Biogenesis / Troicki / Cilic / Doping in Tennis

[Moxie]

Talking of Recovery, I do remember vaguely something about
Novak finding a new method which he wanted to keep it secret.
It was something like sitting inside a globe (too vague). But,
Novak mentioned that it is completely legal.

If it is some ingenious method and it is legal, why is
everybody else not using it? Surely method would leak.

My wild guess here is that ITF/ATP must have more
thoroughly examined his recovery method and might
have told him that, "Hey Buddy, It is not proper,
don't do it and we will hush it up" and Djokovic
complied. Whatever he did before might not have been technically
illegal as it was completely new technique and often
law lags behind science and technology.

This conspiracy theory kind of explains as to
why Novak was depleted in the Wimbledon Final
after a 5-set semifinal with Delpo two days before
in complete contrast to the way he is usually
known to recover recently.

I know I am not giving any proof or for that
matter, even evidence. I am just in a wild
conspiracy theory mode right now.

For equal opportunity fingerpointing without evidence,
does it mean anything that Murray trains out of Miami
for substantial portions of the year and some famous
PED pushers operate out of Miami.

I will leave the floor to anybody who might have
more knowledge about these to discuss it further.
Although, I am just throwing the conspiracy theory out there,
I would prefer people to discuss it based on evidence instead
of going on a limb like me.

Yes, I think you're out on a limb right now. This is my objection...where people make leaps in connections without an substantiation. It impunes the players, and doesn't really move the conversation forward.

The Djokovic "globe" you're talking about is some oxygen egg that he was supposedly sometimes sitting in. (It's not really known how much he used it.) I do think the ITP should rule on it, but if you're question is why don't all players use it, the answer is because it's hugely expensive.

As to Murray training in Miami and Ferrer training in Valencia (Front's point,) I disagree with guilt-by-geographic association. That's too tenuous.

And I would say this about what you say about Djokovic's flag in the Wimbledon final after the tough semi with JMDP: if nothing else, it could say that he IS human and not using artificial stimulants. If it was just a matter of dope, he would certainly have made a better show of it. If it's down to how tough you are on a given day, it makes sense that sometimes they can summon it, and sometimes they can't.

 

[ClayDeath]

I say let them all dope. it beats the hell out of chasing them to all four corners of the globe each and every waking moment hour just to test them.

Olympians are being chased around the bloody clock day and night, 365 days a year just so they can be tested.

tennis doesn't really have a doping problem but a few other sports do.

you will most likely win less in tennis if you dope and not more.

you need unbelievable skills and doping will not deliver those skills. there is no substitute for what is needed in tennis. you have to be gifted and then you need sick skills.

and if that was not enough, you then need mental toughness, testicular fortitude, court intelligence, and the ability to perform under incredible pressure.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

Talking of Recovery, I do remember vaguely something about
Novak finding a new method which he wanted to keep it secret.
It was something like sitting inside a globe (too vague). But,
Novak mentioned that it is completely legal.

If it is some ingenious method and it is legal, why is
everybody else not using it? Surely method would leak.

My wild guess here is that ITF/ATP must have more
thoroughly examined his recovery method and might
have told him that, "Hey Buddy, It is not proper,
don't do it and we will hush it up" and Djokovic
complied. Whatever he did before might not have been technically
illegal as it was completely new technique and often
law lags behind science and technology.

This conspiracy theory kind of explains as to
why Novak was depleted in the Wimbledon Final
after a 5-set semifinal with Delpo two days before
in complete contrast to the way he is usually
known to recover recently.

I know I am not giving any proof or for that
matter, even evidence. I am just in a wild
conspiracy theory mode right now.

For equal opportunity fingerpointing without evidence,
does it mean anything that Murray trains out of Miami
for substantial portions of the year and some famous
PED pushers operate out of Miami.

I will leave the floor to anybody who might have
more knowledge about these to discuss it further.
Although, I am just throwing the conspiracy theory out there,
I would prefer people to discuss it based on evidence instead
of going on a limb like me.

