The doping program joke of the ITF!!!

Amritia3ee wrote:LF, check your v2 inbox.

why don't you send the message here, same PM function?

Amritia3ee wrote:LF, check your v2 inbox.

Responded.

LF,
do Mods read people's PMs on V2?

noleisthebest wrote:LF,
do Mods read people's PMs on V2?

No.

Simon Cambers of the Tennis Space interviews the tight-lipped head of the ITF’s anti-doping program, Dr. Stuart Miller. While Miller keeps up his tradition of not revealing much, he does say that, while there’s no penalty at the moment for associating with a person who has been banned—in this case, Lance Armstrong’s doctor, Luis Garcia del Moral—there is a proposal to make it a violation in the next WADA code.

Dr. Miller says of the Serena Williams “panic room” incident from last year, “There’s another aspect to that, which is the anti-doping programme’s side, which unfortunately I can’t talk about.”

On the question of the ITF’s published testing statistics, he says that the numbers listed don’t include tests that WADA, or a country’s own anti-doping agency, might have administered on a player. Why can’t we get all of them listed together? Miller says that’s WADA’s job. That sounds like another proposal for the next WADA code to me. Right now, despite the stats we have, we still don’t know exactly when or how often tennis players are being tested.

Very interesting NITB.

Makes me wonder if the ITF punishes the players in the same way WADA would if they were caught?

I find it alarming there is such a disparity in the transparency in the correct information being available for all to see by 2 professional bodies in the world of sport.

Well it can only mean one thing: both institutions don't have the guts to deal with the problem and are just covering it up washing hands off each other.
There's a lot of money involved, that's why.

People in those positions are cowards who don't care about the future of tennis, all they want is when the time comes to leave their present job to have a nice springboard for the next, i.e. be able to present another mind-numbing power-point presentation with millions of colourful graphs and charts showing how they increased profits.

But then such bodies as the ITF and WADA are not 'cash rich' therefore any incentive not to deal with the problem may not be down to them protecting the sponsorship deals that keep the sport popular, but more they haven't enough in terms of resources to fully deal with the problems that may exist.

I would ask how much does the ATP and it's sponsors contribute in terms of funding to WADA/ITF and what more can they do to promote 'fairness'

I wonder how much in terms of substances and drug enhancements are now illegal compared to say 4-5 years ago? What would be the perception if someone in the game had taken substances which weren't banned back in 2006 and say is banned now? That for me is more intriguing question. Say if Murray came out and said oh I used this substance back in 2006 when I was developing and it is now a banned substance. I would certainly feel conflicted on him even though legally he wasn't breaking any laws, but it clearly holds an advantage as it is banned now.

The real question is who needs whom more: ATP WADA or the other way round.
You'd need some real passionate top athlete or sports purist/enthusiast/patron who cannot be bribed, to run that instiution in order to have it run properly.
Otherwise, it's just a pond where big fish eat small.

If anything I don't think the sports would want WADA if they wanted a steam rolling commercial machine, however if WADA were perceived not to be doing their jobs 'properly' their creditbility and existence would be in massive jeporady. Who would want to back an organisation not doing what it is paid to do by countries and sports respectively?

I look at tennis for example and look at the players. Who in the sport would need the most protecting if they were drive home profits? In my mind would be Federer. That man is a walking brand and having your name associated with him makes you money. Almost like the Tiger Woods of tennis. What dropped Woods's popularity and creditability? His personal life. Take Nadal. For me I cannot see what benefits there would be in concealing any 'tarnishing' actions which would reflect on tennis, WADA and sponsorships in a bad way. There would be too much damage to allow top athletes to flout sporting laws.

There needs to be clearer guidelines on WADA and the ITF testing. If players are getting away with cheating ot doping, then a report would need to be compiled as to why any player was able to get away with it.

legendkillar wrote:
Take Nadal. For me I cannot see what benefits there would be in concealing any 'tarnishing' actions which would reflect on tennis, WADA and sponsorships in a bad way. There would be too much damage to allow top athletes to flout sporting laws.

