US Open, Flushing Meadows, NY USA - Grand Slam (Men)

[Moxie]

Huh? Her lawyer argued that Nadal would have gotten caught juicing IF ONLY the ITF did more tests? How is that the same as Nadal faking an injury to AVOID a drug test? Cuz...it ain't the same thing. At all. I guess her argument is, "He'd have have avoided the test IF they'd asked him to take one!" LOL! I don't like Nadal, but I hope he wins just because her lawyer is stupid...

I think the statement that got her sued was that she said he was on a silent ban, implying that he'd actually failed a drugs test. Nadal has turned over his doctor's records. But her lawyers have essentially conceded that she's going to lose, asking that the damages be a nominal 1 euro.

 

[Carol]

No offense Front242...but this is about the dumbest non-Carol thing I've ever read on this site. I take offense as a human being - let alone as a black woman (which I am). Your logic is backward and ridiculous. Everybody else in my family is 5'8" or taller. I have a brother who's 2 years older and is 6'5" and an ex-football player. I have 2 more older brothers who are over 6'. I have a sister who is 2 years younger and is 6' and while not a beanpole she's pretty muscular.. I am 5'3" and suck at athletics and rock some chub to prove it. By your logic I can't possibly be related to everyone else in my family because they all tower over me and have bigger muscles. Genetics, even within families with siblings barely 2 years apart - can vary vastly. I can extrapolate that my lack of height is due to the fact that my father had 10 siblings - and his 6 sisters as well as his mother were all under 5'4" and he was only 5'8" himself. Yet he had 4 brothers who were all over 6' - which possibly accounted for my 6'+ siblings all being extra tall. My mother was also about 5'8". When she was a young woman she was stick thin and yet she had a brother who was a 6'2" badass military man who liked to crack walnuts on his forehead - probably just to scare the shite out of us, but beside the point.. Hence my siblings being tall with differing body types - some more muscular than others - and me being short and not muscular. So please don't be illogical like some other posters here. Be better, please.

PS - Exactly when is Serena supposed to have started using steroids? In the crib? She a muscular 10 year-old, so why wouldn't she be a muscular 36 year-old? Just totally freaking dumb ass. If you look at childhood photos of her and Venus she was ALWAYS more muscular than Venus. Let's accuse the black woman of using steroids because it can't possibly be genetics and hard work that's given her those muscles. No sirree, Bob. She must be juicing. Christ. I'm done with this convo. Just flipping ridiculous. This nonsense is why I don't post on the women's tennis boards. The racism on this issue is beyond disgusting - especially when Serena has passed every drug test she's ever taken. Meanwhile it's the blond white woman who got caught using a banned substance, but she served her sentence so now let's go after the muscular black woman because she cannot possibly be more HONEST than the blond white woman. Ugh! It's rampant and repugnant racism and it makes me want to puke. And the worst part? I'm not even a big Serena fan. She's OK, but gimme Steffi Graf as the female GOAT any day of the week....

Well, now it's my turn to say that your comment has not been one of the dumbest like usually is, something smart.....it's about time, congrats!

 

[Busted]

@Busted: You win the rant of the week! That was awesome.

Thanks! But...please don't tell me there's a Rant of the Week contest...cuz...as my mother used to say about my brother acting like a clown, "Don't encourage him!"

 

[Carol]

By the way the poster named "backhandslapper" has been this time the one bringing a dirty and ugly comment

 

[Busted]

Well, now it's my turn to say that your comment has not been one of the dumbest like usually is, something smart.....it's about time, congrats!

I was smart to insult you by calling all your comments stupid? Thanks! I knew you'd see the light sooner or later! Just kidding...I'll cut you some slack on this one...

 

[Moxie]

Thanks! But...please don't tell me there's a Rant of the Week contest...cuz...as my mother used to say about my brother acting like a clown, "Don't encourage him!"

Unofficial. But I love a good rant.

 

[Carol]

I was smart to insult you by calling all your comments stupid? Thanks! I knew you'd see the light sooner or later! Just kidding...I'll cut you some slack on this one...

Don't try to twist what I've said, my English is not the best but you understood very well....or maybe not

 

[Busted]

I think the statement that got her sued was that she said he was on a silent ban, implying that he'd actually failed a drugs test. Nadal has turned over his doctor's records. But her lawyers have essentially conceded that she's going to lose, asking that the damages be a nominal 1 euro.

Right...but that's not what her lawyer argued in court. The lawyer said the ITF doesn't do enough tests because they're scared of Nadal because he's been so successful and is too powerful in the sport. Basically her lawyer is arguing that if the ITF did more tests on Nadal they'd catch him doping. Which is NOT the same thing as proving that he was not injured in 2012 and was just trying to avoid a doping test. He proved he was injured, so her claim that he was faking the injury to avoid doping test don't hold water. I'm not even sure why the judge didn't rule in his favor on the spot unless it's just because the court needs to verify the legitimacy of his medial records.

 

[Carol]

And I don't know if you have read about this but there is another woman ex tennis player from Canada named Helene Pelletier and now she is a journalist saying the same thing about Novak. She says that he wasn't injured but a silence ban because a positive doping control, and of course Novak has put the case in his lawyers hands too. Like I said before, to talk is cheap but later they have to pay the consequences

 

[Carol]

Right...but that's not what her lawyer argued in court. The lawyer said the ITF doesn't do enough tests because they're scared of Nadal because he's been so successful and is too powerful in the sport. Basically her lawyer is arguing that if the ITF did more tests on Nadal they'd catch him doping. Which is NOT the same thing as proving that he was not injured in 2012 and was just trying to avoid a doping test. He proved he was injured, so her claim that he was faking the injury to avoid doping test don't hold water. I'm not even sure why the judge didn't rule in his favor on the spot unless it's just because the court needs to verify the legitimacy of his medial records.

