General Doping/PEDs Discussion

[Moxie]

The backhand got even better, not stronger. You are the greatest defense lawyer in the world, as you can say with a straight face that is reasonable that a guy got doped himself to get a better backhand. Or, even better actually, a stronger backhand while the forehand at best remained the same (or weaker). One sided doping, it is never caught if the player uses the other arm to collect blood (not sure what he to do to piss though).

You are so boring to extract this from all of that. I didn't say his forehand got "stronger," Front and Darth did. My question was why didn't they ask why? My bigger point is the inconsistencies in their arguments. They were "shocked" (read "beyond suspicious,") in 2013, when a 26-year-old Nadal could win the French Open a mere 4 months after a 7-month lay-off due to injury, and yet, didn't flinch when a 35-year-old Federer won the AO, after a 7-month injury lay-off, and not even a tune up tournament. And 4 and a half years since his last win at a Major. Really...no questions? That, to me, is a double-standard.

 

[Moxie]

All I’m saying is that the Nadal & Federer admittedly different examples implied doping was an assumption. Sinner’s is not an assumption.

To me the black & white is either you have it in your doping tests or you do not.

Minute traces is still having a banned substance in your body. That it’s easily available for use in Italy IMO is

Did you mean to finish that last sentence?

I totally get the difference between bogus inferences in the Fedal Wars, and an actual positive test. But, that's what we're here to discuss. I find a difference between the Halep case and the Sinner one.

 

[Jelenafan]

Did you mean to finish that last sentence?

I totally get the difference between bogus inferences in the Fedal Wars, and an actual positive test. But, that's what we're here to discuss. I find a difference between the Halep case and the Sinner one.

I was going to say that whether the drug is easily acquired and used in Italy is irrelevant. All the players teams should know what substances are banned.

There are differences in all cases but how Sinner’s was handled was very different. Its almost like he was presumed innocent.

A “plausible” explanation is now compelling evidence?

 

[Front242]

The problem with your rationale Moxie is that Sinner DID test positive for a banned substance.

That is not conjecture or assumption.

And he did so TWICE. For all we know, he could have won the AO while ON and it had reduced to trace amounts when they finally got positive test results. Winning 2 masters and a slam after 2 positive tests for steroids is an abomination of a look for the sport of tennis. He'll 99% be year end number 1 also after this scandal.

@Moxie btw never forget I never tested positive therefore I'm clean (Lance Armstrong). No, it just means you beat the system or they turned a blind eye. They pretty much have with Sinner. No ban/suspension.

 

[Moxie]

I was going to say that whether the drug is easily acquired and used in Italy is irrelevant. All the players teams should know what substances are banned.

I don't think it's irrelevant, because different cultural attitudes towards certain things can breed a certain casualness. An example: what we call Neosporin in th US, or a triple antibiotic ointment sold OTC and in basically everyone's medicine cabinet, is available only by prescription in the UK. We were in Italy with a group of friends from the UK and their kids, and one of the kids cut her foot, which I doctored with Neosporin and bandaids I had brought, because, while 3 of the parents are medical doctors, they admitted that doctors are useless with their own children, and had brought nothing. One of the doctors remarked as to how good and how useful the ointment was, and seemed suddenly surprised that it wasn't more readily available in the UK. But he was clearly originally surprised that I just casually carried it. Not a banned substance, but I think you can see the point of the story.

There are differences in all cases but how Sinner’s was handled was very different. Its almost like he was presumed innocent.

He was fined, and docked points. He did not sit out any tournaments. It certainly was resolved quickly. I definitely agree the handling of it seemed preferential. However, you're mixing two different points, IMO. You're talking about how it was handled by the powers that be. I had already said I thought they went light on him. I was talking about the other part, which is the actual details, as we know them, about the specifics of the doping charges against a player. I don't think it's useful to conflate them. Whether or not players use banned substances is one problem. How tennis/WADA, etc. handle it is another.

