The doping program joke of the ITF!!!

Maybe it was one of the links I left on Tennis.com

noleisthebest wrote:Maybe it was one of the links I left on Tennis.com

It may have been that, I can't recall. I just know I was searching for info on Nadal's injury and that search somehow directed me to this site.

Tenez wrote:That's interesting.

Do you know this blog? Excellent source of information about doping in tennis.

What blog, you mean THASP? Yes I am very familiar with that site and the Curious Case of Nadal's injury history.

yes I meant thasp...fprgot to copy the link. You must be excited to have a player like Rao raising to the top. You are based in Canada,...aren't you?

Tenez wrote:yes I meant thasp...fprgot to copy the link. You must be excited to have a player like Rao raising to the top. You are based in Canada,...aren't you?

Yes, great to watch Raonic's success. He was not looking so great for the past six months but he has looked better in San Jose. Maybe it is just because he likes that tournament a lot? His backhand looks like it has improved which is good news.

yes great returns.

Its full natty brah!

Another good video from the crazy aussie.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7BbPopNgz7M
go to 7.30, reality check for those who still believe in clean athletes!

Very interesting clip LS.

"it's easier to fool people than convinced them they have been fooled"...and that is so true. It's because it's so easy to fool them that doping is rife...and we getto elect the worst politicians at every occasion.

I have had a quick look recently on v2 and in particular his thread:
The Marinovich Project - Could Explain The Nadal Model

I thought it was a joke to read all those old posters sound so naive, one after the other....and I certainly liked to read a few of them ...but nowadays we can almost feel their fear to be castigated as conspirationist....and that despite the legends admitting doping one after the other.

A quick google search simply shows that even that Marinovich is a drug user, and certainly a junky now. This story is a joke!

It's all become one big entangled mess.

Everyone trying to get their share of profit legally,illegally: athletes, doctors, TDs, crowds...it's just one big, deaf trance nobody wants to get out of.
How Lance Armstrong got busted, why him and not others?....somebody answered that here, but I've already forgotten the answer, doesn't matter, let's see how long it takes for LA dust to settle before it all descends back into undisturbed orgy of lies.

People swallow bigger things and more serious lies on a daily basis anyway.

luvsports! wrote:Its full natty brah!

Another good video from the crazy aussie.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7BbPopNgz7M
go to 7.30, reality check for those who still believe in clean athletes!

I like crazy Aussie....makes me laugh. Shame all the sane people are now being thought of as crazy, though. I suppose even Hamlet pretended to be mad for a good reason, safer to tell the truth like that these days, too. Maybe we should call out forum :Crazy Tennis Forum?

btw tenez there are reports coming out about indurain doping too. I wonder how far they will go back to purge the sport from the scourge of doping.

The thing is, LS, most people don't have a clue and are not interested, even those who play sport and watch it regularly.
When I mention doping in tennis in my club, they look at me like I have a third eye...at best they have heard about LA case and that's about it. He was bad and he got caught. And everything is great now.
It's as naive to think sport is clean as it is that all criminals have been caught and are safely locked in prison.

noleisthebest wrote:

luvsports! wrote:Its full natty brah!

Another good video from the crazy aussie.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7BbPopNgz7M
go to 7.30, reality check for those who still believe in clean athletes!

I like crazy Aussie....makes me laugh. Shame all the sane people are now being thought of as crazy, though. I suppose even Hamlet pretended to be mad for a good reason, safer to tell the truth like that these days, too. Maybe we should call out forum :Crazy Tennis Forum?

Not a bad idea. Especially when in other forums fools try so seriously to appear wise!

luvsports! wrote:btw tenez there are reports coming out about indurain doping too. I wonder how far they will go back to purge the sport from the scourge of doping.

I am a big fan of Indurain and I can perfectly live with the fact he doped......cause like LA said dopers go back till the days they started the TDF. We know about Merckx and I am sure many other greats. I for instance don't believe Lemon was clean either. To me there is a difference doping like everybody does (keeping the trend not be left out) and those who set new doping trends.

Tenez wrote: Very interesting clip LS.

"it's easier to fool people than convinced them they have been fooled"...and that is so true. It's because it's so easy to fool them that doping is rife...and we getto elect the worst politicians at every occasion.

I have had a quick look recently on v2 and in particular his thread:
The Marinovich Project - Could Explain The Nadal Model

I thought it was a joke to read all those old posters sound so naive, one after the other....and I certainly liked to read a few of them ...but nowadays we can almost feel their fear to be castigated as conspirationist....and that despite the legends admitting doping one after the other.

A quick google search simply shows that even that Marinovich is a drug user, and certainly a junky now. This story is a joke!

Tenbo,

Thought I would pull you up on this.

I posted that article based on development in youth. I implore you watch the documentary about how athletes can be developed so young and yet show such promise so early on in their careers. Like I stated in the title 'could' so it wasn't a gimmie or certainty. Just a maybe.