Yes, I think you're out on a limb right now. This is my objection...where people make leaps in connections without an substantiation. It impunes the players, and doesn't really move the conversation forward.

The Djokovic "globe" you're talking about is some oxygen egg that he was supposedly sometimes sitting in. (It's not really known how much he used it.) I do think the ITP should rule on it, but if you're question is why don't all players use it, the answer is because it's hugely expensive.

As to Murray training in Miami and Ferrer training in Valencia (Front's point,) I disagree with guilt-by-geographic association. That's too tenuous.

And I would say this about what you say about Djokovic's flag in the Wimbledon final after the tough semi with JMDP: if nothing else, it could say that he IS human and not using artificial stimulants. If it was just a matter of dope, he would certainly have made a better show of it. If it's down to how tough you are on a given day, it makes sense that sometimes they can summon it, and sometimes they can't.

You don't have to say it two times. I will understand even if you
just say once.

 

[Moxie]

But then, aren't you rather saying both things? What is your actual opinion on doping? You go for pages on that it doesn't happen, and then you say just allow it? I don't really get where you stand on the issue.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

But then, aren't you rather saying both things? What is your actual opinion on doping? You go for pages on that it doesn't happen, and then you say just allow it? I don't really get where you stand on the issue.

You missed my smily sign. You posted the same message two times
once at 11:52 and once at 11:54 and hence the comment.

On a serious note, I hope and would like to believe that top
players do not use doping in Tennis. However, of late, I am wondering
whether I am being naïve. See my next post.

 

[ClayDeath]

my position is almost too simple. I made it clear that it is not an issue with our sport.

therefore it is NOT significant. a few fools that might experiment are usually at a very low level. so let them have at it. who gives a damn. they cant win even at a futures level, let alone at any other level. and it doesn't matter how much doping they do provided they have robbed enough relatives and friends in the first place to be able to experiment.

there is zero empirical evidence that it actually improves their chances of winning in tennis. in fact the exact opposite is most likely true. there is really no substitute for the long hard yards in our sport. and that is only if you have exceptional god given natural abilities. you have to put in the work and try to go as far as you can go.


so with respect to other sports where they are chasing these people to all corners of the globe 24 hours a day and 365 days a year.

that is just too much. and besides next generation of drugs wont be detectable at all.


so let them have at it. they know the risks. some say that it may be the only way to level the playing field.

if anything the masses/fans/viewing public get a better product. I don't think this doping in many other sports can be stopped. they are trying to crack down but newer innovations are right around the corner.


I am just putting something on the table for discussion.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

Here is an articles from Wall Street Jounral on Novak's Oxygen Pod,
published just before US Open 2011.
You can read the article for full details. But, let me mention couple of
interesting points.

1. According to CVAC, the company that makes it, it is twice as
effective as "blood doping", a practice banned in sports.

2. According to WADA, the Oxygen Pod is performance enhancing and so
is against the "spirit of the sport". However, they decided not
to ban the use of it at that time. It appears that they are reevaluating
it and may ban it in the future.

Now for your reading pleasure.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424053111904787404576532854267519860.html

 

[ClayDeath]

interesting.

 

[ClayDeath]

we will talk more about this tomorrow. it remains a fascinating subject.

I better grab some sleep.


see you all tomorrow.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

Do not just read the Wall Street Journal article that I posted.
It also has a video link, in which the journalist takes a test ride on it.

Also, if you don't have life, there are 51 people who have
left comments on that article and that is also available in a
separate tab, once you follow the tab.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

Here is a slight revision to the conspiracy theory, now that we are informed by WSJ article.

