The doping program joke of the ITF!!!

S. Tignor wrote a good article on egg-chamber:
http://blogs.tennis.com/thewrap/2011/08/egg-role.html

NITB, Tenez do you think Djokovic is on PEDs?

I don't think so, personally.

It's just another PE solution. Legal or not legal it helps you run longer that you would without it.

Amritia3ee wrote:NITB, Tenez do you think Djokovic is on PEDs?

I don't think so, personally.

...and Murray. Look at his legs! Look at his brother's.

In the top 10, I'd suspect strongly Djoko, Nadal, Murray, Berdych, Tips, Ferrer and to a lesser extend Delpo. The rest, I'd say 20%.

Only suspecting....thogh in the case of Tips, he stupidly provided completey abnormal pictures of his legs, a kind of "why hidding it?" statement.

What makes you suspect Novak?

Even though that report is a stonking 204 pages long, it is worth the read. The ruthless ambition LA displayed is rather unpleasant.

For me the Doctor's should not be allowed to practice in sport if they have been found guilty of cheating.

I was surprised something as basic as Saline could flush out the EPO.

Well very simply turning from being an asthmatic having to give up in in the middle of tournaments finals from being able to run for ever at a very intense pace. This Dr Igor turned out to be a complete hoax which Djoko separated from.

We simply cannot run for ever on a tennis court. Anyone who tries to extend the rallies is a strong suspect for me nowadays.

Prior to the late 90s, everybody was trying to pull winners for a good reason and they were no shrimps!

See I can see why people would be suspicious of Murray. I am a fan yes, but from a metabolism point of view it has to go some to burn 6,000 calories a day! Which he discloses with his diet.

Djokovic. Well you have the chamber. The documented Septoplasty operation which depending on how much of the cartilage they removed does make it increasingly difficult to breathe easily. Having had one myself I am always overcome with snot! Not a nice picture I know.

Ferrer for a guy in his 30's is moving far too good. Most players in their 30's at least hit a breaking point by where they have a run of injuries.

Suspicions are all we have....

legendkillar wrote:Even though that report is a stonking 204 pages long, it is worth the read. The ruthless ambition LA displayed is rather unpleasant.

For me the Doctor's should not be allowed to practice in sport if they have been found guilty of cheating.

I was surprised something as basic as Saline could flush out the EPO.

Why I dont understand is that instead of creating a long list of things they cannot take, why not simply create a long list of thing they can only take like our typical food and drinks.

I don't care is an athlete is asthmatic and needs a special inhaler. He simply should not have it. Orange juice and water is what it shoudl be all about.

I would also be suspicious of Federer

Tenez wrote:

legendkillar wrote:Even though that report is a stonking 204 pages long, it is worth the read. The ruthless ambition LA displayed is rather unpleasant.

For me the Doctor's should not be allowed to practice in sport if they have been found guilty of cheating.

I was surprised something as basic as Saline could flush out the EPO.

Why I dont understand is that instead of creating a long list of things they cannot take, why not simply create a long list of thing they can only take like our typical food and drinks.

I don't care is an athlete is asthmatic and needs a special inhaler. He simply should not have it. Orange juice and water is what it shoudl be all about.

Well there was the nose inhaler thing with Alan Baxter in 2002.

I agree. There is a list of banned substances. Should they not be sure of medication/supplements they want to take, consult a doctor.

So many times we hear oh I didn't know such and such was an ingredient in this or that.

legendkillar wrote:I would also be suspicious of Federer

Why?

noleisthebest wrote:

legendkillar wrote:I would also be suspicious of Federer

Why?

No longstanding injuries. The guy is 31 and I see no signs of niggling injuries which have led to lay off from the game. Who is to say he isn't doping to avoid injuries? Wouldn't be uncommon.

legendkillar wrote:See I can see why people would be suspicious of Murray. I am a fan yes, but from a metabolism point of view it has to go some to burn 6,000 calories a day! Which he discloses with his diet.