A “plausible” explanation is now compelling evidence?

I'm not sure how to respond to this. A plausible explanation is a plausible explanation. Isn't it of a piece with presenting one's side of a story? Some explanations are not as plausible.

 

[Moxie]

And he did so TWICE. For all we know, he could have won the AO while ON and it had reduced to trace amounts when they finally got positive test results. Winning 2 masters and a slam after 2 positive tests for steroids is an abomination of a look for the sport of tennis. He'll 99% be year end number 1 also after this scandal.

It is worth saying that he tested positive twice within 8 days. He may not have been aware of the first positive when he got the second one, so the same circumstances could have applied, i.e., that it could have been passed by the trainer. I agree that it is a very bad thing, and casts doubt over his great results. However, I believe there is enough to discuss, and it can't be assumed that he was taking the stuff all year, and the other tests just missed it. Halep tested positive for a larger amount of the substance she took, and over a longer period of time, esp. as the biological passport showed anomalies, is that not correct?

@Moxie btw never forget I never tested positive therefore I'm clean (Lance Armstrong). No, it just means you beat the system or they turned a blind eye. They pretty much have with Sinner. No ban/suspension.

I know you'd like to imply one player when you say that, because you have a specific obsession, but your statement, on its face, implies that you believe every player in tennis dopes. If so, then I don't see why you didn't give up on tennis long ago.

 

[MargaretMcAleer]

Moxie,
I am reading today that WADA is reviewing the decision of Sinner's case, and reserves the right to take the appeal to CAS, as appropriate.
If they decided to do so they would expect to make it public.

 

[Moxie]

Moxie,
I am reading today that WADA is reviewing the decision of Sinner's case, and reserves the right to take the appeal to CAS, as appropriate.
If they decided to do so they would expect to make it public.

Thanks, Margaret. When I read your post, I googled it. The Assoc. Press says that WADA and Nado Italia, the Italian anti-doping body, have just a couple of days left to appeal it, so we should know soon.

I'll tell you one case they should revisit is that fellow Battaglino's. It's impossible to know without being told by the powers that be how similar his case is to Sinner's, but in the broader strokes we know, it sounds similar, and he got a 4-year suspension.

 

[Fiero425]

Thanks, Margaret. When I read your post, I googled it. The Assoc. Press says that WADA and Nado Italia, the Italian anti-doping body, have just a couple of days left to appeal it, so we should know soon.

I'll tell you one case they should revisit is that fellow Battaglino's. It's impossible to know without being told by the powers that be how similar his case is to Sinner's, but in the broader strokes we know, it sounds similar, and he got a 4-year suspension.

Oh yeah, the Italian A-D body will get right on that! Don't make me laugh!

 

[MargaretMcAleer]

Thanks, Margaret. When I read your post, I googled it. The Assoc. Press says that WADA and Nado Italia, the Italian anti-doping body, have just a couple of days left to appeal it, so we should know soon.

I'll tell you one case they should revisit is that fellow Battaglino's. It's impossible to know without being told by the powers that be how similar his case is to Sinner's, but in the broader strokes we know, it sounds similar, and he got a 4-year suspension.

Just a point I would like to add, I feel all players cases regardless of their ranking should be heard ASAP, I know Jannik had the money and resources to get his hearing heard ASAP,, and they did it properly through the correct protocols, and he and his team were able to give an answer as to why the banned spray got into his body asap,, not a lot of other players are in the position of players who have the money to hire top lawyers to defend their cases

 

[kskate2]

Just a point I would like to add, I feel all players cases regardless of their ranking should be heard ASAP, I know Jannik had the money and resources to get his hearing heard ASAP,, and they did it properly through the correct protocols, and he and his team were able to give an answer as to why the banned spray got into his body asap,, not a lot of other players are in the position of players who have the money to hire top lawyers to defend their cases

This only goes so far. Remember Simo had buckets of $ and resources too and was pleading for a quick hearing and they absolutely took their sweet time. There's definitely some bias whether it's sex, #1 player or Italian. I can't say definitively, but something about this whole process stinks.