I looked specifically at development in youth, not how they manage themselves in adulthood and beyond say the age of 18. Yes Marinovich was a drug user later on his career and life, however that was not the point. The point I was making was how an athlete in the right conditions can show stunning results at a young age combined with genetics and also training/diet program.

It is worth the watch just to see him as a child and the punishing regime his father put him through. ESPN yes painted the story as a tragedy, but for me the development and crazy methods by his father is something to see.

I for one certainly don't fear any big player being busted. In fact I would welcome it. Whether it be a Nadal or Federer or Djokovic or Murray or all 4 of them.

It is very easy to take cycling and apply the mindset that cheating there means it is rife in every sport. It might be, it might not. What I won't do is obsess over who I think is and isn't. Let the situation run it's natural course. It's a shame that the Fuentes trial might not deliver the transparancy that the world of sport so desparately need right now, but it doesn't mean they will go without punishment or get away with it. Let's hope for a Wiki leak type scandal

My thread was based on development. Nothing else. Not doping and not what athletes do to maintain their levels into adulthood.

I read in the tabloids that Slam tournaments are looking to increase funding in to testing. That is an encouraging sign. It might not be happening at the pace many would want, but it is a start. The ITF and WTA are also being pressured to increase their funding into testing too. It won't account for the years in which tennis's testing was a joke and yes many who did dope would've gotten away with it and that is something that has to be accepted and we need to move on from that. What tennis can do in light of the bad press surrounding it's testing and methods is what we should now be judging it by. There are calls from professionals to increase testing and become more stringent.

I agree Ten it is not good enough and it's a crying shame it has taken so long for the tennis authorities and tournament bodies to finally wake up and take testing forward like they should've done it the moment Agassi exposed the gaping holes in the processes.

Yes the LA scandal was massive and the extent of it's impact hasn't been truly felt as of yet. I think any athletes caught now are not going to cite LA as the inspiration or encouragement to run such an intense doping program. The USDA deserve enormous credit for pursuing Armstrong and his team. They could've easily turned a blind eye to it so it wouldn't expose their gaping flaws, but they made a stand. I think if anything there is more pressure now for national governing bodies to monitor their own athletes retrospect of what their sporting bodies do in terms of testing them.

Hi LK - I know how to bring you back here!

No I have not watched the program on Marinovich but enough infomation was there to believe that he was even a drug user during his professional years (got caught 4 times since 1997s...and admitted to it).
http://www.ocregister.com/news/toddmarinovich-117159-usc-drugpossession.html
We also know that most NFL players were actually doping in the 90s (if not all) and like LS clip shows, 2000 tested positive but names never release.

I don;t know this Marinovich but I don;t think anyway you can compare him physically with the physical sensation Nadal was at first and then seen as "normal" cause an ashmatic and frail Scott have actually now set new fitness and endurance standards. What has this Marinovich achieved? Not much has he? Have you read the very good article called: "the man that never was"? It;s about him and says it all.

Bottom line I do not believe in extraterrestrial performances. It;s as simple as that. It does not exist. I have seen what amazing athletes coudl do thanks to an extremely low heart beat, huge lungs capacity and so on....and what they can achieve is great but not close to what those guys do nowadays...good preparation or not.

But you know that unlike you I do not believe in the WWF circus either. Well I do believe it's a great circus for kids...but let's bear in mind it;s only a circus. Professional sport nowadays is very close to that unfortunately.

Aye indeed Ten

It is purely the kids years. The father was half a good player who by mis-information did not condition himself properly. His son unfortunately took the burden of becoming a 'super' athlete and the methods and diet were insane and hence why he literally ruined his life. Whilst physically the guy was amazing for his age, mentally he wasn't.

The WWF circle was beyond reckless. The pressure is different compared to real sport but the abuse their bodies suffered through steroids and other treatments was utterly dreadful. Many entered an early grave through substance abuse. I am glad that type of abuse does not appear so much in sport because athletes would be dropping dead left, right and centre.

I believe with the right frame of mind and physical ability that any person or athlete is capable of performances above what they can normally deliver. You had a guy running a 4 minute mile in 1954! I think these freakish occurances can happen. I accept the issue here that not only are they still happening but they are at more consistent basis nowadays.

Will guys who were caught and not successful in their sport be remembered by anyone? No they won't yet successful cheats will.

My immediate hope now is that tennis can pull itself up to a high standard in drug and substance testing that be the benchmark for other sports. Yes I am stretching it

Tenez wrote:
Not a bad idea. Especially when in other forums fools try so seriously to appear wise!

Tell me about it!
Plus, it would go great with our photo

Last night I have finally resigned myself that doping will continue, sport will become less and less watchable but masses, esp the new generations won't know any better so that's how it will perpetuate ad nauseum.

We, who remember the times when roses had a beautiful fragrance, grapes didn't taste like cherries and other fruit, songs were sung by people with a voice wearing suits and not lingerie, athletes whose head was joined to the rest of the body by a neck and not glued to it with another set of ridiculous muscles.... we will suffer and be grumpy old people and watch or listen to old tapes....