Djokovic. Well you have the chamber. The documented Septoplasty operation which depending on how much of the cartilage they removed does make it increasingly difficult to breathe easily. Having had one myself I am always overcome with snot! Not a nice picture I know.

Ferrer for a guy in his 30's is moving far too good. Most players in their 30's at least hit a breaking point by where they have a run of injuries.

Suspicions are all we have....

Good to see we can have an open discussion without taking personally cause his/her player is suspected. Again I would like to reiterate that It's only strong (very strong actually) suspicions but I have no proof. You can imagine that if some are going to fight the USADA case, how didfficult it is to have a 100% bullet proof case. In that respect I have simply given up on trying to prove, especially since we know sport organisations are ready to erase positive tests to protect their athletes and sport.

Regarding Ferrer, I actually think that age gives you more stamina. Not the other way around....well till you are 32 at least. If you look at cycling (sure a bad example in a way) but doping or not doping, the racers have their best results in the late 20s and beginning 30s. Look at Gebrebressasie doing his best marathon times very late. What you lose from 28, is some flexibility and recovery time being extended. Typically the lactic acid is not evacuated as easily as in the past and you wake up with a body aching more than in the past.

Ferrer's built is quite short so that also certainly plays in his favour. Those shorter players have always had a better stamina. But running from ever when you are 1m88 or 1m90? Nope. I don;t believe that. Bolt will never compete in the marathon.

legendkillar wrote:

noleisthebest wrote:

legendkillar wrote:I would also be suspicious of Federer

Why?

No longstanding injuries. The guy is 31 and I see no signs of niggling injuries which have led to lay off from the game. Who is to say he isn't doping to avoid injuries? Wouldn't be uncommon.

I didn't know you can dope to avoid injuries. How does that work?
Fed has a continuous trouble with his back which he does not broadcast like Nadal does his knees. Bad back is a killer for a tennis player.

Tenez wrote:

legendkillar wrote:See I can see why people would be suspicious of Murray. I am a fan yes, but from a metabolism point of view it has to go some to burn 6,000 calories a day! Which he discloses with his diet.

Djokovic. Well you have the chamber. The documented Septoplasty operation which depending on how much of the cartilage they removed does make it increasingly difficult to breathe easily. Having had one myself I am always overcome with snot! Not a nice picture I know.

Ferrer for a guy in his 30's is moving far too good. Most players in their 30's at least hit a breaking point by where they have a run of injuries.

Suspicions are all we have....

Good to see we can have an open discussion without taking personally cause his/her player is suspected. Again I would like to reiterate that It's only strong (very strong actually) suspicions but I have no proof. You can imagine that if some are going to fight the USADA case, how didfficult it is to have a 100% bullet proof case. In that respect I have simply given up on trying to prove, especially since we know sport organisations are ready to erase positive tests to protect their athletes and sport.

Regarding Ferrer, I actually think that age gives you more stamina. Not the other way around....well till you are 32 at least. If you look at cycling (sure a bad example in a way) but doping or not doping, the racers have their best results in the late 20s and beginning 30s. Look at Gebrebressasie doing his best marathon times very late. What you lose from 28, is some flexibility and recovery time being extended. Typically the lactic acid is not evacuated as easily as in the past and you wake up with a body aching more than in the past.

Ferrer's built is quite short so that also certainly plays in his favour. Those shorter players have always had a better stamina. But running from ever when you are 1m88 or 1m90? Nope. I don;t believe that. Bolt will never compete in the marathon.

I can't see why we can't be open about things like it. I mean LF made the point on Nadal being ripped and even mentioned Murray as being more ripped. It shouldn't cause for supporters/followers to be defensive or take offense. The question ask would I suspect Murray of doping? probably not out of loyalty as a fan. Could he dope and are there signs he might be? Well yes. Pointers as increased fitness/stamina/muscle mass. These have been signs for past athletes. I would like to believe top tennis players are clean and whilst we have no proof, speculation can create intelligent debate.

