Murray calls for Dope Testing Reform

[britbox]

Murray has called for the testing to be more transparent. At the moment, anyone with 7 tests or more is simply grouped in the 7+ category, so you have no way of knowing if they've been tested 7 times or 25 times.

I don't see any reason why they don't give an exact number either.

[parsehtml]

<a class="embedly-card" href="https://metro.co.uk/2018/07/29/andy-murray-calls-drugs-testing-reform-tennis-amid-serena-williams-row-7774152/">Andy Murray calls for drugs testing reform in tennis amid Serena Williams row</a>
[/parsehtml]

 

[Front242]

Makes sense but I'll never respect Murray as regards doping controls since he was completely the opposite to how he is now when he first came on tour and only changed his tune once Armstrong got busted. Nothing but a PR stunt by his team telling him to grow up. See the true Murray here in his words. Always a clown forever.

 

[Moxie]

It's a bit mild, that article, but obviously he's responding to a question. I suspect you're trying to direct a doping conversation to one thread. We'll see if it works.

 

[Moxie]

Makes sense but I'll never respect Murray as regards doping controls since he was completely the opposite to how he is now when he first came on tour and only changed his tune once Armstrong got busted. Nothing but a PR stunt by his team telling him to grow up. See the true Murray here in his words. Always a clown forever.

Your inclination is to distrust everything that players say when they respond to questions about doping. (Except Roger, of course.) You do realize that they are responding to questions, for one, and for the other, that it's a pretty big pain in the ass and inconvenience for them. Of course they know it has to be done, but if it seems random and unfair and under-disclosed, they are within their rights to feel frustrated with the system. Expressing that frustration doesn't imply guilt.

 

[Front242]

Your inclination is to distrust everything that players say when they respond to questions about doping. (Except Roger, of course.) You do realize that they are responding to questions, for one, and for the other, that it's a pretty big pain in the ass and inconvenience for them. Of course they know it has to be done, but if it seems random and unfair and under-disclosed, they are within their rights to feel frustrated with the system. Expressing that frustration doesn't imply guilt.

Wrong. I never said anything about guilt but merely that what he says to the press these days are not his words but what he's been told to say as I posted above his true feelings regarding doping which come across as incredibly childish and naive given how much money these guys play for.

Tennis has hands down some of the worse doping controls out there and the ATP/ITF/WTA govern their own sport mostly when it comes to testing. That's a complete joke and yet clowns like Murray still feel the need to complain. Same with Serena. They play close to 11 months of the year and some of these morons complain about being tested 5 times in 6 months. They need to get a life. 11 times in the whole year is only once per month which is beyond ridiculous given the stuff they could be shooting up on the rest of the time and, again, the top players are earning millions. They should just comply with the pathetic controls in place, grow up and stfu and be extremely thankful doping controls in tennis are so damn poor.

 

[Federberg]

Makes sense but I'll never respect Murray as regards doping controls since he was completely the opposite to how he is now when he first came on tour and only changed his tune once Armstrong got busted. Nothing but a PR stunt by his team telling him to grow up. See the true Murray here in his words. Always a clown forever.

but how is this opposite? He's effectively singing the same tune if he's saying they need to reform

 

[Front242]

but how is this opposite? He's effectively singing the same tune if he's saying they need to reform

His tweet I quoted was him complaining about being tested as regards the whereabouts rule. Now that his PR team told him to man up, he's saying the opposite and wants to be tested more. Back then he thought it was too much.

Contrast Murray's silly change of tune in light of Armstrong being busted with Federer, for example, who has always been consistently looking for more testing and not just after the Armstrong debacle where many decided it would look better for them as a PR move to be pro testing. Federer for a long time now has requested they keep samples for up to 10 years for re-testing as technology improves. No other tennis player has requested this which makes me think he knows as much as we do that there are cheats out there he wants retroactively to be caught out. Also leads me more and more to believe he's clean to make such requests. The cheats are always ahead of the testers so if you're a cheat yourself it's a pretty outlandish request which makes me think he's out to get others caught...

 

[britbox]

Yep, Murray was moaning like Jimmy Savile watching an orphanage burn down before the Armstrong debacle. He came full circle after. I think he's right on his transparency argument though... 7+ isn't a good band to have on the testing spectrum... most of the top players fit into that category. They should just list the number of tests.