 

[MargaretMcAleer]

This only goes so far. Remember Simo had buckets of $ and resources too and was pleading for a quick hearing and they absolutely took their sweet time. There's definitely some bias whether it's sex, #1 player or Italian. I can't say definitively, but something about this whole process stinks.

I agree there has to be a over haul regarding the process of a player, if it is the No 1 player, a lower ranked player and sex of a player should not come into it at all

 

[Front242]

This only goes so far. Remember Simo had buckets of $ and resources too and was pleading for a quick hearing and they absolutely took their sweet time. There's definitely some bias whether it's sex, #1 player or Italian. I can't say definitively, but something about this whole process stinks.

The ATP CEO is Italian so there's a big conflict of interest.

 

[Moxie]

The ATP CEO is Italian so there's a big conflict of interest.

I have a hard time imagining that the ATP CEO made that decision unilaterally.

Here's the whole ATP Board:

About | ATP Tour | Tennis

The ATP is a governing body of the men's professional tennis circuits - the ATP Tour, the ATP Challenger Tour and the ATP Champions Tour.

www.atptour.com

 

[Front242]

I have a hard time imagining that the ATP CEO made that decision unilaterally.

Here's the whole ATP Board:

About | ATP Tour | Tennis

The ATP is a governing body of the men's professional tennis circuits - the ATP Tour, the ATP Challenger Tour and the ATP Champions Tour.

www.atptour.com

Never said he did but he has the final say as CEO. It comes down to protecting the sport ultimately more than protecting a fellow Italian but, the irony is, they've destroyed the sport.

 

[Moxie]

Never said he did but he has the final say as CEO. It comes down to protecting the sport ultimately more than protecting a fellow Italian but, the irony is, they've destroyed the sport.

How do you know he has the final say? We don't actually know who is involved in reviewing the cases, and how they're decided. There is no transparency to these things. If there are still a few tennis journalists out there, I wish they'd ask the ATP to lay out the specifics. Who composes the group that reviews these cases? Are players on the board involved? What experts/physicians are consulted? How does the accused player weigh in on their own behalf? Who makes the final decision on thumbs up or thumbs down?

 

[Front242]

How do you know he has the final say? We don't actually know who is involved in reviewing the cases, and how they're decided. There is no transparency to these things. If there are still a few tennis journalists out there, I wish they'd ask the ATP to lay out the specifics. Who composes the group that reviews these cases? Are players on the board involved? What experts/physicians are consulted? How does the accused player weigh in on their own behalf? Who makes the final decision on thumbs up or thumbs down?

Well, whoever does it's a shambles.

 

[the AntiPusher]

This only goes so far. Remember Simo had buckets of $ and resources too and was pleading for a quick hearing and they absolutely took their sweet time. There's definitely some bias whether it's sex, #1 player or Italian. I can't say definitively, but something about this whole process stinks.

Too bad , if they determine to reverse the decision, I know that it will not mean Fritz become the US Open champ by default..

 

[Moxie]

Well, whoever does it's a shambles.

I don't know that that's true. Lack of transparency doesn't translate to being a "shambles." You see it that way because you believe that everything that arises is a) certain guilt, b) merely the tip of some iceberg, and c) anything less than that to you is utter corruption. I'm not saying that you might not be right, or right sometimes, but your unfailing certainty seems intractable and incurious to me. For myself, I prefer to look more closely.

 

[Moxie]

The ATP CEO is Italian so there's a big conflict of interest.

Hang on. I let you distract me. The governing body that determined Sinner had "no fault" was the ITIA, not the ATP. Right? I get all of these acronyms confused when we get into the weeds on these things. No idea what the ATP has to say on it, then. Still, could use more transparency. As @kskate2 asks above: why expediency for Sinner and not Halep?