happens to be winning a lot?
also, the thing about increased aggression is not just an observation, that's a fact - and i really think this side-effect could be very counterproductive in tennis (note: it would also mean that primarily defensive players are per evidence less likely to be doping, so i'll take that as a note).


so while aggressive doping might have side effects on the psychological side, i really don't see how that would be a systematic advantage in any way.

An easier answer than you might have suspected. It's simple. A game plan of 100% non stop barrage of offensive shotmaking is extremely difficult to sustain and everyone of the top players knows this. The margins are so small going for lines all the time that more often than not the guy blasting winners left, right and centre has to come back down to earth, drop serve, lose focus, a set and before you know it you're back on level terms score wise. Then the doubt sets in. Why couldn't I sustain this barrage of winners? I'm feeling tired and puzzled now that my gameplan isn't working and this other guy is so damn fit. What do I do? Meanwhile said fitter guy is staring over the net at the broken man, a quivering bowl of jelly who's since lost all his willpower and his game plan that started off great has now gone down the toilet and the fitter of the two is able to run the mentally exhausted, confused guy (who was leading before) ragged while he struggles to come up ideas since the lull in performance cost him dearly and got him back on level terms scorewise. And in the ensuing panic he's clueless as to how to respond to an energizer bunny exhausting him running him all over the baseline like a headless chicken simply because his superhuman stamina prevailed.

And it prevailed because of the knowledge that the offensive barrage from his opponent couldn't last forever so he knew he had to take advantage at the first opportunity. Knowing he had the gas in the tank to do so is a huge mental advantage. So there, drugs for stamina greatly aid the mind. If you want examples of greatly aided physical endurance helping from the onset, think only of such fitness that you can run down everything that would normally be a winner, thereby frustrating the hell out of the opponent from the get go, causing them to misfire like an 80 year old man with erectile dysfunction.

okay, so you just explained how feeling assured about superior stamina would help you mentally. i though you meant that psychopharmalogical (side)effects of PEDs would help you. but i guess that's not the case.

especially because in tennis, it's never possible to dope yourself into omnipotence. in fact, it isn't possible in any sport whatsoever, but especially in a sport where a match might be over before the stamina aspect really kicks in. but again, this isn't even about doping effects specifically, which is what i thought you'd meant. so sorry for my mis-interpretation, i guess.

 

[britbox]

RE: Biogenesis Scandal - Tennis Players on the books

I agree JS, it's a physically demanding sport and these guys are at the top of food chain.There's nowhere to hide in tennis either.

 

[tented]

RE: Biogenesis Scandal - Tennis Players on the books

I'm feeling puzzled now that my gameplan isn't working ... What do I do? ... his game plan that started off great has now gone down the toilet ... the mentally exhausted, confused guy (who was leading before) struggles to come up ideas ... And in the ensuing panic he's clueless as to how to respond ...

If these are the things PEDs supposedly help, then we know Rafa isn't taking them. * :laydownlaughing






[PM me if you interpret this as anything other than a joke based on how stubborn Rafa can be, or if you think this is my way of insinuating Rafa really is doping, or if you interpret this as Roger is taking PEDs.]

 

[Johnsteinbeck]

RE: Biogenesis Scandal - Tennis Players on the books

John you are good guy, can you please read my bold letters and tell me honestly when I said tennis is not a demanding sport or worse yet; athletic?

well, when you insist that increasing stamina and/or strength (including speed, as a product of strength) through PEDs would not help a tennis player, it's really the only conclusion i can draw, isn't it?

again, i think you and i aren't so far from one another, as in that really, i believe that in tennis, the benefit isn't big enough to outweigh the risk. however, i think it's ridiculous to deny that there aren't quite considerable benefits to be achieved.

or let's put it this way:
1) do you think that stamina, speed and strength do play a role in winning tennis matches?
2) do you recognize that there are substances out there that can improve your stamina, speed and strenght?