So much has been done to prop up Nadal into a marketable cash cow in the artificial way, I don't know where to begin.

Federer is a walking brand because of his tennis alone. He is almost like treasure at the moment, people realising his career is not going to last another 10 years.

Get him out of the picture, and tennis tournaments lack something huge. With Nadal out, you don't notice so much difference.

noleisthebest wrote:

legendkillar wrote:
Take Nadal. For me I cannot see what benefits there would be in concealing any 'tarnishing' actions which would reflect on tennis, WADA and sponsorships in a bad way. There would be too much damage to allow top athletes to flout sporting laws.

So much has been done to prop up Nadal into a marketable cash cow in the artificial way, I don't know where to begin.

Federer is a walking brand because of his tennis alone. He is almost like treasure at the moment, people realising his career is not going to last another 10 years.

Get him out of the picture, and tennis tournaments lack something huge. With Nadal out, you don't notice so much difference.

See to me I don't view Nadal as a massive cash cow. Take his absence now. Has it really been felt over the commercial world? No. Yes he may have scored a new deal with that poker thing, but have big brands missed him? Not at all. Nike for example I doubt Nadal would feature in the top 10 income generating athletes or even on their top 10 paid athletes.

Federer the persona matches his tennis. Elequent. The guy is suave and is a dream for sponsors. Like with watches and stuff. Nadal could never branch out into those markets. The guy is a hustler and bustler on court. To actually have a decent persona off court with such a style of tennis is almost impossible. Agassi for example only managed such a feight because of the slogan 'Image is Everything' Nadal doesn't have any soundbites that generates commercial appeal. The only thing he could do is model pants or something!

Look at Djokovic. The guy is an enigma. That is what makes him so difficult to market. If press and fan perception is one of confusion, sponsors will find it even more difficult to market him in a way which doesn't detract from his popularity as a top tennis player.

Murray is more easier to market because the UK is a marketing whore and people easily buy in commercialism.

In general back to the original title of the thread. If WADA is shown to be ineffective, they will lose funding. That yes could be an argument to cover up failures, but also it is an argument for them to do their jobs. Same as the ITF. As governing bodies would be massively at risk of losing their positions if they were shown to be so ineffective of their primary functions.

legendkillar wrote:
If WADA is shown to be ineffective, they will lose funding. That yes could be an argument to cover up failures, but also it is an argument for them to do their jobs. Same as the ITF. As governing bodies would be massively at risk of losing their positions if they were shown to be so ineffective of their primary functions.

Who funds WADA?

Nadal's deal with NIKE is worth £7 million a year, Federer £9 million.

So you are right, Federer has a bit better sponshorship deal, but as fan I would swap all sponsorship money etc. for success on court.

noleisthebest wrote:

legendkillar wrote:
If WADA is shown to be ineffective, they will lose funding. That yes could be an argument to cover up failures, but also it is an argument for them to do their jobs. Same as the ITF. As governing bodies would be massively at risk of losing their positions if they were shown to be so ineffective of their primary functions.

Who funds WADA?

I would imagine it would be the sports themselves. Afterall they are paying for a service from them.

legendkillar wrote:

I would imagine it would be the sports themselves. Afterall they are paying for a service from them.

I bet it will surprise you to read this:

http://www.wada-ama.org/en/about-wada/funding/

Nadal has started a 'Say NO to doping' incentive throughout Spain:

www.youtube.com/watch?v=bjjyVzMzES8

[quote="noleisthebest"]

legendkillar wrote:

I would imagine it would be the sports themselves. Afterall they are paying for a service from them.

I bet it will surprise you to read this:



I am more annoyed by the fact that they haven't received any grants from sports or sponsors in general.

I can't believe that on a global scale that $13M is charged.

Just adds to the point I made about lack of resources. $13M IMHO is way too short.

legendkillar wrote:
I am more annoyed by the fact that they haven't received any grants from sports or sponsors in general.