What we have in the LA report is a detailed diary of how far doping can go. What regulations it can breakthrough and with the right individuals can go un-detected for years.

noleisthebest wrote:

legendkillar wrote:

noleisthebest wrote:

legendkillar wrote:I would also be suspicious of Federer

Why?

No longstanding injuries. The guy is 31 and I see no signs of niggling injuries which have led to lay off from the game. Who is to say he isn't doping to avoid injuries? Wouldn't be uncommon.

I didn't know you can dope to avoid injuries. How does that work?
Fed has a continuous trouble with his back which he does not broadcast like Nadal does his knees. Bad back is a killer for a tennis player.

Correction I meant 'recover'

Steroids are widely used in sports for players to recover. NFL players for example in the 80's-90's used steroids not only to recover, but to sustain muscle mass too.

This is why I asked previously would posters judge illegal use of drugs or blood doping to enhance performance differently to those who only use for it is to recover from injuuries on a minor scale?

legendkillar wrote:

noleisthebest wrote:

legendkillar wrote:I would also be suspicious of Federer

Why?

No longstanding injuries. The guy is 31 and I see no signs of niggling injuries which have led to lay off from the game. Who is to say he isn't doping to avoid injuries? Wouldn't be uncommon.

I actually see lots of niggling injuries. He just doesn't talk much about it.

In fact watching Federer live really makes you believe you could play like him. No sweat, never tries to hard and plays extremely relaxed. I remember last year when I saw him v Tsonga, it's his timing and sense of anticipation that really saves his body from the violence most are subject.

Yes he coudl benefit from EPO...but steroids I certainly cannot see any clue about it.

I have to admit if I was a top athlete I would be banned within a day given the medication I take

Tenez wrote:

legendkillar wrote:

noleisthebest wrote:

legendkillar wrote:I would also be suspicious of Federer

Why?

No longstanding injuries. The guy is 31 and I see no signs of niggling injuries which have led to lay off from the game. Who is to say he isn't doping to avoid injuries? Wouldn't be uncommon.

I actually see lots of niggling injuries. He just doesn't talk much about it.

In fact watching Federer live really makes you believe you could play like him. No sweat, never tries to hard and plays extremely relaxed. I remember last year when I saw him v Tsonga, it's his timing and sense of anticipation that really saves his body from the violence most are subject.

Yes he coudl benefit from EPO...but steroids I certainly cannot see any clue about it.

Steroids there aren't actually any 'obvious' signs. Testosterone is often the most used and Nandrolone and Deca Durabolin are frequently used in the treatment of injuries or post surgeries.

Yes Federer I would agree wouldn't use doping for performance enhancement, though I would specualte if at all he ever did would probably be in injury/niggle treatment.

What kind of dope do cyclists use?

They are very lean, so not obvious as the thigh-freaks a la Tipsarevic, Murray, Berdych &co

British cyclist Alex Dowsett believes Lance Armstrong remains "a legend of the sport" despite the doping accusations against the American.

The United States Anti-Doping Agency banned Armstrong for life and stripped him of his seven Tour de France titles.

Team Sky rider Dowsett, 24, said: "He is still a legend of the sport. A guy who had cancer came back and won the Tour de France.

"I think it's not really important and I really don't think it matters."

Appauling reaction! That's what worries me!!! It's so rotten than we have racers still defending him. It just shows the rest of the peloton is still unclean. But at least they coudl pretend.

It's like saying we have sold you copper for years at the price of gold. But don;t complain!

noleisthebest wrote:What kind of dope do cyclists use?

They are very lean, so not obvious as the thigh-freaks a la Tipsarevic, Murray, Berdych &co

Well Testosterone was most commingly used one. Nandrolone came in and once they we so easily detectable, they moved to EPO. I am not so much clued up to what they use nowadays.

Interesting poll on msn:

Who is the biggest cheat in sport?

