Is Martina Hingis's induction to Hall of Fame Fair?

[GameSetAndMath]

I am actually a big fan of Martina and for that matter any finesse
tennis player. I am definitely not questioning her achievements.
She has obviously won, I believe 5 GS titles in singles alone and
many more in doubles.

However, she was found guilty of drug violation and was
banned for 2 years, which is the maximum sentence for
drug violation without extenuating circumstances.

Is it really a good idea to induct someone into Hall of
Fame, who has served a 2 year ban on even playing in
the WTA circuit. Are not the people inducted to Hall of Fame
expected to be role model for others.

What does this tell about Tennis Establishment?

 

[my sherona]

its about time for martina h. the greatest player of her generation.

 

[Calvy]

I am actually a big fan of Martina and for that matter any finesse
tennis player. I am definitely not questioning her achievements.
She has obviously won, I believe 5 GS titles in singles alone and
many more in doubles.

However, she was found guilty of drug violation and was
banned for 2 years, which is the maximum sentence for
drug violation without extenuating circumstances.

Is it really a good idea to induct someone into Hall of
Fame, who has served a 2 year ban on even playing in
the WTA circuit. Are not the people inducted to Hall of Fame
expected to be role model for others.

What does this tell about Tennis Establishment?

Her drug violation was for cocaine, not a PED or steroids, but a recreational drug. There was benefit from partaking in the use of cocaine. In some sports marijuana is banned, and I don't believe one should be banned from entering the HOF because of those type of violations.

As for role model, if we're going to start banning people due to not be everyone's idea of a role model or indiscretions, then most of the people in the HOF shouldn't be allowed. Jimmy Connors was an adulterer, Chris Evert had an abortion, Martina N was in a lesbian relationship during time when it was highly frowned upon and illegal in many states and countries, Bill Tilden liked the company of younger men.

Simply put, she earned her inclusion into the Hall of Fame.

 

[Calvy]

its about time for martina h. the greatest player of her generation.

Sure she was, if her generation spanned 1997 to 1999.

Otherwise, an argument could be made she's not even in the top three.

 

[Correspondent Kiu]

Hingis served 209 weeks as #1 player in the world, she is only surpassed in that department by Evert, Navaratilova and Graf.

Surely she belongs in the hall.

 

[RJD11]

Hingis served 209 weeks as #1 player in the world, she is only surpassed in that department by Evert, Navaratilova and Graf.

Surely she belongs in the hall.

While I agree she belongs in the Hall and do not care about
the coke thing at all I do remember how she stayed No 1
so long. She did it just like JJ, Caro, and Dinara did it. Towards
the latter part of her No 1 stay she just played every week and
went deep into tournys. She wasn't winning the big ones. And
perhaps that overplaying was part of the reason for the foot
problems that caused her early retirement. It seemed she was
only playing so much to keep the No 1 spot.

I think had she not done that she could have had a much more
productive career and may have pulled out some of those big
matches she lost.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

Her drug violation was for cocaine, not a PED or steroids, but a recreational drug. There was benefit from partaking in the use of cocaine. In some sports marijuana is banned, and I don't believe one should be banned from entering the HOF because of those type of violations.

As for role model, if we're going to start banning people due to not be everyone's idea of a role model or indiscretions, then most of the people in the HOF shouldn't be allowed. Jimmy Connors was an adulterer, Chris Evert had an abortion, Martina N was in a lesbian relationship during time when it was highly frowned upon and illegal in many states and countries, Bill Tilden liked the company of younger men.

Simply put, she earned her inclusion into the Hall of Fame.

She was not banned for 2 years because moral police did not
like her consuming cocaine, but because it is one of the
banned performance enhancing drugs as it acts as a stimulant
and helps to keep the heart beating rate up.

I am not getting into anybody's personal life here.
I do not know of anybody getting banned from playing
for being an adulterer or lesbian etc.
If as a tennis player you could be banned from playing
the game itself for two years because you disregarded
the rules that you are supposed to follow, I believe you
should not be inducted into the hall of fame not withstanding
her career achievements.

This is not moral policing. This is to make people
play by the rules. IMHO, this shows that the Tennis
Establishment itself does not seem to care for its own
rules.

 

[Calvy]

Her drug violation was for cocaine, not a PED or steroids, but a recreational drug. There was benefit from partaking in the use of cocaine. In some sports marijuana is banned, and I don't believe one should be banned from entering the HOF because of those type of violations.