I don't want to even imagine what tennis could/might/will look like in 10-15 years' time...

legendkillar wrote:Aye indeed Ten

It is purely the kids years. The father was half a good player who by mis-information did not condition himself properly. His son unfortunately took the burden of becoming a 'super' athlete and the methods and diet were insane and hence why he literally ruined his life. Whilst physically the guy was amazing for his age, mentally he wasn't.

Sure But I dont think he was amazing physically in his adult, professional life, was he? Certainly extremely fit but not crazy compared to others....and what makes you think he was not on steroids either? Just because he and his father says so?

I believe with the right frame of mind and physical ability that any person or athlete is capable of performances above what they can normally deliver. You had a guy running a 4 minute mile in 1954! I think these freakish occurances can happen. I accept the issue here that not only are they still happening but they are at more consistent basis nowadays.

Borg was a freak. Becker was freak (in a different way)...problem is that nowadays those freaks run twice as much and hit twice as hard than freakish Borg. And I simply don;t believe that...especially a few rumours are already out there for Borg. Merckx was a freak....he'd look a donkey compared to teh current guys. I understand there is new technology and new training methods...but I understand there are more so new drugs (legal or not I don't care) out there and it is what really makes the difference....not the athletes. Yo saw like all of us how Djoko had to give up a few matches because he coudl not breath, had palpitation or other allergies...yet now he is simply unstoppable. We even saw him inhale a spray in his AO12 final v Nadal underneath a towel. It may have been legal, I don;t care...he was certainly using a chemical to help him last longer. So imagine what they could do outside courts to be prepared to run that much...at a time only the fittest can win those big slams.

Will guys who were caught and not successful in their sport be remembered by anyone? No they won't yet successful cheats will.

Well the thing they all dope...That is my main point. I honestly think that very rare case of amazing atheltes don't...but that might be my childish side again...however they have to back it up with obvious techical skills a la Messie or Federer.

My immediate hope now is that tennis can pull itself up to a high standard in drug and substance testing that be the benchmark for other sports. Yes I am stretching it

Honestly, it will not happen. They all talk about it now because Nadal was out for 8/9 months. If he returns successfull, his huge fan base will be enough to forget about the time rule again and turn a blind eye on doping tests. I am not saying this down to Nadal only but to all athletes who can gather huge crowds...cause this is what allows a whole industry to thrive.

The thing is NITB with every 1-2 breakthrough in techniques or agents to detect doping or drug use your going to get 10-11 new products and substances that illegally enhance performance and remain undetectable. All the time there is a market for such substances to enable athletes to cheat will make it difficult to close out cheating in general. If there was an effective way to target the market or providers might be a step in the right direction to winning the war on drug cheats. Companies who keep the rich richer will always avoid scrutiny.

noleisthebest wrote:Last night I have finally resigned myself that doping will continue, sport will become less and less watchable but masses, esp the new generations won't know any better so that's how it will perpetuate ad nauseum.

We, who remember the times when roses had a beautiful fragrance, grapes didn't taste like cherries and other fruit, songs were sung by people with a voice wearing suits and not lingerie, athletes whose head was joined to the rest of the body by a neck and not glued to it with another set of ridiculous muscles.... we will suffer and be grumpy old people and watch or listen to old tapes....

I don't want to even imagine what tennis could/might/will look like in 10-15 years' time...

It's a win or lose situation.

At that time you refer to, there was not a lot of money in sport. Any average fan coudl buy a ticket to see the matches. PLayers were paid peanuts and most sports did not want to turn professionals.

Nowedays a ticket at Chelsea or ManU costs a fortune, players are paid millions and the standard is much higher.

federer, Nadal and Djoko can have a way of life Laver and even Borg could never dream about. It's also those amazing tough conditions that have allowed us to see amazing performances...some certainly too physical...but other were just amazing (Fed ovecoming those roadrunners) are worth amazing sporting moments to me. Drugs in a way...influences a result wrongly but provides amazing spectacle as well....except that recently it has had teh opposite effect.

I still believe that the new generation will have the keys to overcome the roadrunners generation and it will take much less time that expected. ...so for me the spectacle continues....even after Fed...but if I don;t finde the player able to win with grace I simply won't follow the game with the same enthusiasm....no different than teh Pete/Agassi years actually.

legendkillar wrote:The thing is NITB with every 1-2 breakthrough in techniques or agents to detect doping or drug use your going to get 10-11 new products and substances that illegally enhance performance and remain undetectable. All the time there is a market for such substances to enable athletes to cheat will make it difficult to close out cheating in general. If there was an effective way to target the market or providers might be a step in the right direction to winning the war on drug cheats. Companies who keep the rich richer will always avoid scrutiny.

And that is true...and this exactly why I do not believe in freakish "physical" performance nowadays...cause imagine that the great athletes take drugs....what kind of pure natural freak could overtake them? Impossible...those drugs are really efficient.