1. 
   Lance Armstrong
   
2. 
   Diego Maradona
   
3. 
   Ben Johnson
   
4. 
   Salman Butt - cricket spot-fixing
   
5. 
   Tonya Harding
   
6. 
   Dean Richards - Bloodgate
   
7. 
   Thierry Henry
   
8. 
   Marion Jones
   
9. 
   Juventus, Lazio & Fiorentina
   
10. 
    Hanse Cronje
    

I say, where's Carl Lewis's name on this list?

Tenez wrote:

British cyclist Alex Dowsett believes Lance Armstrong remains "a legend of the sport" despite the doping accusations against the American.

The United States Anti-Doping Agency banned Armstrong for life and stripped him of his seven Tour de France titles.

Team Sky rider Dowsett, 24, said: "He is still a legend of the sport. A guy who had cancer came back and won the Tour de France.

"I think it's not really important and I really don't think it matters."

Appauling reaction! That's what worries me!!! It's so rotten than we have racers still defending him. It just shows the rest of the peloton is still unclean. But at least they coudl pretend.

It's like saying we have sold you copper for years at the price of gold. But don;t complain!

Just read that. Disgusting!

I cannot begin to believe that there are some that would defend him despite the damning report.

I doubt MSN would dare feature Carl Lewis

I wonder if stuffing his body with all that junk triggered that cancer.

Nandrolone is a steroid whereas EPO is a "oxygenator" (increase your percentage O2 can carry) and therefore allows you to run or cycle longer. Clenbuterol will simply burn all the extra fat and make you leaner.

I think they can use everything in cycling and tennis. It will simply make you fitter and stronger without having to train too hard which is what players want to avoid to keep their energy for the matches.

noleisthebest wrote:I wonder if stuffing his body with all that junk triggered that cancer.

I woudl say it's the other way around. His cancer (not sure it is proven he really had one) was used to cover up some of his PED use...probably at the beginning.

noleisthebest wrote:I wonder if stuffing his body with all that junk triggered that cancer.

The report actually pre-dated the cancer. He would've been on Testosterone whilst recovering in terms beefing up the levels that chemo and radiotherapy can reduce. They often use Testosterone to increase cell structure in the body to generate more antibodies.

Tenez wrote:Nandrolone is a steroid whereas EPO is a "oxygenator" (increase your percentage O2 can carry) and therefore allows you to run or cycle longer. Clenbuterol will simply burn all the extra fat and make you leaner.

I think they can use everything in cycling and tennis. It will simply make you fitter and stronger without having to train too hard which is what players want to avoid to keep their energy for the matches.

So it basically speeds up the metabolism. I am staggered that cyclists use it so much as that thing will also increase your heart-rate to dangerous levels through their strenuous hill rides. Extra sweating is a dead give-away. I don't see how fat-burners can increase the fitness, though.

noleisthebest wrote: I don't see how fat-burners can increase the fitness, though.

That's what makes the muscles look so ripped. It makes you lighter, therefore faster and more mobile. Well we know Nalby is not using that!

One thing I noticed in the AO12 is that Nadal had very little fat around his eyes. He looked like the skin was stretched and you had a gap between the eye balls lid and the eyebrow. He simply did not have a ounce of fat on him.

Tenez wrote:

noleisthebest wrote: I don't see how fat-burners can increase the fitness, though.

That's what makes the muscles look so ripped. It makes you lighter, therefore faster and more mobile. Well we know Nalby is not using that!

One thing I noticed in the AO12 is that Nadal had very little fat around his eyes. He looked like the skin was stretched and you had a gap between the eye balls lid and the eyebrow. He simply did not have a ounce of fat on him.

And I bet he had to change shirts often much to the delight of Wooffie & the waxed-chest fanclub

More info on what NITB posted last night


Lance Armstrong's reputation is in tatters after the United States Anti-Doping Agency (USADA) labelled him a "serial" cheat who led "the most sophisticated, professionalised and successful doping programme that sport has ever seen".