 

[Federberg]

Yep, Murray was moaning like Jimmy Savile watching an orphanage burn down before the Armstrong debacle. He came full circle after. I think he's right on his transparency argument though... 7+ isn't a good band to have on the testing spectrum... most of the top players fit into that category. They should just list the number of tests.

bwhahahaha!

 

[DarthFed]

Makes sense but I'll never respect Murray as regards doping controls since he was completely the opposite to how he is now when he first came on tour and only changed his tune once Armstrong got busted. Nothing but a PR stunt by his team telling him to grow up. See the true Murray here in his words. Always a clown forever.

I didn't realize he had made comments like that. Either way I've never really suspected him. He seems like a fairly honorable chap. That said I'm not a fan of his play or the antics on court.

And yes, Federer calling for the biological passport and retaining samples for 10 years are the opposite statements of someone who is currently doping or is planning to dope in the future.

 

[monfed]

Mugray should've specified if he wants doping reform in male or female players.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

The players are tested by ATP/WTA/ITF during tournaments, by their own country's testing agencies like USADA and finally by the WADA. Each one maintains its own database and they don't combine the number of tests administered by these different agencies to the same player. So, it is lot more tricky to figure out the exact count of how many times a player is tested in total.

Having said that Serena's argument that all players should be equally tested is totally ridiculous for the following reasons.

1. It is natural to test winners and top ranked players more often than a player ranked outside top 100 who has never ever won a tournament. On the other hand, when it comes to match fixing the second category of players should be checked more often as they are more prone to indulge in it as they make very less money.

2. It is also natural to test players who are being suspected (either due to biological passport or due to leads coming from various sources or due to opportunity a player may have to do so).

3. If everybody knows that they will be tested 10 times per year, for example, then if a player's 10th test in an year happens to be in July, then that player knows that there will be no more testing for him/her for the rest of the year and so they can freely dope. So, there has to be a random element here to keep everybody on their toes.

 

[Moxie]

The players are tested by ATP/WTA/ITF during tournaments, by their own country's testing agencies like USADA and finally by the WADA. Each one maintains its own database and they don't combine the number of tests administered by these different agencies to the same player. So, it is lot more tricky to figure out the exact count of how many times a player is tested in total.

Having said that Serena's argument that all players should be equally tested is totally ridiculous for the following reasons.

1. It is natural to test winners and top ranked players more often than a player ranked outside top 100 who has never ever won a tournament. On the other hand, when it comes to match fixing the second category of players should be checked more often as they are more prone to indulge in it as they make very less money.

2. It is also natural to test players who are being suspected (either due to biological passport or due to leads coming from various sources or due to opportunity a player may have to do so).

3. If everybody knows that they will be tested 10 times per year, for example, then if a player's 10th test in an year happens to be in July, then that player knows that there will be no more testing for him/her for the rest of the year and so they can freely dope. So, there has to be a random element here to keep everybody on their toes.

This is so well-laid out, GSM, thanks.

1. I agree, and I think this is SOP. Players get tested when they win, is my understanding. Also late-stages of (especially) Majors. (Also good point about match-fixing and lower-ranked players, but I guess that's another conversation.)

2. Is the biological passport in place?

3. I'm sure we'd all agree to set a maximum number of test/year is a ridiculous idea. But here's where I might get Serena's complaint: if you get tested more in-competition because you're winning, it's one thing. But if you're randomly tested out of competition than other players, and perhaps by a lot, it might be a reasonable complaint. You understand that the Williams sisters have felt hard done by at times due to the color of their skin. I think that could be taken into consideration from Serena's POV, as well.

 

[Moxie]

And yes, Federer calling for the biological passport and retaining samples for 10 years are the opposite statements of someone who is currently doping or is planning to dope in the future.

You and Front have called out the ATP/ITF for being unreliable and protecting top players. Therefore, wouldn't it be just as easy to say that Roger can state the party line, because he knows he's immune? Arguably, it's those that go against the status quo that risk their ire. It could be said that standing up to them is the better proof of innocence. In any case, if you're going to say that Roger's statements argue against his doping, you should, by the same logic, say that Rafa's actually taking a woman to court for slander argues equally well for his own clean record. I've only ever asked you guys to put them to the same standard. (You don't though.)

 

[GameSetAndMath]

This is so well-laid out, GSM, thanks.