3) if you've answered yes on both accounts, then why would doping be "inconsequential" in tennis?



oh, and tented, i might have to borrow this line to close all doping related postings of mine:

[PM me (...) if you think this is my way of insinuating Rafa really is doping]

 

[ClayDeath]

RE: Biogenesis Scandal - Tennis Players on the books

I agree JS, it's a physically demanding sport and these guys are at the top of food chain.There's nowhere to hide in tennis either.

there is everywhere to hide in team sports baron.


what kind of scotch are you drinking? I am going to have to send you a few bottles of single malt scotch (12 years old at least).

there is just nowhere to hide in tennis obviously.

 

[huntingyou]

RE: Biogenesis Scandal - Tennis Players on the books

John you are good guy, can you please read my bold letters and tell me honestly when I said tennis is not a demanding sport or worse yet; athletic?

well, when you insist that increasing stamina and/or strength (including speed, as a product of strength) through PEDs would not help a tennis player, it's really the only conclusion i can draw, isn't it?

again, i think you and i aren't so far from one another, as in that really, i believe that in tennis, the benefit isn't big enough to outweigh the risk. however, i think it's ridiculous to deny that there aren't quite considerable benefits to be achieved.

or let's put it this way:
1) do you think that stamina, speed and strength do play a role in winning tennis matches?
2) do you recognize that there are substances out there that can improve your stamina, speed and strenght?

3) if you've answered yes on both accounts, then why would doping be "inconsequential" in tennis?



oh, and tented, i might have to borrow this line to close all doping related postings of mine:

[PM me (...) if you think this is my way of insinuating Rafa really is doping]

Ok, tell me how ped can improve stamina and speed in measurable terms? strengths is not a factor in tennis otherwise you would have muscle guys ruling the sport. Power in tennis come from TECHNIQUE....once you are already relative strong through training; there is no point of increasing body mass. It's counterproductive actually.

 

[ClayDeath]

RE: Biogenesis Scandal - Tennis Players on the books

Go to the Cilic thread, buddy, and you see Front insinuating that Rafa was out with a silent ban. It's fair to ask where people are coming from with their views, especially when they evade questions about their motives...

front is a good poster but clearly he wants to play both sides of the fence.

I don't even know what he said in the past. just one post and I knew he had a an issue with the clay warrior.


no worries. lot of people have issues with the clay warrior.

I think it is almost amusing.

the man snatches 97% of ALL his red clay matches for nearly a decade.

he takes 100% of the finals at RG and wins nearly 98% of ALL his matches there.

he has dominated the red clay for a decade.


he has won 20 matches against roger.

he has won 20 matches against nole.

probably 20 against ferru who is pretty damn good in his own right.

he has a winning record against murray.

he has owned berdych on ALL surfaces since the last great biblical flood.



I can see the envy on the part of some people. I saw it at tennis4you and I saw it the most at mtf.

those people there are just eaten up with blind envy and blind hate.

---

I know that baron britbox but those names get thrown out a lot. I am making it clear to the masses that the top guns don't need it. and that is the point here from my vantage point anyway.

I am busy making my own point about the sport in my own unique way. it is a sport that happens to require an immense amount of skill. and then you need all that natural ability. you either have that or you don't.


I have played the sport at a fairly high level. I was born with amazing speed and unlimited endurance (high level of vo2max).

still I worked day and night to develop my strokes without which I would not have been able to beat anyone.

I would blast the cement wall 2-3 hours a day minimum before even hitting the practice courts. I even put in a few 10 hour days which is insane but that is what it took for me.

anyway it is not rocket science. anybody reading any of front`s posts would quickly figure out that he is obsessed with nadal.


but we, on the other hand, make it a point to not name anybody because that is what you do when you don't have any evidence. i refuse to accuse anybody even with evidence because i may not know the nature of the evidence.


hell I don't even believe troicki is guilty in any way. surely there is some sort of miscalculation.


i have said all along that this deal is a nonissue in our sport.


but the discussion is fascinating anyway. and folks are enjoying the debates and the discussions.

CD , I agree it's ludicrous to think anyone is going to be successful in the sport without supreme talent. Take that as a given. All the top pros are insanely talented and in the main, exceptional athletes.

That is separate from the doping issue. Doping gives that extra edge - it can help boost stamina, strength, endurance and recovery beyond normal limits. It's a difference maker - not the core reason that these guys are great tennis players.