USADA has released the reasons, which includes evidence from 11 of Armstrong's former team-mates, behind its decision to strip him of his seven Tour de France titles and hand him a lifetime ban.

Armstrong decided earlier this year not to contest the USADA charges, but he has always denied any involvement with doping and his lawyer Sean E Breen denounced the action as "a patently unfair, rigged process". But, according to USADA chief executive Travis T Tygart, there was "conclusive and undeniable proof" of a team-run doping conspiracy at Armstrong's US Postal Service Pro Cycling Team.

The 'reasoned decision' document said: "USADA has found proof beyond a reasonable doubt that Lance Armstrong engaged in serial cheating through the use, administration and trafficking of performance-enhancing drugs and methods and that Armstrong participated in running in the US Postal Service Team as a doping conspiracy."

The former team-mates who gave evidence against Armstrong were Tyler Hamilton, Floyd Landis, Frankie Andreu, Michael Barry, Tom Danielson, George Hincapie, Levi Leipheimer, Stephen Swart, Christian Vande Velde, Jonathan Vaughters and David Zabriskie.

USADA claimed Armstrong, 41, supplied banned drugs to other riders on the team, pressured them into participating in the doping programme and threatened to get them removed from the team if they refused.

The document said: "His goal (of winning the Tour de France multiple times) led him to depend on EPO, testosterone and blood transfusions but also, more ruthlessly, to expect and to require that his team-mates would likewise use drugs to support his goals if not their own."

Breen told BBC Radio 5 Live on Wednesday that Armstrong had no wish to engage in the USADA process. He said: "He didn't contest them (the allegations) in the USADA form because it's a patently unfair, rigged process and he was going to lose. There wasn't any doubt about it. They had the cards stacked."

The only apparent reaction from Armstrong himself came in the form of a tweet, which read: "What am I doing tonight? Hanging with my family, unaffected, and thinking about this," with a link to his Livestrong website.

USADA alleged Armstrong's doping programme was organised by Dr Michele Ferrari, a consultant to the US Postal Service team. Ferrari and Dr Garcia del Moral have also received lifetime bans for their part in the doping conspiracy. Three others, Johan Bruyneel, who is now in charge of the RadioShack-Nissan team, a team doctor Dr Pedro Celaya and team trainer Jose Marti, have chosen to contest the charges and take their cases to arbitration.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/cycling/19907683

An interesting read. Even has a video on how blood doping works on the body

I knew what was blood doping .....up to recently recently! It's scary to see that they have now untracable drugs again.

Tenez wrote:I knew what was blood doping .....up to recently recently! It's scary to see that they have now untracable drugs again.

people abuse their bodes too lightly these days. Not many of them will see healthy old age and play tennis at 85 as a result.

Amritia3ee wrote:

Veejay wrote:

I dont know what exact PED's Nadal is taking,the drugs available to pro athletes are way ahead of whats available on the circuit.The longer it remains that way,the greater the chances that it remains undetected in drug tests
I can only speculate that he uses something similar to Sustanon

Something similar to Sustanon?
A bit vague.

Veejay if you can't be specific, then I can't directly argue against anything.
Do you think he is using Sustanon or not? If so, why?