.

Why would Nike want to fund WADA and as a result potentially find out that for example Nadal is doping. They'd do the exact opposite.

noleisthebest wrote:

legendkillar wrote:
I am more annoyed by the fact that they haven't received any grants from sports or sponsors in general.

.

Why would Nike want to fund WADA and as a result potentially find out that for example Nadal is doping. They'd do the exact opposite.

Then I wouldn't imagine that such a secret could remain secret under Nike given the number of tennis players they sponsor. Wouldn't make logical sense.

If anything why not fund grants to WADA in a bid to out sponsors who may well pressure their athletes to win at all costs?

Amritia3ee wrote:Nadal has started a 'Say NO to doping' incentive throughout Spain:

www.youtube.com/watch?v=bjjyVzMzES8

ha ha ha. . This clears every doubt that surrounds him, isn't it?

legendkillar wrote:

If anything why not fund grants to WADA in a bid to out sponsors who may well pressure their athletes to win at all costs?

I think WADA is just a smokescreen, a token institution.
Why?
Because of the way they operate and the "results" they produce.
Who have they caught- Odesnik.
What happened to him? He got suspended two years
What happened a few months later? He got his suspension cancelled because he (like prisoners) "behaved" well and probably grassed some bigger names or whatever he knew.
Did we see anybody else caught as a result of those good behaviour bits of information? No.

But we have had Nadal (and a few other players) pull out right out of Olympics and having his PR team bang their heads together spinning out a new injury every month not knowing when he'd be back.

Now there are two options here: he's either really injured or he is undergoing a silent ban.

raiders_of_the_lost_ark wrote:

Amritia3ee wrote:Nadal has started a 'Say NO to doping' incentive throughout Spain:

www.youtube.com/watch?v=bjjyVzMzES8

ha ha ha. . This clears every doubt that surrounds him, isn't it?

Can't wait to see the reaction from French media

raiders_of_the_lost_ark wrote:

Amritia3ee wrote:Nadal has started a 'Say NO to doping' incentive throughout Spain:

www.youtube.com/watch?v=bjjyVzMzES8

ha ha ha. . This clears every doubt that surrounds him, isn't it?

It's funny cause in this clip he says zero tolerance to doping but then goes on to defend all those caught red handed like Cantador.

noleisthebest wrote:

legendkillar wrote:

If anything why not fund grants to WADA in a bid to out sponsors who may well pressure their athletes to win at all costs?

I think WADA is just a smokescreen, a token institution.
Why?
Because of the way they operate and the "results" they produce.
Who have they caught- Odesnik.
What happened to him? He got suspended two years
What happened a few months later? He got his suspension cancelled because he (like prisoners) "behaved" well and probably grassed some bigger names or whatever he knew.
Did we see anybody else caught as a result of those good behaviour bits of information? No.

But we have had Nadal (and a few other players) pull out right out of Olympics and having his PR team bang their heads together spinning out a new injury every month not knowing when he'd be back.

Now there are two options here: he's either really injured or he is undergoing a silent ban.

Good points. We have already seen how corrupt UCI and USA Track and field are in hiding their athletes. We have seen how LA was able to get away for so many years with UCI itself protecting him. We have seen many sporting bodies sending their athletes for international competitions despite them involved in doping. Charlie Francis said in his interview that there was not a single time any of his athletes were tested out of competition without warning all the while Canadian sporting body maintaining that it was all done.

If ATP/ITF can cover up Aggasi's case, why would it not do for some more elite players? The money involved now has multiplied several times in just a few years.

I always see some unknown players getting caught, where as the top ones go untroubled.

noleisthebest wrote:

legendkillar wrote:

If anything why not fund grants to WADA in a bid to out sponsors who may well pressure their athletes to win at all costs?