I followed cycling for years and saw the difference it made. (It made a bigger difference in cycling because of the nature if the sport). I saw a quality classics/one day rider transformed into a multiple grand tour champion. People refused to believe it was a by-product of systematic doping and those that did were pilloried, bullied or sued. We know the truth now and the sport has descended into a laughing stock.

Tennis has been roundly criticised by WADA and USADA for it's pitiful testing programme. Dope doctors have confirmed they are working with tennis players. Evidence of doped tennis players has been ordered to be destroyed (The Fuentes case). Ex-players have said they believe doping is an issue and we've also seen 2 Top 20 calibre players under the spotlight this week.

We can deny the problem exists or tennis can get it's house in order and avoid bigger scandals further down the line as we have seen with other sports.

I'd prefer the latter option.

i hear ya mate but i think you and i just see this deal from different vantage points. and i don't have a problem with that. it makes for a good discussion here for all the others as well.


you see it as a problem because you have seen what it can do to the sport as we have seen in cycling.

still cycling is not any less popular. in fact, it is more popular than ever. the tour is still the single most popular sporting event on the planet. in part because of the nature of it. it has 21 stages and is 21 days long.

and there is no question that one can obtain an edge but mostly in sports like cycling, weightlifting, American football, baseball, basketball, and track and field. and hence that is where the use is most rampant.

marginal cost greatly exceeds the marginal benefits in tennis of doping. it is just not the right sport for it.

you simply cannot beat the better players day in and day out because they are simply more talented and more gifted. they are also shrewd problem solvers on the court. they encounter far less difficulty in performing under clutch circumstances. they are mentally tough and they have massive testicular fortitude. they will not give in even for a single point.

and they are physically gifted. they have the right height and so forth.


you may have noticed that the short guys don't win anything big in modern tennis.


so no amount of doping will help you beat the better players. you can take that stuff until the end of all time. you are just not going to win even a masters event, let alone a slam.

that small edge that you speak of is too insignificant in our sport.

guys doping doesn't pay in our sport. it is not even an issue in the sport from my vantage point.


it pays where its use is rampant. that should have been your first clue.


I am bumping this post again.

 

[tented]

RE: Biogenesis Scandal - Tennis Players on the books

All right, let's try this.

Who has watched the video and/or read the accompanying article? (This is what Britbox used to begin the whole thread 100+ posts ago.)

http://espn.go.com/espn/otl/story/_/id/9508288/biogenesis-whistleblower-broke-open-scandal-says-ncaa-mma-nba-other-athletes-used-clinic-mlb-investigation

They're worth watching and reading.

Anyone have any thoughts on them they would like to share?

"What he can't believe, he said, is that law enforcement never took up the case ..."

If you had access to as much information as he did (several boxes of documents), and now your goal is for there to be a federal investigation, why would you go to the Miami New Times -- a free weekly newspaper? He didn't even go to the Miami Herald.

These seem like odd choices. I would have gone to the FBI, plus saved copies to show the New York Times in case the FBI didn't do anything.

I'm not trying to start a conspiracy theory, but his choices are striking.

 

[Front242]

RE: Biogenesis Scandal - Tennis Players on the books

huntingyou Wrote:

[/quote]

Ok, tell me how ped can improve stamina and speed in measurable terms? strengths is not a factor in tennis otherwise you would have muscle guys ruling the sport. Power in tennis come from TECHNIQUE....once you are already relative strong through training; there is no point of increasing body mass. It's counterproductive actually.
[/quote]

I recall a witty and brilliant quote by Britbox recently, quoted below and it pretty much sums things up regarding PEDs for speed.

"I'm sure elite athletes can run 100 metres in a straight line without doping too... but... "

Really think they wouldn't take them unless they made a huge difference? For stamina they'll work for marathons, cycling, etc. Of course both can be done naturally but try competing against a top performer in any sport where all other things being equal you're on level terms. Then the guy on PEDs has a clear edge in speed and stamina.

Regarding power I agree I mean look at Fed's tiny arms. That said I'm sure if his arms and torso had a bit more beef he'd also serve a bit harder too so you can look at it two ways. But regarding serve it's clear that while he's way smaller now than he was in 2004-2006, Nadal for example, doesn't serve any faster than Federer who has puny arms. Aside from 2010 of course, which was down to a grip change that he never chose to use again eventhough he was frequently serving over 130mph.