Not vague at all Amritia,I am giving you a very specific type of steroid and saying that I believe Nadal uses something similar because the characteristics is consistent with taking Sustanon
If I believe the characteristics are very similar or almost identical to that of Sustanon what difference would it make what the drug is called? It could be called Ameritia for all I care,as long as its properties are similar the name is totally irrelevant
The reason why I believe its something similar to Sustanon is because Sustanon is a steroid which contains both growth hormones and cutting hormones,it contains 2 types of growth hormones and 2 types of cutting hormones
When Nadal cycles up his body becomes way too ripped to suggest he takes steroids which contains only growth hormones,theres clearly evidence that he not only gains weight but becomes incredibly defined at the same time.This is inconsistent with taking something like Deca Durobolin which contains only growth hormones and which athletes,especially those who are seeking to gain muscle mass take.Its also inconsistent with a combination of Stanazol and another steroid like Primobolin for instance because his body would then become rock solid and it will stay that way for several seasons as Stanazol is almost permanent ,not only that the cycles on water based steroids such as Stanazol is long,it takes a minimum of 6 weeks for the drug to get into your system at an incredibly high dosage of at least 3-4 injections per week
This is really risky for a pro athlete because of surprise drug tests,so you could realistically only cycle up out of competition
Sustanon on the other hand is a very fast acting steroid with incredible results already seen and gained in as little as 4 weeks.In my opinion its without a doubt the best steroid out there on the mainstream market.This also makes it a good steroid to use for blood doping
The reason why I dont believe it is Sustanon is because Sustanon can now easily be detected in drug tests and I dont believe Nadal would employ such advanced doping doctors who would use drugs that can be easily detected.Doping doctors are employed to use state of the art doping technology thats way ahead of testing and way ahead of whats known and done on the mainstream circuit
Besides you dont need to know any of this to answer the questions I asked you,if steroids arent being used like you claimed then you should have a plausible explanation for the questions I asked you,the names of drugs etc is tally irrelevant in answering those questing

Sustanon side effects:

• Pain at injection site.
  
• Headache.
  
• Breast pain, enlargement of the breasts.
  
• Salt and water retention.
  
• Swelling caused by fluid retention (oedema).
  
• Weight gain.
  
• Hair loss.
  
• Acne.
  
• Depression.
  
• Hostility.
  
• Nervousness.
  
• Prostate problems.
  
• Persistent painful erection of the penis (priapism).
  
• Decreased sperm count.
  
• Reduced volume of ejaculation.
  
• Increased levels of red blood cells and haemoglobin in the blood.
  
• Jaundice.
  
• Liver tumours.
  
• Premature sexual development when used in young boys.
  
• Premature closure of the ends of bones, causing stunted growth when used in young boys.
  

noleisthebest wrote:

Tenez wrote:I knew what was blood doping .....up to recently recently! It's scary to see that they have now untracable drugs again.

people abuse their bodes too lightly these days. Not many of them will see healthy old age and play tennis at 85 as a result.

But there is so much money involved. It's not even a choice. They are so stressed out with their sponsors asking for more.

Tenez wrote:

noleisthebest wrote:

Tenez wrote:I knew what was blood doping .....up to recently recently! It's scary to see that they have now untracable drugs again.

people abuse their bodes too lightly these days. Not many of them will see healthy old age and play tennis at 85 as a result.

But there is so much money involved. It's not even a choice. They are so stressed out with their sponsors asking for more.

Glad I don't have to worry about sponsors

Amritia3ee wrote:Sustanon side effects:

• Pain at injection site.
  
• Headache.
  
• Breast pain, enlargement of the breasts.
  
• Salt and water retention.
  
• Swelling caused by fluid retention (oedema).
  
• Weight gain.
  
• Hair loss.
  
• Acne.
  
• Depression.
  
• Hostility.
  
• Nervousness.
  
• Prostate problems.
  
• Persistent painful erection of the penis (priapism).
  
• Decreased sperm count.
  
• Reduced volume of ejaculation.
  
• Increased levels of red blood cells and haemoglobin in the blood.
  
• Jaundice.
  
• Liver tumours.
  
• Premature sexual development when used in young boys.
  
• Premature closure of the ends of bones, causing stunted growth when used in young boys.
  

And?
Show me one steroid which doesnt have the same or similar side effects
Whats your point Ameritia? What the hell does this have to do with what we are talking about?
I never said taking steroids are good for you,I asked you to give me a plausible explanation for the questions I asked
If steroids werent used then there should be a reasonable explanation so what is it?
If you dont understand what I am asking you here is an example
Everyone who is suspicious of Djokovic has talked about his extreme weight loss
The story his camp have put out is 100% entirely plausible,a change of diet could totally be the reason why he 1 lost a lost of weight and 2 help better his stamina level
If drugs arent the reason why then the argument that a change of diet can stand up as its entirely plausible
So could you explain to me how Nadal developed a physique like that,doing that much cardio with little to no weight training?