As for role model, if we're going to start banning people due to not be everyone's idea of a role model or indiscretions, then most of the people in the HOF shouldn't be allowed. Jimmy Connors was an adulterer, Chris Evert had an abortion, Martina N was in a lesbian relationship during time when it was highly frowned upon and illegal in many states and countries, Bill Tilden liked the company of younger men.

Simply put, she earned her inclusion into the Hall of Fame.

She was not banned for 2 years because moral police did not
like her consuming cocaine, but because it is one of the
banned performance enhancing drugs as it acts as a stimulant
and helps to keep the heart beating rate up.

I am not getting into anybody's personal life here.
I do not know of anybody getting banned from playing
for being an adulterer or lesbian etc.
If as a tennis player you could be banned from playing
the game itself for two years because you disregarded
the rules that you are supposed to follow, I believe you
should not be inducted into the hall of fame not withstanding
her career achievements.

This is not moral policing. This is to make people
play by the rules. IMHO, this shows that the Tennis
Establishment itself does not seem to care for its own
rules.

"Are not the people inducted to Hall of Fame
expected to be role model for others."

Role models are based on moral standards, and by you writing that one is expected to be a "role model," moral standards apply and are relevant in what I wrote.

Cocaine DOES NOT give one a benefit when competing. Heck, we might as well ban chocolate candy bars and other types of candies as well as coca cola or pepsi, they're stimulants and they're allowed to be ingested on court. They're no more natural than cocaine.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

Her drug violation was for cocaine, not a PED or steroids, but a recreational drug. There was benefit from partaking in the use of cocaine. In some sports marijuana is banned, and I don't believe one should be banned from entering the HOF because of those type of violations.

As for role model, if we're going to start banning people due to not be everyone's idea of a role model or indiscretions, then most of the people in the HOF shouldn't be allowed. Jimmy Connors was an adulterer, Chris Evert had an abortion, Martina N was in a lesbian relationship during time when it was highly frowned upon and illegal in many states and countries, Bill Tilden liked the company of younger men.

Simply put, she earned her inclusion into the Hall of Fame.

She was not banned for 2 years because moral police did not
like her consuming cocaine, but because it is one of the
banned performance enhancing drugs as it acts as a stimulant
and helps to keep the heart beating rate up.

I am not getting into anybody's personal life here.
I do not know of anybody getting banned from playing
for being an adulterer or lesbian etc.
If as a tennis player you could be banned from playing
the game itself for two years because you disregarded
the rules that you are supposed to follow, I believe you
should not be inducted into the hall of fame not withstanding
her career achievements.

This is not moral policing. This is to make people
play by the rules. IMHO, this shows that the Tennis
Establishment itself does not seem to care for its own
rules.

"Are not the people inducted to Hall of Fame
expected to be role model for others."

Role models are based on moral standards, and by you writing that one is expected to be a "role model," moral standards apply and are relevant in what I wrote.

Cocaine DOES NOT give one a benefit when competing. Heck, we might as well ban chocolate candy bars and other types of candies as well as coca cola or pepsi, they're stimulants and they're allowed to be ingested on court. They're no more natural than cocaine.

I meant role model in a professional sense, not in terms of their
personal life. Being banned is definitely not being a role model
in the professional sense itself.

So, why do you think Cocaine is one of the banned substances?
It is definitely not for some moralistic reasons.

 

[RJD11]

Her drug violation was for cocaine, not a PED or steroids, but a recreational drug. There was benefit from partaking in the use of cocaine. In some sports marijuana is banned, and I don't believe one should be banned from entering the HOF because of those type of violations.

As for role model, if we're going to start banning people due to not be everyone's idea of a role model or indiscretions, then most of the people in the HOF shouldn't be allowed. Jimmy Connors was an adulterer, Chris Evert had an abortion, Martina N was in a lesbian relationship during time when it was highly frowned upon and illegal in many states and countries, Bill Tilden liked the company of younger men.

Simply put, she earned her inclusion into the Hall of Fame.

She was not banned for 2 years because moral police did not
like her consuming cocaine, but because it is one of the
banned performance enhancing drugs as it acts as a stimulant
and helps to keep the heart beating rate up.

I am not getting into anybody's personal life here.
I do not know of anybody getting banned from playing
for being an adulterer or lesbian etc.
If as a tennis player you could be banned from playing
the game itself for two years because you disregarded
the rules that you are supposed to follow, I believe you
should not be inducted into the hall of fame not withstanding
her career achievements.