I think WADA is just a smokescreen, a token institution.
Why?
Because of the way they operate and the "results" they produce.
Who have they caught- Odesnik.
What happened to him? He got suspended two years
What happened a few months later? He got his suspension cancelled because he (like prisoners) "behaved" well and probably grassed some bigger names or whatever he knew.
Did we see anybody else caught as a result of those good behaviour bits of information? No.

But we have had Nadal (and a few other players) pull out right out of Olympics and having his PR team bang their heads together spinning out a new injury every month not knowing when he'd be back.

Now there are two options here: he's either really injured or he is undergoing a silent ban.

I don't think it is a silent ban. One has never been dished out in sport before so I can't imagine they would start it now.

To me he is injured. I think what we are witnessing is the gradual end to his career. It was asked how far could he possibly push his body in terms of his tennis and now we are seeing it. I really do think if he has a poor 2013, we could see him actually retire. He doesn't strike me as someone who would want to hang around in the lower end of the tennis rankings.

Odesnik is a different matter all together. One I don't agree with.

Dimitar Kutrovsky tested positive in May this year. He was tested on 14th February. Oddly enough Nadal tweeted he took a urine test the same day.

legendkillar wrote:

Dimitar Kutrovsky tested positive in May this year. He was tested on 14th February. Oddly enough Nadal tweeted he took a urine test the same day.

Very interesting. Oddly interesting. Fancy tweeting about urinating (tests) on Valentine's Day
BTW, I think Nadal's both injured and doping.

raiders_of_the_lost_ark wrote:

noleisthebest wrote:

legendkillar wrote:

If anything why not fund grants to WADA in a bid to out sponsors who may well pressure their athletes to win at all costs?

I think WADA is just a smokescreen, a token institution.
Why?
Because of the way they operate and the "results" they produce.
Who have they caught- Odesnik.
What happened to him? He got suspended two years
What happened a few months later? He got his suspension cancelled because he (like prisoners) "behaved" well and probably grassed some bigger names or whatever he knew.
Did we see anybody else caught as a result of those good behaviour bits of information? No.

But we have had Nadal (and a few other players) pull out right out of Olympics and having his PR team bang their heads together spinning out a new injury every month not knowing when he'd be back.

Now there are two options here: he's either really injured or he is undergoing a silent ban.

Good points. We have already seen how corrupt UCI and USA Track and field are in hiding their athletes. We have seen how LA was able to get away for so many years with UCI itself protecting him. We have seen many sporting bodies sending their athletes for international competitions despite them involved in doping. Charlie Francis said in his interview that there was not a single time any of his athletes were tested out of competition without warning all the while Canadian sporting body maintaining that it was all done.

If ATP/ITF can cover up Aggasi's case, why would it not do for some more elite players? The money involved now has multiplied several times in just a few years.

I always see some unknown players getting caught, where as the top ones go untroubled.

The case of Agassi was 'recreational' drugs. The ITF and ATP's testing regime then was truly shocking. He got off with a covering letter explaining how it got into his system. Now why the ITF or ATP did not follow this up only they will know.

There are so many things which don't make sense physically. I mean how did Federer go 2008 with Mono and win a Slam despite Mono blighting the career of Soderling and ending Ancic's? How does Nadal keep playing physically brutal tennis despite a long list of 'injuries'? How can Djokovic play a year like 2011 with the aid of an egg chamber and not have such a year in 2012? How does Murray continuosly get fitter and pack more muscle each year? You take it on face value. I don't know what they do off court and I don't know what sort of training regimes they really have or understand the mechanics of their bodies.

Comparing US Track and Field is too diverse. Too many specialist sports to begin with. I don't believe Nadal is an exception to every rule in the book in the tennis world

Yes top players you rarely if at all hear them test positive. Gasquet is the only real big name in recent time to test positive. We are chancing odds and using that formula to determine for example that 1 of the big 4 is surely a drug cheat. Maybe they all cheat, maybe they don't.