1. There are couple of reasons why not everyone is using Oxygen Pod. It is indeed expensive, costing around $75,000.
But, that is expensive for you and me, not for professional Tennis Players. Even a 100th ranked pro player is typically
a multimillionaire. They can surely afford it, especially if it gives legally double the effect of blood doping.
The real reasons are

a) It is a bulky thing and tennis players constantly criss-crossing the world, it is difficult to take it
with you when you are travelling. It is not like some HGH vials that you can put in your pocket
and travel. So, you really need somebody (a well wisher) who has it
and can provide access to it for you.

b) The article also said that there are only 20 units of these Oxygen Pods. It looks like they are
not manufactured in a mass production and so their availability is a problem.

2. As the WSJ Article says, Novak stayed in some wealthy well wisher's mansion when he
participated in the 2011 US Open (the one he won) and also some years prior to that.
Perhaps, he also has some other well wisher in Australia, who is letting him use it when
he plays AO. Recall his 5-setter with Murray followed by 5-setter with Nadal in last year's
AO and the matches lasted for 5 to 6 hours. Perhaps, he does not have any well wisher,
who has this unit and who is nearby to Wimbledon grounds. That might explain
why he was so depleted in Wimby 2013.

3. CD repeatedly keeps arguing that Doping does not help in Tennis. That is being too naïve. Of course,
everybody agrees that an idiot who dopes cannot just go on to win a grand slam. This does not
imply that top players do not dope or are not interested in doping or will not get any advantage
by doping.

That is like saying that intelligent students will not cheat when the professor walks out of the
exam room for a while. Intelligent student will also surely gain advantage by looking at the forbidden notes.
Intelligent student will also have every temptation.

To give a different analogy, that is like saying beautiful girls have no need to apply make up.
Actually, beautiful girls routinely apply make up. If the make up helps per project her assets
even better, why not use it to get "competitive advantage".

In one of the earlier posts, "britbox" pointed out that the purpose of doping is to get improper
advantage among competitive equals. I even "liked" that post. No two players illustrate
the term "competitive equals" at this time than Andy and Novak. They both are at about
the same level (not to mention the same style) game wise.

4. The top players have more money and so can afford to do more sophisticated doping
(that may be expensive) which may be more difficult to detect. This may explain as to why
more low level players get caught than top level players.

5. Finally, the top players have more incentive to dope if it gives them advantage. The
difference between winning and losing a first round match in an ATP 250 is probably
about $5000 or so. The difference between winning and being a runner up at USO is
$1.3 million, not to mention the prestige of winning the grand slam and the associated
sponsorships that it will fetch. When that much is at stake, if a player could get any advantage
the will take it, unless they are really principle based.

6. We say, there is no doping at the top level. However, we must realize that Troiki is
ranked around 30 and Cilic is ranked around 15 and Novak is #1. Agreed that we don't have
a final verdict on Troiki/Cilic and what Novak did is technically not illegal. But, we will be
naïve to think that doping is confined to low echelons of Tennis (such as the Saudi
Arabian Player whom i have never heard of before, who was recently banned or even
a slightly higher level player like Wayne Odesnik).

 

[August]

Whenever you see a five-setter with two heavily exhausted players in the 5th set, you know another player of those could be easily winning the 5th set if he was doping. (Unless both players are already doping.)

Here is an articles from Wall Street Jounral on Novak's Oxygen Pod,
published just before US Open 2011.
You can read the article for full details. But, let me mention couple of
interesting points.

1. According to CVAC, the company that makes it, it is twice as
effective as "blood doping", a practice banned in sports.

2. According to WADA, the Oxygen Pod is performance enhancing and so
is against the "spirit of the sport". However, they decided not
to ban the use of it at that time. It appears that they are reevaluating
it and may ban it in the future.

Now for your reading pleasure.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424053111904787404576532854267519860.html

I wonder how they could control the use of those CVAC pods if they banned them. I'm afraid performance-enhancing methods will get so hard to detect that doping will be allowed in the future. But it would be sad, especially in sport like tennis where skills play a role. Doping would improve players' fitness and there wouldn't be so much importance on shotmaking skills as players could retrive almost all balls.