This is not moral policing. This is to make people
play by the rules. IMHO, this shows that the Tennis
Establishment itself does not seem to care for its own
rules.

"Are not the people inducted to Hall of Fame
expected to be role model for others."

Role models are based on moral standards, and by you writing that one is expected to be a "role model," moral standards apply and are relevant in what I wrote.

Cocaine DOES NOT give one a benefit when competing. Heck, we might as well ban chocolate candy bars and other types of candies as well as coca cola or pepsi, they're stimulants and they're allowed to be ingested on court. They're no more natural than cocaine.

I meant role model in a professional sense, not in terms of their
personal life. Being banned is definitely not being a role model
in the professional sense itself.

So, why do you think Cocaine is one of the banned substances?
It is definitely not for some moralistic reasons.

It is against the law.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

Her drug violation was for cocaine, not a PED or steroids, but a recreational drug. There was benefit from partaking in the use of cocaine. In some sports marijuana is banned, and I don't believe one should be banned from entering the HOF because of those type of violations.

As for role model, if we're going to start banning people due to not be everyone's idea of a role model or indiscretions, then most of the people in the HOF shouldn't be allowed. Jimmy Connors was an adulterer, Chris Evert had an abortion, Martina N was in a lesbian relationship during time when it was highly frowned upon and illegal in many states and countries, Bill Tilden liked the company of younger men.

Simply put, she earned her inclusion into the Hall of Fame.

She was not banned for 2 years because moral police did not
like her consuming cocaine, but because it is one of the
banned performance enhancing drugs as it acts as a stimulant
and helps to keep the heart beating rate up.

I am not getting into anybody's personal life here.
I do not know of anybody getting banned from playing
for being an adulterer or lesbian etc.
If as a tennis player you could be banned from playing
the game itself for two years because you disregarded
the rules that you are supposed to follow, I believe you
should not be inducted into the hall of fame not withstanding
her career achievements.

This is not moral policing. This is to make people
play by the rules. IMHO, this shows that the Tennis
Establishment itself does not seem to care for its own
rules.

"Are not the people inducted to Hall of Fame
expected to be role model for others."

Role models are based on moral standards, and by you writing that one is expected to be a "role model," moral standards apply and are relevant in what I wrote.

Cocaine DOES NOT give one a benefit when competing. Heck, we might as well ban chocolate candy bars and other types of candies as well as coca cola or pepsi, they're stimulants and they're allowed to be ingested on court. They're no more natural than cocaine.

I meant role model in a professional sense, not in terms of their
personal life. Being banned is definitely not being a role model
in the professional sense itself.

So, why do you think Cocaine is one of the banned substances?
It is definitely not for some moralistic reasons.

It is against the law.

ITF is not there for law enforcement. That would be the business
of local police. If a player's blood alcohol level was found higher
than the local limits for safe driving, ITF will not ban them from
playing for two years. ITF will just laugh at the player for
hurting their own chances by "playing while intoxicated".

 

[Calvy]

Her drug violation was for cocaine, not a PED or steroids, but a recreational drug. There was benefit from partaking in the use of cocaine. In some sports marijuana is banned, and I don't believe one should be banned from entering the HOF because of those type of violations.

As for role model, if we're going to start banning people due to not be everyone's idea of a role model or indiscretions, then most of the people in the HOF shouldn't be allowed. Jimmy Connors was an adulterer, Chris Evert had an abortion, Martina N was in a lesbian relationship during time when it was highly frowned upon and illegal in many states and countries, Bill Tilden liked the company of younger men.

Simply put, she earned her inclusion into the Hall of Fame.

She was not banned for 2 years because moral police did not
like her consuming cocaine, but because it is one of the
banned performance enhancing drugs as it acts as a stimulant
and helps to keep the heart beating rate up.

I am not getting into anybody's personal life here.
I do not know of anybody getting banned from playing
for being an adulterer or lesbian etc.
If as a tennis player you could be banned from playing
the game itself for two years because you disregarded
the rules that you are supposed to follow, I believe you
should not be inducted into the hall of fame not withstanding
her career achievements.

This is not moral policing. This is to make people
play by the rules. IMHO, this shows that the Tennis
Establishment itself does not seem to care for its own
rules.

"Are not the people inducted to Hall of Fame
expected to be role model for others."

Role models are based on moral standards, and by you writing that one is expected to be a "role model," moral standards apply and are relevant in what I wrote.