 

[ClayDeath]

RE: Biogenesis Scandal - Tennis Players on the books

nonsense. they can all serve at 130 mph or at higher speeds.

nadal has shoulder issues so he stopped quickly after 2010.

even fabrice santoro has hit serves at 130+ mph.


and now I heard that ryan Harrison hit one at 142 mph.



nadal is muscular and strong because its the nature of his heavy topspin strokes and the nature of his game. it is a very demanding style of play.

average player would lose his arm trying to hit like nadal.

I played with heavy topspin off both wings too. and I looked like Hercules without hitting the damn weights.

these days ALL of the players have to hit the gym. there is no choice or any other option.

it is one of the biggest trends in the sport which was discussed in my tennis mega trends thread:

supreme fitness is one of the final frontier`s in tennis.


but you are free to call it doping if you wish.

no amount of doping can buy you the fitness required to dominate slams in tennis. or even the masters events.

 

[Front242]

RE: Biogenesis Scandal - Tennis Players on the books

nonsense. they can all serve at 130 mph or at higher speeds.

nadal has shoulder issues so he stopped quickly after 2010.

even fabric santoro has hit serves at 130+ mph.


and now I heard that ryan Harrison hit one at 142 mph.

Given that doing so improves the chances of earning more free points I'm sure they all would if they could.

 

[Johnsteinbeck]

RE: Biogenesis Scandal - Tennis Players on the books

nonsense. they can all serve at 130 mph or at higher speeds.

nadal has shoulder issues so he stopped quickly after 2010.

even fabric santoro has hit serves at 130+ mph.


and now I heard that ryan Harrison hit one at 142 mph.

Given that doing so improves the chances of earning more free points I'm sure they all would if they could.

well, i think /technically/ yes, pretty much all pros would be capable of accelerating the ball to 130 and bring it somewhere across the net. do it with the necessary spin and placement necessary to make it a viable weapon in a match? that's another issue of course, because otherwise yes, everyone would make almost every serve a 130+ one.

Ok, tell me how ped can improve stamina and speed in measurable terms? strengths is not a factor in tennis otherwise you would have muscle guys ruling the sport. Power in tennis come from TECHNIQUE....once you are already relative strong through training; there is no point of increasing body mass. It's counterproductive actually.

how can PED improve stamina and speed? i reckon they don't, which is why i've never heard of an endurance athletes (like cyclists) or athletes who need speed (like sprinters) ever doping...:s
and yes, strength is not an issue - again, all our favorite pros hit the weights because they like the "clank" sound the machines make.

just to be clear: modern PEDs are more than your average 1970ies juicer bodybuilder testosterone...:nono

---

and there is no question that one can obtain an edge but mostly in sports like cycling, weightlifting, American football, baseball, basketball, and track and field. and hence that is where the use is most rampant.

marginal cost greatly exceeds the marginal benefits in tennis of doping. it is just not the right sport for it.

you simply cannot beat the better players day in and day out because they are simply more talented and more gifted. they are also shrewd problem solvers on the court. they encounter far less difficulty in performing under clutch circumstances. they are mentally tough and they have massive testicular fortitude. they will not give in even for a single point.

and they are physically gifted. they have the right height and so forth.


you may have noticed that the short guys don't win anything big in modern tennis.


so no amount of doping will help you beat the better players. you can take that stuff until the end of all time. you are just not going to win even a masters event, let alone a slam.

that small edge that you speak of is too insignificant in our sport.

guys doping doesn't pay in our sport. it is not even an issue in the sport from my vantage point.


it pays where its use is rampant. that should have been your first clue.


I am bumping this post again.

thanks, and i'll bump the bump - because this is so close to hunting's point, yet makes so much more sense. the edge that you can get from doping in tennis might not be big enough to justify the risk. this is debatable. i happen to agree. but to deny any potential edge is ridiculous.

 

[ClayDeath]

RE: Biogenesis Scandal - Tennis Players on the books

bump the bump. I like it.

we may have to name a song "bump the bump".