 

[britbox]

^ August, I think that's where the Biological Passport will play a role. It will highlight abnormalities in the blood, even if the player is not necessarily testing positive for a given substance.

 

[Ricardo]

Here is a slight revision to the conspiracy theory, now that we are informed by WSJ article.

1. There are couple of reasons why not everyone is using Oxygen Pod. It is indeed expensive, costing around $75,000.
But, that is expensive for you and me, not for professional Tennis Players. Even a 100th ranked pro player is typically
a multimillionaire. They can surely afford it, especially if it gives legally double the effect of blood doping.
The real reasons are

a) It is a bulky thing and tennis players constantly criss-crossing the world, it is difficult to take it
with you when you are travelling. It is not like some HGH vials that you can put in your pocket
and travel. So, you really need somebody (a well wisher) who has it
and can provide access to it for you.

b) The article also said that there are only 20 units of these Oxygen Pods. It looks like they are
not manufactured in a mass production and so their availability is a problem.

2. As the WSJ Article says, Novak stayed in some wealthy well wisher's mansion when he
participated in the 2011 US Open (the one he won) and also some years prior to that.
Perhaps, he also has some other well wisher in Australia, who is letting him use it when
he plays AO. Recall his 5-setter with Murray followed by 5-setter with Nadal in last year's
AO and the matches lasted for 5 to 6 hours. Perhaps, he does not have any well wisher,
who has this unit and who is nearby to Wimbledon grounds. That might explain
why he was so depleted in Wimby 2013.

3. CD repeatedly keeps arguing that Doping does not help in Tennis. That is being too naïve. Of course,
everybody agrees that an idiot who dopes cannot just go on to win a grand slam. This does not
imply that top players do not dope or are not interested in doping or will not get any advantage
by doping.

That is like saying that intelligent students will not cheat when the professor walks out of the
exam room for a while. Intelligent student will also surely gain advantage by looking at the forbidden notes.
Intelligent student will also have every temptation.

To give a different analogy, that is like saying beautiful girls have no need to apply make up.
Actually, beautiful girls routinely apply make up. If the make up helps per project her assets
even better, why not use it to get "competitive advantage".

In one of the earlier posts, "britbox" pointed out that the purpose of doping is to get improper
advantage among competitive equals. I even "liked" that post. No two players illustrate
the term "competitive equals" at this time than Andy and Novak. They both are at about
the same level (not to mention the same style) game wise.

4. The top players have more money and so can afford to do more sophisticated doping
(that may be expensive) which may be more difficult to detect. This may explain as to why
more low level players get caught than top level players.

5. Finally, the top players have more incentive to dope if it gives them advantage. The
difference between winning and losing a first round match in an ATP 250 is probably
about $5000 or so. The difference between winning and being a runner up at USO is
$1.3 million, not to mention the prestige of winning the grand slam and the associated
sponsorships that it will fetch. When that much is at stake, if a player could get any advantage
the will take it, unless they are really principle based.

6. We say, there is no doping at the top level. However, we must realize that Troiki is
ranked around 30 and Cilic is ranked around 15 and Novak is #1. Agreed that we don't have
a final verdict on Troiki/Cilic and what Novak did is technically not illegal. But, we will be
naïve to think that doping is confined to low echelons of Tennis (such as the Saudi
Arabian Player whom i have never heard of before, who was recently banned or even
a slightly higher level player like Wayne Odesnik).

Agreed with most but players ranked near 100 are not multi-millionaires, they win just enough to cover various expenses and a decent living. They normally don't get any form of sponsorship at that level either, so it's day and night between them and top players. They can't afford that 'egg'.

 

[ClayDeath]

excellent discussion here.

 

[Front242]

Here is a slight revision to the conspiracy theory, now that we are informed by WSJ article.