Did you watch LK the last clip posted from LS a few posts up? It's really funny to see the physical transformation of some of those.

Sure But I dont think he was amazing physically in his adult, professional life, was he? Certainly extremely fit but not crazy compared to others....and what makes you think he was not on steroids either? Just because he and his father says so?

The guy was actually remarkably fit and talented. He wasn't jacked like other players. He was clean until the recreational stuff came into his life. He was being tested 3 times a week after his first season and even one of the coaches went to a police station to get training in how to detect in a persons eyes whether they have been on the magic dragon. There were rumours and the NFL certainly hammered him.

Borg was a freak. Becker was freak (in a different way)...problem is that nowadays those freaks run twice as much and hit twice as hard than freakish Borg. And I simply don;t believe that...especially a few rumours are already out there for Borg. Merckx was a freak....he'd look a donkey compared to teh current guys. I understand there is new technology and new training methods...but I understand there are more so new drugs (legal or not I don't care) out there and it is what really makes the difference....not the athletes. Yo saw like all of us how Djoko had to give up a few matches because he coudl not breath, had palpitation or other allergies...yet now he is simply unstoppable. We even saw him inhale a spray in his AO12 final v Nadal underneath a towel. It may have been legal, I don;t care...he was certainly using a chemical to help him last longer. So imagine what they could do outside courts to be prepared to run that much...at a time only the fittest can win those big slams.

Yes Borg and Becker were extremely talented. I would even throw Connors in there. Sampras was a freak as was Lendl. I do think that looking at Lendl certainly shows where the emphasis on fitness and conditioning first came from. Was Djokovic using the spray to last longer or clear his nostrils? From personaly experience I have had a septoplasty like Djokovic and even after it you can build up a hell of a lot of snot and guff and it becomes difficult to actually breathe. I don't know for certain, but I can say that his nasal problems aren't something that will go away despite surgery. One could argue if Alan Baxter was stripped of a medal so should others

Well the thing they all dope...That is my main point. I honestly think that very rare case of amazing atheltes don't...but that might be my childish side again...however they have to back it up with obvious techical skills a la Messie or Federer.

It's like a vicious circle though. We can agree talent is impossible to replicate, but achievieing a high standard of fitness is and yet is impossible to believe a collection of athletes can achieve that. Murray for example banged the fitness drum for years and really in the last 2 years has hit peak fitness. One could argue how long can it take to achieve peak fitness. If Murray can only beat an ageing Federer, is that more pertinent to the point that Murray for all his lungs and muscles could only succeed when Federer lost a step and not Murray becoming a jacked up freak? There is more to it than fitness. Djokovic's successes over Nadal were by many put down to fitness when for me early in 2011 it was Djokovic taking the ball earlier and attacking him on short balls. 2012 really was when Djokovic physically become more superior, but I won't atribute all his success over Nadal to that. Nadal for all his powers had to wait really for Federer's levels to drop off before dominating the calendar be it a year. Talent v Lungs v Drugs. Who wins? Well in this case talent.

Honestly, it will not happen. They all talk about it now because Nadal was out for 8/9 months. If he returns successfull, his huge fan base will be enough to forget about the time rule again and turn a blind eye on doping tests. I am not saying this down to Nadal only but to all athletes who can gather huge crowds...cause this is what allows a whole industry to thrive.

Is it not stranger though in his absence that players have spoken about the flaws in the testing in tennis. Maybe their are concerns and hunches maybe that if Nadal manages a Slam this year that something must be wrong and that I will be filling my car with Nadal urine!

[/quote] Merckx was a freak....he'd look a donkey compared to teh current guys. I understand there is new technology and new training methods...but I understand there are more so new drugs (legal or not I don't care) out there and it is what really makes the difference....not the athletes.

Not strictly true about merckx. Boardman beat him in the late 90's in that old school hour record thing with the same bike but only by a few meters if that and boardman was one of the most fastidious and meticulous of riders the sport has ever seen.
Times have gone down from the peleton in speed from the 1990's and mid 00's, i just think drug gains aren't as big, are more subtle and are better at beating the system.

Well the thing they all dope...That is my main point. I honestly think that very rare case of amazing atheltes don't...but that might be my childish side again...however they have to back it up with obvious techical skills a la Messie or Federer.
[quote]
Apparently messi was on hgh at the start of his career so don't be so sure.

luvsports! wrote:Apparently messi was on hgh at the start of his career so don't be so sure.

Well he was on something cause genetically he was bound to be very short I heard....but to me that is were doping is not such an issue cause I woudl not mind Federer doping either to stay with the trends. Messi is most likely doping to last the distance. To me there is no physical sport that can give chance for a talented athlete to compensate for teh phsyical weakness cause the drugs hlep so much that any doper will have too much of an advantage. The only one I believe who coudl make the difference up to 2007..even 2010 was Federer. I don;t think he woudl have won v Nadal in Wimby 2012 (and Djoko had he been 100%).

Federer is history in the current physical state of tennis conds....unless they really speed the courts up.