I also hope the ITF can do something against that french woman

 

[Moxie]

Right...but that's not what her lawyer argued in court. The lawyer said the ITF doesn't do enough tests because they're scared of Nadal because he's been so successful and is too powerful in the sport. Basically her lawyer is arguing that if the ITF did more tests on Nadal they'd catch him doping. Which is NOT the same thing as proving that he was not injured in 2012 and was just trying to avoid a doping test. He proved he was injured, so her claim that he was faking the injury to avoid doping test don't hold water. I'm not even sure why the judge didn't rule in his favor on the spot unless it's just because the court needs to verify the legitimacy of his medial records.

I think the judicial process takes its time. The judge will review the evidence submitted and rule.

 

[backhandslapper]

Well, Busted, as for Serena in the panic room...

http://tennispurist.blogspot.cz/2017/04/the-curious-case-of-roger-federer.html -- this I think is pretty good.

Only for red-pillers though.

 

[Federberg]

These kinds of blogs are so tiresome. There’s bound to be some person on the inter web that’ll raise suspicions whether there’s supporting evidence or not. What on earth has a better serve got to do with drugs? Erm.. bigger racquet perhaps? As for his performance this year, the fact that his average rally length is surely less than it’s probably ever been explains a lot, but there are people out there that won’t let the obvious get in the way of a good conspiracy. Pathetic! If Roger had been able to run the table in Canada then Cincy then Flushing I might have been concerned there might be some truth here. I for one was appalled that he attempted to do that, and he got what he deserved. You see the truth is he is an old man. An exceptionallly talented one yes, but that is all

 

[GameSetAndMath]

This very same blog has been brought up by Kieran and we have discussed this and refuted it thoroughly before.

 

[mrzz]

Ugh... I could answer to 97269236543765435 points of that blog above, but I will use my time to other things. Besides from repeating the obvious -- the guy is technically better -- and there are no pills to that, I´ll just answer the serve part (because the bh part the guy answered himself):

If I wanted to find doping evidence on the serve, I would look for the average speed -- and that every tennis fan knows that has dropped in Federer´s case. His serve always had a very important placement component, and it is just getting better. The serve is a technical aspect of the game, sometimes hidden by the fact that some big servers just slam it down. This year Federer is firing some second serve aces, just out of placement. I guess only those are enough to explain that 2.2 aces differential the blog author cited.

Anyway, I just disagree with the guy. But there is one thing I agree with him: that you can make those claims if you think you have a point. I know that accusations are dangerous thing, but one can say that in his opinion player X is a doper (I wouldn't do that, but still). I am not offended by the fact the blog's author thinks like that -- and I do not think the big 3 + 1 are saints above any suspicion. As Darth always points, all those guys have the incentive to dope... but to equate better results to doping is quite simplistic to my eyes.

 

[Moxie]

That blog is a response to the "Curious Case of Rafael Nadal" that has been circulating for years. I have never said that Roger dopes, but I have made the plea that those who like to make the claim on Nadal should look at the similar circumstances with Roger. I really don't think that either one of them has cheated. I think they are superior tennis players and athletes to anyone in their era, and likely before. They are also more dedicated to the work than the greats before them, IMO. These kinds of blogs are about taking away from the great tennis that both Federer and Nadal have played, and their dedication to hard work, and the sport. It's basement jockeying, and sour grapes, if you ask me.

 

[backhandslapper]

Whenever an athlete is asked about doping and dodges the question by offering his "hard work is underrated and overlooked" platitudes, you know they're doing their best to hint at the truth without pissing off their agent and lawyer. So, if by accident, they get caught or just exposed one day, they can't be labeled as liars.

Just cheats.

This and the sycophant fans with rose-colored glasses is the repulsive side of sports. You guys put way too much stock and belief in athletes. If anyone calls a suspicion there most likely is a lot of doping at the top of any truly physical sport a "conspiracy theory", I suggest they take a closer look at what they consider realistic.

It's nice to see Rafa and Roger fans agree on something for once though. Both of these hard working and exceptionally gifted studs are clean as lilies. And the illusion goes on.

 

[Moxie]

No one says they're as clean as lilies. Most of us have said they all push the edge of what is legal. @backhandslapper, you think that fans have rose-colored glasses, but I'd ask you: if you're so sure the game is dirty, then why do you follow it, at all? I mean, the season is long, the matches can be long, and you have to invest in an individual player. If they're all doping, then why on earth do you bother?

 

[Federberg]

I second that question. Why bother joining a tennis forum if all you're going to do is create conspiracies about the players? Look if you had anything substantive to say then perhaps it would be food for thought, but all I've heard so far seems like fluff.

I've got an idea, join a cycling forum, have fun!

 

[mrzz]

Most of us have said they all push the edge of what is legal

This. Nobody is saying that they just eat carrots and bananas... these guys live in the XXI century. But when you say "doper", you say something blatantly illegal, that the rest of the field on average is not doing. That is the part rational people challenge about the claim.

Federer's case is so obvious for someone who actually plays that I won't even bother about it. Nadal's, as his game is more physical, catches more the occasional reader. But the guy was beating top ATP players at 15 years of age, was he doping back then?