1. There are couple of reasons why not everyone is using Oxygen Pod. It is indeed expensive, costing around $75,000.
But, that is expensive for you and me, not for professional Tennis Players. Even a 100th ranked pro player is typically
a multimillionaire. They can surely afford it, especially if it gives legally double the effect of blood doping.
The real reasons are

a) It is a bulky thing and tennis players constantly criss-crossing the world, it is difficult to take it
with you when you are travelling. It is not like some HGH vials that you can put in your pocket
and travel. So, you really need somebody (a well wisher) who has it
and can provide access to it for you.

b) The article also said that there are only 20 units of these Oxygen Pods. It looks like they are
not manufactured in a mass production and so their availability is a problem.

2. As the WSJ Article says, Novak stayed in some wealthy well wisher's mansion when he
participated in the 2011 US Open (the one he won) and also some years prior to that.
Perhaps, he also has some other well wisher in Australia, who is letting him use it when
he plays AO. Recall his 5-setter with Murray followed by 5-setter with Nadal in last year's
AO and the matches lasted for 5 to 6 hours. Perhaps, he does not have any well wisher,
who has this unit and who is nearby to Wimbledon grounds. That might explain
why he was so depleted in Wimby 2013.

3. CD repeatedly keeps arguing that Doping does not help in Tennis. That is being too naïve. Of course,
everybody agrees that an idiot who dopes cannot just go on to win a grand slam. This does not
imply that top players do not dope or are not interested in doping or will not get any advantage
by doping.

That is like saying that intelligent students will not cheat when the professor walks out of the
exam room for a while. Intelligent student will also surely gain advantage by looking at the forbidden notes.
Intelligent student will also have every temptation.

To give a different analogy, that is like saying beautiful girls have no need to apply make up.
Actually, beautiful girls routinely apply make up. If the make up helps per project her assets
even better, why not use it to get "competitive advantage".

In one of the earlier posts, "britbox" pointed out that the purpose of doping is to get improper
advantage among competitive equals. I even "liked" that post. No two players illustrate
the term "competitive equals" at this time than Andy and Novak. They both are at about
the same level (not to mention the same style) game wise.

4. The top players have more money and so can afford to do more sophisticated doping
(that may be expensive) which may be more difficult to detect. This may explain as to why
more low level players get caught than top level players.

5. Finally, the top players have more incentive to dope if it gives them advantage. The
difference between winning and losing a first round match in an ATP 250 is probably
about $5000 or so. The difference between winning and being a runner up at USO is
$1.3 million, not to mention the prestige of winning the grand slam and the associated
sponsorships that it will fetch. When that much is at stake, if a player could get any advantage
the will take it, unless they are really principle based.

6. We say, there is no doping at the top level. However, we must realize that Troiki is
ranked around 30 and Cilic is ranked around 15 and Novak is #1. Agreed that we don't have
a final verdict on Troiki/Cilic and what Novak did is technically not illegal. But, we will be
naïve to think that doping is confined to low echelons of Tennis (such as the Saudi
Arabian Player whom i have never heard of before, who was recently banned or even
a slightly higher level player like Wayne Odesnik).

I especially like your point 5 and completely agree and wish those who think doping at the top level doesn't exist or more importantly refuse to believe it offers no incentive would wake up and stop being so naive. Great post.

 

[Moxie]

Here is a slight revision to the conspiracy theory, now that we are informed by WSJ article.

1. There are couple of reasons why not everyone is using Oxygen Pod. It is indeed expensive, costing around $75,000.
But, that is expensive for you and me, not for professional Tennis Players. Even a 100th ranked pro player is typically
a multimillionaire. They can surely afford it, especially if it gives legally double the effect of blood doping.
The real reasons are

a) It is a bulky thing and tennis players constantly criss-crossing the world, it is difficult to take it
with you when you are travelling. It is not like some HGH vials that you can put in your pocket
and travel. So, you really need somebody (a well wisher) who has it
and can provide access to it for you.

b) The article also said that there are only 20 units of these Oxygen Pods. It looks like they are
not manufactured in a mass production and so their availability is a problem.