Tenez wrote:I still believe that the new generation will have the keys to overcome the roadrunners generation and it will take much less time that expected. ...so for me the spectacle continues....even after Fed...but if I don;t finde the player able to win with grace I simply won't follow the game with the same enthusiasm....no different than teh Pete/Agassi years actually.

Unfortunately, I am a bit beyond the point of the "overcoming" effect. Yes, a generation of giants may blast roadrunners off the court, but who wants to watch them?
I came to conclusion that tennis really is unwatchable with players being over 190cm tall, (195 absolute max but only if they are a super-coordinated freaks).

The only hope and great thing about the future of tennis is that as a sport it really relies heavily on head to eye coordination to start with, fitness and the rest you can add to it and manufacture any baseline ball-basher.
Tennis, unlike cycling and athletics is very fixable, it's just that we need the right people in the right places, tweaking a few things with playing conditions, will definitely discourage any advantage endurance doping may give some.
If medicine helps players to recover between matches, I don't mind. They play a grueling tour all year round now.

25 secs implementation is just perfect anda fantastic step in the right direciton. I really want & hope the umpires to implement it religiously!

Tenez wrote:

luvsports! wrote:Apparently messi was on hgh at the start of his career so don't be so sure.

Well he was on something cause genetically he was bound to be very short I heard....but to me that is were doping is not such an issue cause I woudl not mind Federer doping either to stay with the trends. Messi is most likely doping to last the distance. To me there is no physical sport that can give chance for a talented athlete to compensate for teh phsyical weakness cause the drugs hlep so much that any doper will have too much of an advantage. The only one I believe who coudl make the difference up to 2007..even 2010 was Federer. I don;t think he woudl have won v Nadal in Wimby 2012 (and Djoko had he been 100%).

Federer is history in the current physical state of tennis conds....unless they really speed the courts up.

So are you saying you would offer a little tolerance to those who are talented that require that extra little fizz?

I don't see how HGH should be tolerated. If your short, so be it. I have heard that one and it does pose the question of his talent. For me it does. Kinda of a Captain America thing going on and as Tony Stark said to him "The only special thing about you came from a bottle"

I am against any forms of doping and if the athletes I support are doping then bigger fool me. I would never seek to justify it in any case. Any respect for that athlete would be lost in a second.

legendkillar wrote:The thing is NITB with every 1-2 breakthrough in techniques or agents to detect doping or drug use your going to get 10-11 new products and substances that illegally enhance performance and remain undetectable. All the time there is a market for such substances to enable athletes to cheat will make it difficult to close out cheating in general. If there was an effective way to target the market or providers might be a step in the right direction to winning the war on drug cheats. Companies who keep the rich richer will always avoid scrutiny.

LK,

I think you'll agree that we all love watching nice, all-court tennis full of creativity and flair. That's tennis at its very best.
Players don't need to be mega-fit, work their bodies from the day they are born in order to play tennis like that. Mac didn't.

Now, tennis is a business, and I respect that. Players and their families endure huge, no guarantee sacrifices for years in order to get to the position where they can make some money.
That's where the problem starts: after years of suffering, scarping for travel costs etc, suddenly they realise there are plenty of fish in the same tank and only one pie to share, they realise there is one guy who has a great talent and he'll get the main chunk of it, so what do you do?

As for Nadal, I don't mind the guy per se, although I have never liked him, not even for a second either as a character or a player. But that's my subjective taste and it doesn't cloud my judgement. Hats off to Toni and his genius super-spin plan.
The thing that I don't forgive him is the damage he has brought to the tour: gameshmanship, time-wasting, selfishly pushing his own agenda: demanding 2 years protected ranking, pushing his own people into tennis establishment in order to serve his selfish purposes, and , thank God resigning when things didn't go his way, still managing to squeeze Ljubicic out of the picture when he applied for ATP job and getting his man in and now demanding fewer hard courts, shorter season etc etc.
I don't want to hurt or upset his fans, but I really can't wait for him to retire.

If he could just be a tennis player like the rest, not trying to ruing the game with out of court dealings, I wouldn't mind him.

legendkillar wrote:

So are you saying you would offer a little tolerance to those who are talented that require that extra little fizz?

If I may answer this one, as well, I offer all the tolerance in the world to one an only Justine Henin

legendkillar wrote:So are you saying you would offer a little tolerance to those who are talented that require that extra little fizz?

Only tolerating knowing without the shadow of a doubt that the physical freaks those talented guys are facing are doped.

I don't see how HGH should be tolerated. If your short, so be it. I have heard that one and it does pose the question of his talent. For me it does. Kinda of a Captain America thing going on and as Tony Stark said to him "The only special thing about you came from a bottle"

I completely agree that Messi in theory shoudl npt have taken any hormones to make him bigger, taller. Maradona became a great without it...but the thing is all those guys Messi are facing are doped...so him taking something doesn't bother me.....at least he brings genius with him...the others just dope. That's my view.