1. I agree, and I think this is SOP. Players get tested when they win, is my understanding. Also late-stages of (especially) Majors. (Also good point about match-fixing and lower-ranked players, but I guess that's another conversation.)

2. Is the biological passport in place?

3. I'm sure we'd all agree to set a maximum number of test/year is a ridiculous idea. But here's where I might get Serena's complaint: if you get tested more in-competition because you're winning, it's one thing. But if you're randomly tested out of competition than other players, and perhaps by a lot, it might be a reasonable complaint. You understand that the Williams sisters have felt hard done by at times due to the color of their skin. I think that could be taken into consideration from Serena's POV, as well.

No, players don't always get tested when they win. My statement was generic in the sense that players who win a lot and are starts should naturally be tested more.

I believe biological passport is now in place. So, if someone's passport is changing significantly, that will raise a red flag and they will be tested more often.

Serena's grievances about other issues related to her skin color and/or physique is understandable. But, her grievance claiming that she is being discriminated in testing does not hold water. As I already stated else where, Serena was tested six times till June of this year, whereas Roger said at Wimbledon that he was tested seven times in the last month alone. Considering they both have similar stature to the game, she should realize that her complaints are not valid. What bothers me here is that I think Serena is intelligent. I don't believe she is that stupid to believe that there is actual discrimination going against her regarding testing. This bothers me even more. If I think she is stupid, I can give her a pass for confusing issues and crying discrimination when there is none.

 

[Moxie]

No, players don't always get tested when they win. My statement was generic in the sense that players who win a lot and are starts should naturally be tested more.

I believe biological passport is now in place. So, if someone's passport is changing significantly, that will raise a red flag and they will be tested more often.

Serena's grievances about other issues related to her skin color and/or physique is understandable. But, her grievance claiming that she is being discriminated in testing does not hold water. As I already stated else where, Serena was tested six times till June of this year, whereas Roger said at Wimbledon that he was tested seven times in the last month alone. Considering they both have similar stature to the game, she should realize that her complaints are not valid. What bothers me here is that I think Serena is intelligent. I don't believe she is that stupid to believe that there is actual discrimination going against her regarding testing. This bothers me even more. If I think she is stupid, I can give her a pass for confusing issues and crying discrimination when there is none.

How do you know that players don't always get tested when they when big tournaments? I've heard Rafa talk about it in press conferences as if it's a day-in-the-life part of getting from court to shower to press conference to massage to after party.

Serena IS intelligent. And you've never walked a mile in her gender or her skin color (I'm guessing,) so I wouldn't presume to talk about what she should feel in terms of discrimination if I were you.

 

[DarthFed]

How do you know that players don't always get tested when they when big tournaments? I've heard Rafa talk about it in press conferences as if it's a day-in-the-life part of getting from court to shower to press conference to massage to after party.

Serena IS intelligent. And you've never walked a mile in her gender or her skin color (I'm guessing,) so I wouldn't presume to talk about what she should feel in terms of discrimination if I were you.

So because of her race and gender she should be given preferential treatment when it comes to drug testing? I don't think there is room for any athlete to complain about the testing being strict aside from obvious stuff like if they were tested every day, or tested right before big matches, etc.

 

[DarthFed]

You and Front have called out the ATP/ITF for being unreliable and protecting top players. Therefore, wouldn't it be just as easy to say that Roger can state the party line, because he knows he's immune? Arguably, it's those that go against the status quo that risk their ire. It could be said that standing up to them is the better proof of innocence. In any case, if you're going to say that Roger's statements argue against his doping, you should, by the same logic, say that Rafa's actually taking a woman to court for slander argues equally well for his own clean record. I've only ever asked you guys to put them to the same standard. (You don't though.)

How is Federer promoting changes that would catch more cheaters remotely similar to Nadal taking that woman to court? If anything it's telling that he took her to trial in regards to the period she mentioned. Nadal has garnered suspicion before in his career and his uncle and him just brushed it off. Those were "general" suspicions and this was a specific period that the French sports minister mentioned. And it is the most suspicious absence for Nadal...period. According to him he was badly hurt all clay season, a season in which he dropped one set (RG final) aside from the blue clay he didn't want to play on. He didn't show any signs of injury during Wimbledon either, and to top things off he skipped AO with a tummy ache 3 weeks in advance and immediately played small clay tournaments after AO was over. And that was at age 26. Remember this year when he had knee problems at age 31 and still gave AO a shot? Why the difference?