2. As the WSJ Article says, Novak stayed in some wealthy well wisher's mansion when he
participated in the 2011 US Open (the one he won) and also some years prior to that.
Perhaps, he also has some other well wisher in Australia, who is letting him use it when
he plays AO. Recall his 5-setter with Murray followed by 5-setter with Nadal in last year's
AO and the matches lasted for 5 to 6 hours. Perhaps, he does not have any well wisher,
who has this unit and who is nearby to Wimbledon grounds. That might explain
why he was so depleted in Wimby 2013.

3. CD repeatedly keeps arguing that Doping does not help in Tennis. That is being too naïve. Of course,
everybody agrees that an idiot who dopes cannot just go on to win a grand slam. This does not
imply that top players do not dope or are not interested in doping or will not get any advantage
by doping.

That is like saying that intelligent students will not cheat when the professor walks out of the
exam room for a while. Intelligent student will also surely gain advantage by looking at the forbidden notes.
Intelligent student will also have every temptation.

To give a different analogy, that is like saying beautiful girls have no need to apply make up.
Actually, beautiful girls routinely apply make up. If the make up helps per project her assets
even better, why not use it to get "competitive advantage".

In one of the earlier posts, "britbox" pointed out that the purpose of doping is to get improper
advantage among competitive equals. I even "liked" that post. No two players illustrate
the term "competitive equals" at this time than Andy and Novak. They both are at about
the same level (not to mention the same style) game wise.

4. The top players have more money and so can afford to do more sophisticated doping
(that may be expensive) which may be more difficult to detect. This may explain as to why
more low level players get caught than top level players.

5. Finally, the top players have more incentive to dope if it gives them advantage. The
difference between winning and losing a first round match in an ATP 250 is probably
about $5000 or so. The difference between winning and being a runner up at USO is
$1.3 million, not to mention the prestige of winning the grand slam and the associated
sponsorships that it will fetch. When that much is at stake, if a player could get any advantage
the will take it, unless they are really principle based.

6. We say, there is no doping at the top level. However, we must realize that Troiki is
ranked around 30 and Cilic is ranked around 15 and Novak is #1. Agreed that we don't have
a final verdict on Troiki/Cilic and what Novak did is technically not illegal. But, we will be
naïve to think that doping is confined to low echelons of Tennis (such as the Saudi
Arabian Player whom i have never heard of before, who was recently banned or even
a slightly higher level player like Wayne Odesnik).

I especially like your point 5 and completely agree and wish those who think doping at the top level doesn't exist or more importantly refuse to believe it offers no incentive would wake up and stop being so naive. Great post.

I actually think that is point #5 is the weakest for the argument of doping at the highest levels. The top players are multi-millionaraires and don't care about the difference in money between one round and another. (Of course, there is the difference in prestige.) That's where I think the temptation to augment their chances inclines the lower ranked players, however. The difference in one round is a huge payday.

And yes, the cost of an oxygen egg, or many other treatments does elude most players. We kid ourselves about how many tennis players are actually in fat-city.

 

[Front242]

Here is a slight revision to the conspiracy theory, now that we are informed by WSJ article.

1. There are couple of reasons why not everyone is using Oxygen Pod. It is indeed expensive, costing around $75,000.
But, that is expensive for you and me, not for professional Tennis Players. Even a 100th ranked pro player is typically
a multimillionaire. They can surely afford it, especially if it gives legally double the effect of blood doping.
The real reasons are

a) It is a bulky thing and tennis players constantly criss-crossing the world, it is difficult to take it
with you when you are travelling. It is not like some HGH vials that you can put in your pocket
and travel. So, you really need somebody (a well wisher) who has it
and can provide access to it for you.

b) The article also said that there are only 20 units of these Oxygen Pods. It looks like they are
not manufactured in a mass production and so their availability is a problem.