I am against any forms of doping and if the athletes I support are doping then bigger fool me. I would never seek to justify it in any case. Any respect for that athlete would be lost in a second.

But you might as well say you are against sport. I have the feeling you still believe those top players are clean. That to me is the problem...you want to give them benefit of the doubt.

I simply don't doubt...not on these matters. ...and same applies to Marinovich....it's just another selling story. They will have to show me immense talent to make me believe other wise. I don't see it in those top players....th eopposite if anything. They do not want to rely on talent....too much of an untangible, erratic entity to guarantee you to reach the business end of slams.

But you might as well say you are against sport. I have the feeling you still believe those top players are clean. That to me is the problem...you want to give them benefit of the doubt.

A long time ago Tenez I played football and was a football fan. The club I played for was fantastic. We got in some new players as others had retired. One cold winter Saturday before a match 3 of these new players pulled out some Cocaine and snorted 6 lines between them. I got changed, refused to play and never played for them again. 4 months later I decided to retire from the sport because of that incident. Since then I have even ceased from watching it all together.

I give tennis players who have no previous the benefit of the doubt. Why would I not? What have they done that would attract such attention? Nadal granted bears the brunt and suspicion because of affiliations and somewhat bizarre national loyalty to cheating athletes and his PRP treatment. He hasn't helped himself granted.

They could all be doping or they might. I won't throw my eggs in one basket on hunches or suspicions. You could even call me splinters because of the fence I sit on.

legendkillar wrote:

But you might as well say you are against sport. I have the feeling you still believe those top players are clean. That to me is the problem...you want to give them benefit of the doubt.

A long time ago Tenez I played football and was a football fan. The club I played for was fantastic. We got in some new players as others had retired. One cold winter Saturday before a match 3 of these new players pulled out some Cocaine and snorted 6 lines between them. I got changed, refused to play and never played for them again. 4 months later I decided to retire from the sport because of that incident. Since then I have even ceased from watching it all together.

I give tennis players who have no previous the benefit of the doubt. Why would I not? What have they done that would attract such attention? Nadal granted bears the brunt and suspicion because of affiliations and somewhat bizarre national loyalty to cheating athletes and his PRP treatment. He hasn't helped himself granted.

They could all be doping or they might. I won't throw my eggs in one basket on hunches or suspicions. You could even call me splinters because of the fence I sit on.

Well the difference is that you know what happens in football...you don't know what happens at tennis. It;s roughly the same people who play tennis, football or rid a bike...it;s just human nature. You stopped playing football cause 3 guys snorted cocain....and assumed the game was rotten. Did you think all footballers were cocaine abusers?

Do you give a magician the benefit of the doubt that he is a real master of matter cause you don;t know his tricks? I guess not you just assume he has tricks up his sleeves you are not aware.
This is how you have to watch tennis players running for ever nowadays....they have tricks up their sleeves.

I gave football Ten because after witnessing that incident it annoyed me to no end that these individuals showed professionalism or respect for the game and the team that I committed myself.

My disillusionment increase around the same time with the sport because of the corruption within FIFA and also the debts racked up by teams and they would dodge tax bills and avoid prosecution. I have no idea how on earth that can happen given if you missed a tax bill you would be slung in prison. How can irresponsible owners and administrators at football clubs be above that? Couple that with the diving and feigning of injuries makes the sport a laughing stock. There are some sports that have a degree of integrity left, though they are becoming elusive.

No sport is without it's failings or scandals. Some just have more than others.

In relation to the benefit of the doubt. In terms of Magicians, it is case of you know the tricks are not magic. Illusion is an art form yes and looking behind the tricks and how they are achieved is what keeps the interest for people. What is the normal reaction to a magician performing a magic trick? 'How did they do that?'

Tennis players that run and run. I remember looking at some stats of the average running for a 5 set match which equated to 4 miles. Over a Slam tournament should every match be a 5 setter you would be looking at 21 miles. On that basis and the current crop of matches I would hazard a guess that an average Slam winner would run about 15 miles during a tournament. That shouldn't be hard for a top athlete to achieve. Many remarked that Djokovic after his marathon match with Wawrinka would recover enough to defeat Ferrer in the semi's and he did. Is that down to his recovery powers or something more foul? There have been many questions I have raised and asked about past performances and even current levels and physical limitations and how they are achieved. I wouldn't class those feats as entirely un-achievable through fitness and talent combined. I remember you commenting that the current conds and that only Federer and Ferrer in your mind are the only top players that adjusted to them. I think that could be opened to other players.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/tennis/9901202/International-Tennis-Federation-backs-Andy-Murray-and-Roger-Federers-call-for-tougher-anti-doping-measures.html

All I can say is hmmmmm.

Find it shocking that the first dope test in tennis was carried out in 1986!! Now I am truly sceptical!

.

My question and doubt about the genuineness of all these calls for testing is : Why now?
Why did they all not demand it 5 years ago for example?

Unfortunatelly, it all looks like another media/PR exercise....and we all know how long the effects of those last...