 

[Moxie]

How is Federer promoting changes that would catch more cheaters remotely similar to Nadal taking that woman to court? If anything it's telling that he took her to trial in regards to the period she mentioned. Nadal has garnered suspicion before in his career and his uncle and him just brushed it off. Those were "general" suspicions and this was a specific period that the French sports minister mentioned. And it is the most suspicious absence for Nadal...period. According to him he was badly hurt all clay season, a season in which he dropped one set (RG final) aside from the blue clay he didn't want to play on. He didn't show any signs of injury during Wimbledon either, and to top things off he skipped AO with a tummy ache 3 weeks in advance and immediately played small clay tournaments after AO was over. And that was at age 26. Remember this year when he had knee problems at age 31 and still gave AO a shot? Why the difference?

Somehow those dots connect for you, but you've always been willing to fill great leaps in logic with gobs of fairy tales that make you happy and fix the reality of the Fedal h2h. You also spin all of the above the way you like, no matter how often you get reminded of the actual truth. You and Front like to talk about Rafa skipping the AO with tummy ache. That's not what happened, and I've reminded you of that many times. It was the tuneup to the AO that he skipped with an illness and so, after 7 months off, didn't feel prepared to start at the AO. That is different from last year...he'd only had a short break and he did play a tune-up. Also, Nadal has not "garnered suspicion," and Toni hasn't brushed it off. When that doctor in Spain was arrested, a French newspaper decided to speculate about Nadal and Barca for no reason other than that they were successful Spanish athletes/teams and they sell papers in headlines. So Rafa threatened to sue them. Angrily. Not brushed off. The rest is just internet troll speculation following directly on from that one in print speculation, read avidly and fed by, the likes of you and Front. And everyone knows why that theory has been embraced so whole-heartedly by Federer fans.

Now, I have asked you to say when and why Rafa would have started doping, since he had such early success and you say beginning of 2005, and your only answer to "why" seems to be that there's a lot of money in tennis. As a motivation, that would fit almost every player in tennis, but less so an 18-year-old from a prosperous family. As to doping at 18, I don't see why he would have, since he career had been on a pretty steep upward climb since he turned pro at 15. He had successes in 2003 and 2004, too, so why dope in 2005? 2015 makes more sense. But you've never let common sense intrude on your commitment to your theory.

 

[Moxie]

@DarthFed: It seems to me that every time I hold your feet to the fire about Nadal and doping early in his career, you abdicate the conversation. I have given you any number of reasonable, common sense examples of why it makes no sense that Nadal was doping in 2004-2005. Many times over the years. The reason that you are committed to late 2004-early 2005 is that, otherwise, your argument falls apart. If Nadal was playing long 5-setters in 2005, and winning the FO without help, then how can you imply that he has help, by calling him the "Energizer Bunny," all the time? Not if he demonstrated that he had the fitness, before, what you would say, was doping. Also, the Dr. Fuentes scandal came down in 2006. If Nadal didn't start doping in 2005, why would he have started doping in 2006, as a very successful 19-year-old? (There is no reason.) But if he didn't, then he was clean of the Fuentes scandal, the touch-stone that you and Front, particularly, love to embrace. Let's face it...you have to peg him to 2004-5, or your arguments don't hold water. One of your arguments is that he got more "bulked up" between 2004-2005. News flash: that can happen between 17-18 to a boy, especially if he has already topped out at his height. Though I would argue that he didn't look remarkably different from when he beat Roger as a 17 year and Roddick as an 18 year old. Nor did he play tennis in anyway differently. The other point you try to make is that he has great stamina in matches. He did, when he was younger. (Another news flash?) But he has definitely shown less stamina later in his career. He's helped by mental strength, but you can't make me believe that that is anything other than innate in him.

I'm sorry to be tedious about pressing this, but you are tedious when you ignore the conversation, and then just keep inserting snide remarks in other threads. It's a passive-aggressive way of forcing me to either ignore you, and not disrupt the thread, or to call you on it. And it's cowardly of @Front242 and @Wimbledonerer to "like" your post, but also not have the courage to back it up in conversation. If we don't debate it outright, it's not fair of you to make sleazy remarks all the time.