Cocaine DOES NOT give one a benefit when competing. Heck, we might as well ban chocolate candy bars and other types of candies as well as coca cola or pepsi, they're stimulants and they're allowed to be ingested on court. They're no more natural than cocaine.

I meant role model in a professional sense, not in terms of their
personal life. Being banned is definitely not being a role model
in the professional sense itself.

So, why do you think Cocaine is one of the banned substances?
It is definitely not for some moralistic reasons.

Please reference one source that states cocaine is a benefit for sport advantage, just one. If that was the case, you'd have athletes running, jumping and swimming on the stuff.

And just so you know, there are several substances that are on the banned list, that experts and athlete believe should not be, because they don't benefit the athlete.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

Her drug violation was for cocaine, not a PED or steroids, but a recreational drug. There was benefit from partaking in the use of cocaine. In some sports marijuana is banned, and I don't believe one should be banned from entering the HOF because of those type of violations.

As for role model, if we're going to start banning people due to not be everyone's idea of a role model or indiscretions, then most of the people in the HOF shouldn't be allowed. Jimmy Connors was an adulterer, Chris Evert had an abortion, Martina N was in a lesbian relationship during time when it was highly frowned upon and illegal in many states and countries, Bill Tilden liked the company of younger men.

Simply put, she earned her inclusion into the Hall of Fame.

She was not banned for 2 years because moral police did not
like her consuming cocaine, but because it is one of the
banned performance enhancing drugs as it acts as a stimulant
and helps to keep the heart beating rate up.

I am not getting into anybody's personal life here.
I do not know of anybody getting banned from playing
for being an adulterer or lesbian etc.
If as a tennis player you could be banned from playing
the game itself for two years because you disregarded
the rules that you are supposed to follow, I believe you
should not be inducted into the hall of fame not withstanding
her career achievements.

This is not moral policing. This is to make people
play by the rules. IMHO, this shows that the Tennis
Establishment itself does not seem to care for its own
rules.

"Are not the people inducted to Hall of Fame
expected to be role model for others."

Role models are based on moral standards, and by you writing that one is expected to be a "role model," moral standards apply and are relevant in what I wrote.

Cocaine DOES NOT give one a benefit when competing. Heck, we might as well ban chocolate candy bars and other types of candies as well as coca cola or pepsi, they're stimulants and they're allowed to be ingested on court. They're no more natural than cocaine.

I meant role model in a professional sense, not in terms of their
personal life. Being banned is definitely not being a role model
in the professional sense itself.

So, why do you think Cocaine is one of the banned substances?
It is definitely not for some moralistic reasons.

Please reference one source that states cocaine is a benefit for sport advantage, just one. If that was the case, you'd have athletes running, jumping and swimming on the stuff.

And just so you know, there are several substances that are on the banned list, that experts and athlete believe should not be, because they don't benefit the athlete.

Please follow the link below to educate yourself with the list of
prohibited substances.
http://www.itftennis.com/antidoping/rules/prohibited-list.aspx
You will find it under section S6.

 

[Fiero425]

Hingis served 209 weeks as #1 player in the world, she is only surpassed in that department by Evert, Navaratilova and Graf.

Surely she belongs in the hall.

While I agree she belongs in the Hall and do not care about
the coke thing at all I do remember how she stayed No 1
so long. She did it just like JJ, Caro, and Dinara did it. Towards
the latter part of her No 1 stay she just played every week and
went deep into tournys. She wasn't winning the big ones. And
perhaps that overplaying was part of the reason for the foot
problems that caused her early retirement. It seemed she was
only playing so much to keep the No 1 spot.

I think had she not done that she could have had a much more
productive career and may have pulled out some of those big
matches she lost.

Well that made little sense! You just compared Hingis to players who didn't sniff a major! Very brainy! Holding onto the #1 ranking is not a crime from what I remember about the history of the game either!

 

[RJD11]

She was not banned for 2 years because moral police did not
like her consuming cocaine, but because it is one of the
banned performance enhancing drugs as it acts as a stimulant
and helps to keep the heart beating rate up.

I am not getting into anybody's personal life here.
I do not know of anybody getting banned from playing
for being an adulterer or lesbian etc.
If as a tennis player you could be banned from playing
the game itself for two years because you disregarded
the rules that you are supposed to follow, I believe you
should not be inducted into the hall of fame not withstanding
her career achievements.

This is not moral policing. This is to make people
play by the rules. IMHO, this shows that the Tennis
Establishment itself does not seem to care for its own
rules.