I think they are more serious NITB. The ITF can't afford not to follow through on these plans they are putting in motion. What is even more frightening is that Dick Pound is criticised for saying tennis stesting is a joke and doping is rife and yet Bitti finds it acceptable to point the finger at all sports being affected by doping.

Not the most remarkable thing he could've said.

So, as you can see, it all seems to be one big circus with a thin facade of righteusnrss (calls for doping, all this talk of funds being increased etc etc) whereas in fact they are all waiting for the dust caused by LA scandal to settle and then carry on as before.
That also explains why there is so little happening with this Fuentes case, and why it has been reduced to "health issues" and cycling only. Utter farce!

The Fuentes case is hilarious given that the doctor himself is calling for all names and it seems the Spanish authorities are influencing that.

I think Dick Pound was spot on about the ITF covering their arses!

It is good the Slams are upping the funding. That's a good start. The ITF must exceed what the Slams are doing and follow through on this 'shake up' in testing in tennis.

I question the wisdom of Bitti for admitting tennis has been lagging and that many players have gotten away with cheating. He is affiliated with it being so lax and also with this change. If it fails, I think tennis will never recover from it and interest with will die.

legendkillar wrote:Tennis players that run and run. I remember looking at some stats of the average running for a 5 set match which equated to 4 miles. Over a Slam tournament should every match be a 5 setter you would be looking at 21 miles. On that basis and the current crop of matches I would hazard a guess that an average Slam winner would run about 15 miles during a tournament.

But I am sure you are aware that those miles are not jogging miles. It's even worse than running 4 miles at a 100m pace cause every 4m has a stop and start element in it. In a 100m you have only one start and then it's about keeping your body balanced on a straight line till the finishing line. Then besides the stop and start every 4m you have, you have the bending of the body to every corners have having to bend and lift your upper body at the end of those 4m and then twist it to throw your arm and racquet as violently as possible. It's extremely exhausting.

But the key in all that is that though a fit body could do it, anybody in the world would lose the subtle precision it takes to time a 100mph ball coming at you and sending it back. This is where all the talent disappears in todays game. Cause though physcally men can run for ever, all their subtle timing, precision shots are heavily affected after a 10 shot rallies....and more so towards the end of those 10shot rallies and even more so after a set. Thankfully this is why tennis has a 2mn break every other games to take our physiology into account...but nowadays it's so physical that it is not enough. So players have developed a tennis with huge margins for error where precision is not that much needed but built themselves a ridiculous fitness.

A bit of physiology is useful to explain the phenomenon....why talent doesn't last the distance. Sports like tennis and biathlon are there to challenge both types of muscles...unlike a simple marathon.

Type I, slow twitch, or "red" muscle, is dense with capillaries and is rich in mitochondria and myoglobin, giving the muscle tissue its characteristic red color. It can carry more oxygen and sustain aerobic activity using fats or carbohydrates as fuel.[4] Slow twitch fibers contract for long periods of time but with little force.
Type II, fast twitch muscle, has three major subtypes (IIa, IIx, and IIb) that vary in both contractile speed[5] and force generated.[4] Fast twitch fibers contract quickly and powerfully but fatigue very rapidly, sustaining only short, anaerobic bursts of activity before muscle contraction becomes painful. They contribute most to muscle strength and have greater potential for increase in mass. Type IIb is anaerobic, glycolytic, "white" muscle that is least dense in mitochondria and myoglobin. In small animals (e.g., rodents) this is the major fast muscle type, explaining the pale color of their flesh.

That is one brilliant post T!
Spot on with the game transmuting into pecentage safe hitting and the way it's linked with physical (oxygen) demands. Tennis movement indeed is extremely demanding but only when coupled with the fact of what you have to do when you get to the ball. And the over and over again.
A step in the wrong direction, unfortunately.

Still, could be fixed with doing something about the conditions, couldn't it?

Tenez wrote:

legendkillar wrote:Tennis players that run and run. I remember looking at some stats of the average running for a 5 set match which equated to 4 miles. Over a Slam tournament should every match be a 5 setter you would be looking at 21 miles. On that basis and the current crop of matches I would hazard a guess that an average Slam winner would run about 15 miles during a tournament.

But I am sure you are aware that those miles are not jogging miles. It's even worse than running 4 miles at a 100m pace cause every 4m has a stop and start element in it. In a 100m you have only one start and then it's about keeping your body balanced on a straight line till the finishing line. Then besides the stop and start every 4m you have, you have the bending of the body to every corners have having to bend and lift your upper body at the end of those 4m and then twist it to throw your arm and racquet as violently as possible. It's extremely exhausting.

But the key in all that is that though a fit body could do it, anybody in the world would lose the subtle precision it takes to time a 100mph ball coming at you and sending it back. This is where all the talent disappears in todays game. Cause though physcally men can run for ever, all their subtle timing, precision shots are heavily affected after a 10 shot rallies....and more so towards the end of those 10shot rallies and even more so after a set. Thankfully this is why tennis has a 2mn break every other games to take our physiology into account...but nowadays it's so physical that it is not enough. So players have developed a tennis with huge margins for error where precision is not that much needed but built themselves a ridiculous fitness.