Gary Player years ago complained and made the point that Golfers dope. Yet he couldn't provide one name or a strand of proof to back such a claim. That is what annoys me about these athletes who bleat. If they have proof, back yourself. Empty assumptions will just for me be treated as rumour. Nothing more.

noleisthebest wrote:the "results" they produce.
Who have they caught- Odesnik.

They did not even catch him! The Austaralian customs did.

noleisthebest wrote:

legendkillar wrote:

Dimitar Kutrovsky tested positive in May this year. He was tested on 14th February. Oddly enough Nadal tweeted he took a urine test the same day.

Very interesting. Oddly interesting. Fancy tweeting about urinating (tests) on Valentine's Day
BTW, I think Nadal's both injured and doping.

It was a bizarre tweet

Call it luck or coincedence that his 'story' was corroborated by Kutrovsky testing positive providing a sample on the same day. That does indicate that testing is carried out.

Take AO 2012. Only the losers in matches were tested?? Would explain why Djokovic and Nadal wanted to win it so badly

And why Nadal was so disappointed to lose....

legendkillar wrote:
The case of Agassi was 'recreational' drugs. The ITF and ATP's testing regime then was truly shocking. He got off with a covering letter explaining how it got into his system. Now why the ITF or ATP did not follow this up only they will know.

Okay even if it was a recreational drug, but the manner in which it was handled was shocking. And we only got to know about this because Aggassi himself told it in his book. But is this not reason enough to suspect that he might have got away in similar or even more shocking manner with other PEDs and we don't know about it because Aggasi decided not to talk about it. Yes, Agaasi was always doubted with his sudden spike in his performances, his spectacular returns from injuries. It was not only fans like me who doubted it, even pros. Haven't you heard what Rios said about Agassi's doping and ATP?

legendkillar wrote:

There are so many things which don't make sense physically. I mean how did Federer go 2008 with Mono and win a Slam despite Mono blighting the career of Soderling and ending Ancic's?

Of all arguments this raised against Fed for doping, this one seems most robotic. Its like saying that everyone who has Mono must suffer till x-number of years, else its either not Mono or the player is doping? The extent a disease affects every individual can vary, is it hard to understand. Thousands of people die of malaria every year, yet when I had it as a 12 year old, I survived and recovered in 1.5 months. Surprising isn't it? Even Roddick was diagnosed with Mononucleosis and yet his career didn't end like Ancic. Doping??? Come on. And Ancic did make his return, perhaps he lacked motivation to meet the demands of pro-tennis player.

legendkillar wrote: Comparing US Track and Field is too diverse.

I agree. But the kind of reasoning they accepted is more shocking. e.g.

Dennis Mitchel when caught for testosterone in 1998 gave this reason and this was accepted by USA Tarck and Field: "five bottles of beer and sex with his wife at least four times . . . it was her birthday, the lady deserved a treat,"

legendkillar wrote: I don't believe Nadal is an exception to every rule in the book in the tennis world

Maybe, maybe not.

legendkillar wrote: Yes top players you rarely if at all hear them test positive. Gasquet is the only real big name in recent time to test positive.

Perhaps you must be already knowing the explanation he gave in his defence which was accepted.

legendkillar wrote: Gary Player years ago complained and made the point that Golfers dope. Yet he couldn't provide one name or a strand of proof to back such a claim. That is what annoys me about these athletes who bleat. If they have proof, back yourself. Empty assumptions will just for me be treated as rumour. Nothing more.

Some are empty, some aren't. Now we have to decide for ourselves.

Nole takes the firs set 6:1. Poor Berlocq looks like a WTA sparring partner in this match.
ooops! just ralised wrong thread

Of all arguments this raised against Fed for doping, this one seems most robotic. Its like saying that everyone who has Mono must suffer till x-number of years, else its either not Mono or the player is doping? The extent a disease affects every individual can vary, is it hard to understand. Thousands of people die of malaria every year, yet when I had it as a 12 year old, I survived and recovered in 1.5 months. Surprising isn't it? Even Roddick was diagnosed with Mononucleosis and yet his career didn't end like Ancic. Doping??? Come on. And Ancic did make his return, perhaps he lacked motivation to meet the demands of pro-tennis player.