Veejay wrote:I dont see any evidence of photoshop being used nor can I think why anyone would want to do that,especially when he looks no different watching him on t.v or up close ( live) during certain parts of the season.This is my personal opinion which is based on my vision,I have to go by that,you cannot expect me to go by what you see.I can understand that its a two way street,you go by what you see and I go by what I see,the only way we can fairly compare our opinions is to go by the pictures ( which you claim is photoshoped)

There is no evidence to the contrary regarding image doctoring. This is from AO 2010.

http://tennis.topbuzz.com/tennis-pics/d/30947-1/Rafael+Nadal+bare+chested+without+shirt+on+at+O2+Arena+2010.JPG

Veejay wrote:For years now he has inflated and deflated,but I dont expect many to really take much notice unless they know thats going on,its not always obvious,sometimes its very slight,other times theres a massive difference

This is very good opportunity when Nadal is back to see what we see.

Veejay wrote:If you wish to believe that those pictures are photoshopped,then thats your opinion which youre entitled to but thats no less a conspiracy theory then basing your suspicions solely on that photograph or what you see

See the image above. There are many others like that. Here is an example of photoshopping.

http://jameswaites.ilatech.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/rafael-nadal-big-biceps.jpg

Veejay wrote:I would like to know why THASP has no credibility,putting their opinion and suspicions aside,the information they post on that blog is factual,you cant say the interviews,articles and research has no credibility,cause if that was truly the case the blog would have been buried ages ago

I am not questioning the medical aspects of the discussions, but the conclusions that it draws. That is where I see the lack of credibility.

Veejay wrote:It is my opinion based my personal experience that it is impossible for anyone to develop such a ripped muscular look with absolutely no weight training.Nadal has admitted on several occasions that he does all his training on court and none in the gym,so how is he developing a body like that during certain parts of the season,i.e. the business end of spring going into summer when its obvious he has virtually no time to even go to a gym but yet during the off season when he probably has more time to go to the gym then he does while he is on tour,he looks far more "out of shape" or less muscular
Even if you were going to the gym and using legal supplements,your muscles dont inflate with water due to the water retention from growth hormones so you wont ever get that "hot air " inflated look unless you're finishing it off with stanazol which then gives you an unnatural ripped look where the lines your muscles makes is way too symmetrical
Bottom line is if we go back to the picture for reference,the one you claim is photoshopped,it is impossible to develop a physique like that with virtually no weight training,so the question remains is how did he do it?

There are many UTube videos of a full gym at Nadal's Mallorca home, IIRC. Stanazolol detection is much easier from what I understand from medical journals.

PS: http://www.rombio.eu/rbl4vol14/7.pdf

Veejay wrote:As for Murray I have said several times before that I believe he was on Nandrolone when he was being coached by Brad Gilbert

That is a very long time ago, several years ago. It does not explain 2011-2012.

Veejay wrote:

laverfan wrote:"You want a balance between muscle and speed. Too much muscle (and consequent weight) will actually hinder speed"

Precisely my point,Ameritia wanted to imply that Nadal was using protein shakes to bulk up,my question is why would a pro tennis athlete would want to bulk up as its only common sense that such a move will hinder speed.Not only that,why would any
tennis player decide to put such strain on their ligaments and skeleton,especially a player who claims to have the "career threatening" injuries.Osteoporosis is the last thing someone who claims they have hoffa's syndrome wants
My opinion is simply that Nadal gaining weight is a side effect of taking steroids which contains growth hormones,he isnt intentionally trying to gain weight to improve

The presence of steroids and corresponding diuretics (HCTZ, etc.,) for cleaning are easily detectable. Remember Canas and HCTZ. He was banned due to the diuretic presence, not, because of banned substances like steroids being detected.