"Are not the people inducted to Hall of Fame
expected to be role model for others."

Role models are based on moral standards, and by you writing that one is expected to be a "role model," moral standards apply and are relevant in what I wrote.

Cocaine DOES NOT give one a benefit when competing. Heck, we might as well ban chocolate candy bars and other types of candies as well as coca cola or pepsi, they're stimulants and they're allowed to be ingested on court. They're no more natural than cocaine.

I meant role model in a professional sense, not in terms of their
personal life. Being banned is definitely not being a role model
in the professional sense itself.

So, why do you think Cocaine is one of the banned substances?
It is definitely not for some moralistic reasons.

It is against the law.

ITF is not there for law enforcement. That would be the business
of local police. If a player's blood alcohol level was found higher
than the local limits for safe driving, ITF will not ban them from
playing for two years. ITF will just laugh at the player for
hurting their own chances by "playing while intoxicated".

No major sport will tolerate its players breaking the law.

Alcohol is not illegal

And while it is extremely stupid for a player to go on court

drunk it is not illegal. I don't know if its against the rules of

tennis

 

[GameSetAndMath]

I am actually a big fan of Martina and for that matter any finesse
tennis player. I am definitely not questioning her achievements.
She has obviously won, I believe 5 GS titles in singles alone and
many more in doubles.

However, she was found guilty of drug violation and was
banned for 2 years, which is the maximum sentence for
drug violation without extenuating circumstances.

Is it really a good idea to induct someone into Hall of
Fame, who has served a 2 year ban on even playing in
the WTA circuit. Are not the people inducted to Hall of Fame
expected to be role model for others.

What does this tell about Tennis Establishment?

Her drug violation was for cocaine, not a PED or steroids, but a recreational drug. There was benefit from partaking in the use of cocaine. In some sports marijuana is banned, and I don't believe one should be banned from entering the HOF because of those type of violations.

As for role model, if we're going to start banning people due to not be everyone's idea of a role model or indiscretions, then most of the people in the HOF shouldn't be allowed. Jimmy Connors was an adulterer, Chris Evert had an abortion, Martina N was in a lesbian relationship during time when it was highly frowned upon and illegal in many states and countries, Bill Tilden liked the company of younger men.

Simply put, she earned her inclusion into the Hall of Fame.

There is a men's player by name Bob Hewitt, who later became
a coach. He was inducted into Hall of Fame. He was accused of
sexually harassing and raping young girls he coached.

On November 15, 2012, after months of investigation in the claims and allegations that he sexually abused girls he coached, Hewitt was suspended of his accolade in the International Tennis Hall of Fame. "His legacy ceases to exist in the Hall of Fame", said Mark Stenning, executive director of the International Tennis Hall of Fame. "As of today, his plaque will be removed from the Hall of Fame. His name will be removed from our website and all other materials, and from the perspective of the Hall of Fame, he is suspended from the Hall of Fame."

According to the charter, there is an even an explicit line about
character and integrity in the requirements to be inducted into
the Hall of Fame.[/u]

 

[GameSetAndMath]

Here is the actual criteria for induction into Hall of Fame under
Recent Player Category, given below in verbatim.

Recent Player Category Eligibility Criteria
•Active as competitors in the sport within the last 20 years prior to consideration.
•Not a significant factor on the ATP, WTA or Wheelchair Tennis tours within five years prior to induction.
•A distinguished record of competitive achievement at the highest international level, with consideration given to integrity, sportsmanship and character.

 

[Fiero425]

There is a men's player by name Bob Hewitt, who later became
a coach. He was inducted into Hall of Fame. He was accused of
sexually harassing and raping young girls he coached.

On November 15, 2012, after months of investigation in the claims and allegations that he sexually abused girls he coached, Hewitt was suspended of his accolade in the International Tennis Hall of Fame. "His legacy ceases to exist in the Hall of Fame", said Mark Stenning, executive director of the International Tennis Hall of Fame. "As of today, his plaque will be removed from the Hall of Fame. His name will be removed from our website and all other materials, and from the perspective of the Hall of Fame, he is suspended from the Hall of Fame."

According to the charter, there is an even an explicit line about
character and integrity in the requirements to be inducted into
the Hall of Fame.[/u]
[/quote]


I was horrified to see and hear about this last year! Frew McMillan and BoB Hewitt were my favorite men's doubles team back in the 70's! It seems you hear more and more about this stuff including in the figure skating industry! One male coach was accused of molesting his boy charges, a woman was being warned to keep her kid away, and she retorted, "I have a daughter!" There are some sick parents out there so not all of this was "under the covers" so to speak! I just wonder how it was kept under wraps for so many years?