You make the sensible argument that illness's affect different players and I agree that is a sensible position to take. Why cannot the same logic and concession be made to someone like Nadal? It is through choice what we decide to believe. I personally don't believe Federer has doped, but would understand if people make the case for it like they would with any athlete.

I agree. But the kind of reasoning they accepted is more shocking. e.g.

Dennis Mitchel when caught for testosterone in 1998 gave this reason and this was accepted by USA Tarck and Field: "five bottles of beer and sex with his wife at least four times . . . it was her birthday, the lady deserved a treat,"

I would love to have his publicist who came up with that one

Perhaps you must be already knowing the explanation he gave in his defence which was accepted

.

I do. It has to be his most costliest kiss.

Some are empty, some aren't. Now we have to decide for ourselves.

Well I think if there is substance, I wish they would just stick their neck out and say. Unless of course they are hiding something.

If the day came that Nadal, Federer, Djokovic or Murray came out as a dope cheat would be the day I would actually give up on tennis.

I don't think Nole is doping.

I don't think he is, but I was more IF a big IF any of them came out as a doper, I would be very sad.

legendkillar wrote:I don't think he is, but I was more IF a big IF any of them came out as a doper, I would be very sad.

I wouldn't be sad, I'd be angry, but I don't think it'll come to that.

I would be sad. The lasting damage it would leave on tennis I think it couldn't recover.

legendkillar wrote:I would be sad. The lasting damage it would leave on tennis I think it couldn't recover.

It would recover if there was a genuine zero tolerance policy. Players would know they couldn't get away any more. All hypothetical and not happening in the near future, though.

Your comment on another thread about this type of slow baseline game hitting brickwall is quite interesting. Players are suffering for it with their bodies as they push themselves to the limits trying to "outfit" the next guy.

I did notice a lot more talk on the subject of reverting playing conditions a bit since AO. Institutions, authorities and decision-making bodies do seem to take notice, but they naturally lag behind fans and enthusiasts who notice it first.

I think it has hit a brick wall in terms of how far that style of tennis can go. It has passed it's peak by where Murray and Djokovic are the last to really succeed before the new breed come aboard. Look at Tomic. Supposidly he is the new breed for the type of tennis percieved to succeed yet he has bombed. Raonic cannot rally long enough. It needs change because tomorrow's superstars can't even crack a dent in the current guard of tennis.

Now doubt tennis will go on beyond damaging scandals, though I certainly would give up my interest in it should it ever be the case.

legendkillar wrote:I think it has hit a brick wall in terms of how far that style of tennis can go. It has passed it's peak by where Murray and Djokovic are the last to really succeed before the new breed come aboard. Look at Tomic. Supposidly he is the new breed for the type of tennis percieved to succeed yet he has bombed. Raonic cannot rally long enough. It needs change because tomorrow's superstars can't even crack a dent in the current guard of tennis.

Now doubt tennis will go on beyond damaging scandals, though I certainly would give up my interest in it should it ever be the case.

I think Raonic and Tomic are overhyped by the new-blood-hungry/desperate media. When the right kind of talent turns up, things will go back to normal.

In the meantime, players will be spending more time in the gym then on tennis courts

noleisthebest wrote:I don't think Nole is doping.

So that gluten free story is true then?

legendkillar wrote: Why cannot the same logic and concession be made to someone like Nadal? It is through choice what we decide to believe.

Can you elaborate this point?

legendkillar wrote:
You make the sensible argument that illness's affect different players and I agree that is a sensible position to take. Why cannot the same logic and concession be made to someone like Nadal? It is through choice what we decide to believe. I personally don't believe Federer has doped, but would understand if people make the case for it like they would with any athlete.

But clearly style of play shoudl be the prime clue for looking for possible dopers. It;s clear that some games woudl benefit more than other from PED.