2. As the WSJ Article says, Novak stayed in some wealthy well wisher's mansion when he
participated in the 2011 US Open (the one he won) and also some years prior to that.
Perhaps, he also has some other well wisher in Australia, who is letting him use it when
he plays AO. Recall his 5-setter with Murray followed by 5-setter with Nadal in last year's
AO and the matches lasted for 5 to 6 hours. Perhaps, he does not have any well wisher,
who has this unit and who is nearby to Wimbledon grounds. That might explain
why he was so depleted in Wimby 2013.

3. CD repeatedly keeps arguing that Doping does not help in Tennis. That is being too naïve. Of course,
everybody agrees that an idiot who dopes cannot just go on to win a grand slam. This does not
imply that top players do not dope or are not interested in doping or will not get any advantage
by doping.

That is like saying that intelligent students will not cheat when the professor walks out of the
exam room for a while. Intelligent student will also surely gain advantage by looking at the forbidden notes.
Intelligent student will also have every temptation.

To give a different analogy, that is like saying beautiful girls have no need to apply make up.
Actually, beautiful girls routinely apply make up. If the make up helps per project her assets
even better, why not use it to get "competitive advantage".

In one of the earlier posts, "britbox" pointed out that the purpose of doping is to get improper
advantage among competitive equals. I even "liked" that post. No two players illustrate
the term "competitive equals" at this time than Andy and Novak. They both are at about
the same level (not to mention the same style) game wise.

4. The top players have more money and so can afford to do more sophisticated doping
(that may be expensive) which may be more difficult to detect. This may explain as to why
more low level players get caught than top level players.

5. Finally, the top players have more incentive to dope if it gives them advantage. The
difference between winning and losing a first round match in an ATP 250 is probably
about $5000 or so. The difference between winning and being a runner up at USO is
$1.3 million, not to mention the prestige of winning the grand slam and the associated
sponsorships that it will fetch. When that much is at stake, if a player could get any advantage
the will take it, unless they are really principle based.

6. We say, there is no doping at the top level. However, we must realize that Troiki is
ranked around 30 and Cilic is ranked around 15 and Novak is #1. Agreed that we don't have
a final verdict on Troiki/Cilic and what Novak did is technically not illegal. But, we will be
naïve to think that doping is confined to low echelons of Tennis (such as the Saudi
Arabian Player whom i have never heard of before, who was recently banned or even
a slightly higher level player like Wayne Odesnik).

I especially like your point 5 and completely agree and wish those who think doping at the top level doesn't exist or more importantly refuse to believe it offers no incentive would wake up and stop being so naive. Great post.

I actually think that is point #5 is the weakest for the argument of doping at the highest levels. The top players are multi-millionaraires and don't care about the difference in money between one round and another. (Of course, there is the difference in prestige.) That's where I think the temptation to augment their chances inclines the lower ranked players, however. The difference in one round is a huge payday.

And yes, the cost of an oxygen egg, or many other treatments does elude most players. We kid ourselves about how many tennis players are actually in fat-city.

Well, I'm not really highlighting the money aspect personally for the top players as they have enough money but I've also said this numerous times: they're playing more for places in history, honour of record holding, etc. and this makes it very much a great incentive to get whatever edge you can if you're able to get away with it. Then again though, they're greedy sobs too (mostly Fed and Nadal) so not completely going to discard the money aspect either. Otherwise why would they refuse to play tournaments if the appearance fee wasn't enough. But mostly it's all about record breaking and pride and any edge in achieving this will gladly be lapped up if they can get away with it.

 

[ClayDeath]

if they are playing for history then it is way too risky to experiment with doping.

you could lose it all and be discredited for life. worse, you would have to give the prize money back. and some of that endorsement money back as well.

just ask lance about it.

nice try front. what else have you got?

this discussion is fascinating.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

if they are playing for history then it is way too risky to experiment with doping.

you could lose it all and be discredited for life. worse, you would have to give the prize money back. and some of that endorsement money back as well.

just ask lance about it.

nice try front. what else have you got?

this discussion is fascinating.

and then after five years, they will induct you into hall of fame.