 

[Calvy]

I am actually a big fan of Martina and for that matter any finesse
tennis player. I am definitely not questioning her achievements.
She has obviously won, I believe 5 GS titles in singles alone and
many more in doubles.

However, she was found guilty of drug violation and was
banned for 2 years, which is the maximum sentence for
drug violation without extenuating circumstances.

Is it really a good idea to induct someone into Hall of
Fame, who has served a 2 year ban on even playing in
the WTA circuit. Are not the people inducted to Hall of Fame
expected to be role model for others.

What does this tell about Tennis Establishment?

Her drug violation was for cocaine, not a PED or steroids, but a recreational drug. There was benefit from partaking in the use of cocaine. In some sports marijuana is banned, and I don't believe one should be banned from entering the HOF because of those type of violations.

As for role model, if we're going to start banning people due to not be everyone's idea of a role model or indiscretions, then most of the people in the HOF shouldn't be allowed. Jimmy Connors was an adulterer, Chris Evert had an abortion, Martina N was in a lesbian relationship during time when it was highly frowned upon and illegal in many states and countries, Bill Tilden liked the company of younger men.

Simply put, she earned her inclusion into the Hall of Fame.

There is a men's player by name Bob Hewitt, who later became
a coach. He was inducted into Hall of Fame. He was accused of
sexually harassing and raping young girls he coached.

On November 15, 2012, after months of investigation in the claims and allegations that he sexually abused girls he coached, Hewitt was suspended of his accolade in the International Tennis Hall of Fame. "His legacy ceases to exist in the Hall of Fame", said Mark Stenning, executive director of the International Tennis Hall of Fame. "As of today, his plaque will be removed from the Hall of Fame. His name will be removed from our website and all other materials, and from the perspective of the Hall of Fame, he is suspended from the Hall of Fame."

According to the charter, there is an even an explicit line about
character and integrity in the requirements to be inducted into
the Hall of Fame.[/u]

Are you truly equating the rape and molestation of several young girls by their trust coach to taking cocaine?

And I aware of the Hewitt saga, and the HOF is correct in it's decision to remove him. But, his removal had nothing to his being a role model, especially since he was not very well liked for his on court tactics and disposition toward his opponents.

 

[Calvy]

She was not banned for 2 years because moral police did not
like her consuming cocaine, but because it is one of the
banned performance enhancing drugs as it acts as a stimulant
and helps to keep the heart beating rate up.

I am not getting into anybody's personal life here.
I do not know of anybody getting banned from playing
for being an adulterer or lesbian etc.
If as a tennis player you could be banned from playing
the game itself for two years because you disregarded
the rules that you are supposed to follow, I believe you
should not be inducted into the hall of fame not withstanding
her career achievements.

This is not moral policing. This is to make people
play by the rules. IMHO, this shows that the Tennis
Establishment itself does not seem to care for its own
rules.

"Are not the people inducted to Hall of Fame
expected to be role model for others."

Role models are based on moral standards, and by you writing that one is expected to be a "role model," moral standards apply and are relevant in what I wrote.

Cocaine DOES NOT give one a benefit when competing. Heck, we might as well ban chocolate candy bars and other types of candies as well as coca cola or pepsi, they're stimulants and they're allowed to be ingested on court. They're no more natural than cocaine.

I meant role model in a professional sense, not in terms of their
personal life. Being banned is definitely not being a role model
in the professional sense itself.

So, why do you think Cocaine is one of the banned substances?
It is definitely not for some moralistic reasons.

Please reference one source that states cocaine is a benefit for sport advantage, just one. If that was the case, you'd have athletes running, jumping and swimming on the stuff.

And just so you know, there are several substances that are on the banned list, that experts and athlete believe should not be, because they don't benefit the athlete.

Please follow the link below to educate yourself with the list of
prohibited substances.
http://www.itftennis.com/antidoping/rules/prohibited-list.aspx
You will find it under section S6.

I'm well aware cocaine is on the list, but, where is it stated it's benefits an athletes performance? Having it on a banned list doesn't mean it enhances ones performances. In fact, it tends to do the opposite. In fact, caffeine, which is a stimulant, and which would give a user a more effective "up" than cocaine is not on the list.