Having said that, yes we need to be open to the fact that all players are possible suspects. And if anything I believe that any player wanting to be successful in tennis has actually no choice but to use illegal substances.....unless one might be exceptionally talented....much more than Llodra for instance.

raiders_of_the_lost_ark wrote:

legendkillar wrote: Why cannot the same logic and concession be made to someone like Nadal? It is through choice what we decide to believe.

Can you elaborate this point?

What you said on Federer:
Of all arguments this raised against Fed for doping, this one seems most robotic. Its like saying that everyone who has Mono must suffer till x-number of years, else its either not Mono or the player is doping? The extent a disease affects every individual can vary, is it hard to understand.

Nadal, whose game is very tough on his body (due to his style of play), has knee problems -which were always predicted by tennis experts-, and yet we have to believe, according to you, that anyone who buys it is 'moronic.'
Different rules for Federer, different rules for Nadal.

Tenez wrote:

noleisthebest wrote:I don't think Nole is doping.

So that gluten free story is true then?

Absolutely!

I know people like to attribute his 2011 to doping, they are free to think that way. I don't believe he doped, but do know that he had a lot of allergies (go back to 2010 when he had to pull out of Serbia Open as well as Madrid because of serious trouble he had with his breathing due to pollen in European springtime, and not being able to take regular hayfever medicine), which in turn were tested by this Cetojevic and found to be gluten allergy.
It's no magic, I bet loads of people carry it not knowing it.

If you want to , you can see that he lost a lot of weight since then, the tiny bit of muscle fat he may have carried is all vanished.

He definitely improved his fitness, but 2011's main ingredient was the confidence run.

He paid for it with the torn back muscle and had to rest 6 weeks.

Those who chose to believe he was "cycling down" can believe it. I don't. 2011 was the only year when he had a break because of that injury. Normally, autumn was his bread and butter for creaming those 1000 masters titles after Federer and Nadal got their foot off the gas as they were those winning slams.

Yes, stupid gluten allergies

Tenez wrote:

legendkillar wrote:
You make the sensible argument that illness's affect different players and I agree that is a sensible position to take. Why cannot the same logic and concession be made to someone like Nadal? It is through choice what we decide to believe. I personally don't believe Federer has doped, but would understand if people make the case for it like they would with any athlete.

But clearly style of play shoudl be the prime clue for looking for possible dopers. It;s clear that some games woudl benefit more than other from PED.

Having said that, yes we need to be open to the fact that all players are possible suspects. And if anything I believe that any player wanting to be successful in tennis has actually no choice but to use illegal substances.....unless one might be exceptionally talented....much more than Llodra for instance.

Well by logic his style of play is demanding on the body. When he pulls out of events or declares himself injured, people don't believe it. The guy has spent 18 months on the treatment table in his whole career.

This latest setback is clear indication that his body is catching up with him. A guy that comes from a sporting background within his family to me suggests there's something in the genes.

legendkillar wrote:

Tenez wrote:

legendkillar wrote:
You make the sensible argument that illness's affect different players and I agree that is a sensible position to take. Why cannot the same logic and concession be made to someone like Nadal? It is through choice what we decide to believe. I personally don't believe Federer has doped, but would understand if people make the case for it like they would with any athlete.

But clearly style of play shoudl be the prime clue for looking for possible dopers. It;s clear that some games woudl benefit more than other from PED.

Having said that, yes we need to be open to the fact that all players are possible suspects. And if anything I believe that any player wanting to be successful in tennis has actually no choice but to use illegal substances.....unless one might be exceptionally talented....much more than Llodra for instance.

Well by logic his style of play is demanding on the body. When he pulls out of events or declares himself injured, people don't believe it. The guy has spent 18 months on the treatment table in his whole career.

This latest setback is clear indication that his body is catching up with him. A guy that comes from a sporting background within his family to me suggests there's something in the genes.

Ferrer runs just as much if not more than Nadal, plus he's older but he never seems to be "suffering" like his younger compatriot.