Veejay wrote:I agree that muscles can atrophy if an athlete is injured,faster for some then others.I question if it would waste away that fast and to such an extent for someone who is considered the greatest natural athlete/athletic player the game has ever seen,especially to such a degree that there isnt even any definition left.In 09 when Nadal lost a significant amount of weight,he only missed 2 tournaments,Queens and Wimbledon,he was back on tour by Rogers Cup and it wasn't till the end of the season at the WTF when there was a clear significant difference,so his muscles didnt atrophy because he was off tour injured.To hammer it home,why didnt his muscles atrophy when he was injured and off tour for around 6 weeks,but then it did 5 months later?
Whats really strange about all of this is if Nadal could lose that much weight,how come didn't he lose it long before when he is doing 8+ hours of cardio a day training or playing?

If he continued practice and gym work, it would explain the lack of muscle atrophy. This is the only logical explanation.

Veejay wrote:Tennis is very much an endurance sport,the amount of running a player does could be compared to running a marathon,when youre doing that much running eventually your muscles will catabolise,so how come Nadal can play for several months running virtual marathons and maintain such a physique and then all of sudden lose it if the ability to lose weight was always there?

Ferrer is a prime example of someone who can run all day, but has never been accused of doping. Why? I know Javier Piles and Ferrer run marathons as part of their training regimen.

Veejay wrote:Mac's comments do need to be taken with a grain of salt but I have never been one to pay much attention to him anyway.I thought what he said way before he said it,I only used him as reference to prove Im not the only one who saw what I saw

Let us see what happens when Nadal does come back after the current layoff.

laverfan wrote:I am not questioning the medical aspects of the discussions, but the conclusions that it draws. That is where I see the lack of credibility.

You might disagree on one or 2 occasions. I did. I remember then they were trying to put the case that Nadal got a fake injury at the AO10 v Ferrer when he was going for 4 in row. I thought that was pushing it and strangely enough Murray has been very much above doubt when frankly there was obvious signs already since Brad took over. But all in all their questions are very sound!

Tenez wrote:I thought that was pushing it and strangely enough Murray has been very much above doubt when frankly there was obvious signs already since Brad took over.

Murray had Brad Gilbert from 2006-2007. How is his physique now influenced by Gilbert in 2007-2012? Lendl has been around for the last 10+ months, and I consider Lendl as mature enough to not be involved with Murray, if Murray was not clean. He would nto come out of retirement to just get his name tainted, would he?

Tenez wrote:But all in all their questions are very sound!

If the questions person A asks while person B has similar questions, they will be very sound to both person A and person B, but perhaps not to person C.

laverfan wrote: and I consider Lendl as mature enough to not be involved with Murray, if Murray was not clean. He would nto come out of retirement to just get his name tainted, would he?

He is not touching this side of tennis so he won't be tainted. He already made a joke in AO12 about the kind of drinks players were having nowadays to allow them to run for ever.

If the questions person A asks while person B has similar questions, they will be very sound to both person A and person B, but perhaps not to person C.

Correct and a few of us consider ourselves belonging to As and Bs while clearly some unsure logic makes you a typical C.

An interesting read on existence of silent bans or suspensions.

http://www.tennisnow.com/News/Doping,-Tennis,-Nadal-Connection.aspx

This is a fantastic article rotla. It seems to have been specifically written for Amri!

It's understandable that Nadal fans want to take his knee issues at face value. (Especially when he says heartwarming things like: “I always want to be honest with myself and to those who have faith in me.”) But observers with knowledge of systematic doping in several other sports find it prudent to ask the difficult, and in this case unpopular, questions.

And I am glad she mentions THASP as a good source of information. It;s about time the work those people have made gets some credit....certainly more credibilty than a player's smile or words.

raiders_of_the_lost_ark wrote:An interesting read on existence of silent bans or suspensions.

http://www.tennisnow.com/News/Doping,-Tennis,-Nadal-Connection.aspx

very interesting rotla, thanks!