A bit of physiology is useful to explain the phenomenon....why talent doesn't last the distance. Sports like tennis and biathlon are there to challenge both types of muscles...unlike a simple marathon.

Type I, slow twitch, or "red" muscle, is dense with capillaries and is rich in mitochondria and myoglobin, giving the muscle tissue its characteristic red color. It can carry more oxygen and sustain aerobic activity using fats or carbohydrates as fuel.[4] Slow twitch fibers contract for long periods of time but with little force.
Type II, fast twitch muscle, has three major subtypes (IIa, IIx, and IIb) that vary in both contractile speed[5] and force generated.[4] Fast twitch fibers contract quickly and powerfully but fatigue very rapidly, sustaining only short, anaerobic bursts of activity before muscle contraction becomes painful. They contribute most to muscle strength and have greater potential for increase in mass. Type IIb is anaerobic, glycolytic, "white" muscle that is least dense in mitochondria and myoglobin. In small animals (e.g., rodents) this is the major fast muscle type, explaining the pale color of their flesh.

Timing a 100mph ball is eye co-ordination and timing. This more to do with talent for me than it is just being another extension of physical element. Even with the pushers of today they still need to judge the pace correctly hence why to those with talent it becomes second nature almost.

It requires more than ever precision for those with more talent to find and play the shots necessary to win the points.

Ten if a player can't play more than 3 effective winning shots in a rally, for me they are not talented enough to win in today's game. Not everything is down to fitness, but the consistency to be able to trust the talent to execute the shot. Look at the recent Wawrinka v Djokovic match at the AO. Did that come down to fitness or was it Wawrinka buckling at the most crucial points in the match? For me it came down to Wawrinka mentally not having it. He had that match on his racquet and couldn't push it home. Some might struggle physically, but if they got themselves 10% fitter then they could withstand the brutal rallies. Same with Murray and Federer. Murray should've been home and dry and again mentally kapoot.

Jimmy Connors analogy of tennis being 90% mental is true today as it was back then. It's ok tennis being littered with pushers, but seriously what do they have to take it to the next level and be successful with that? Some are limited by their talent eg a Ferrer or Tipsarevic. Look at Tsonga. If that guy was mentally tougher, he would've won Slams by now.

There are examples of players that do prove your point about the fitness, but also their are many players who prove Connors point. Take Djokovic. He was looking good at the start of 2012 and hence the passing of his Grandad and the manner of his defeat to Nadal at the FO I think really hurt him mentally hence why I think he missed out on Wimbledon and the US Open titles.

I think it is a mix of 2 then 1 dominating factor.

Thanks for muscle explanation thought that was interesting.

noleisthebest wrote:My question and doubt about the genuineness of all these calls for testing is : Why now?
Why did they all not demand it 5 years ago for example?

Unfortunatelly, it all looks like another media/PR exercise....and we all know how long the effects of those last...

Yes. Good point. I think the main reason is that 5 years you actually had more testing than during the peak Nadal career. It is documented by the ITF themselves. They have reduced the number of OOC tests and bllod test from 2008/2011. In fact they were even reluctant to reveal the latest figures recently (all documented in THASP site).

The second reason is that we are of course questioning more and more the cleanliness of teh sport and it's affecting the credibility of those performances...especially since at first we were told Nadal was one in a century athlete....and suddenly we have 3.

But finally and more importantly I think players can happily push for it cause they have methods and drugs that are simply untraceable nowadays. The new EPOs are virtually impossible to track so players can simply look good without the fear being caught. Tests if you look at it have always been useless. Dopers are being caught by police and custom investigations..not through tests.

noleisthebest wrote:
Still, could be fixed with doing something about the conditions, couldn't it?

Certainly. And I have been saying that more than the courts conditions, it's the strings which have allowed for far more margins. Keep the courts as slow but only allow for natural strings and you will have a dramatic change of ranking order.

Very much like the 100m ranking is not the same as the 800m ranking.

Well, so long as I can dream....

legendkillar wrote:
Timing a 100mph ball is eye co-ordination and timing. This more to do with talent for me than it is just being another extension of physical element. Even with the pushers of today they still need to judge the pace correctly hence why to those with talent it becomes second nature almost.

It all depends on what you do with it. There is a huge difference if just loop it back in the court (with force to make it even a safer shot)...much tougher if you send it low over the net in one corner and even much tougher if you really need to aim for the lines and sharpest angles. For somone who has been hitting a ball every day since 5, the first 2 cases are extremely easy and require little talent. You can even learn to do it with your LH...especially if you have a big one and inject enough power to send it safely 2m above the net and 2m inside the baseline.

It requires more than ever precision for those with more talent to find and play the shots necessary to win the points.

Talent uses those white musles tiring quickly.

Ten if a player can't play more than 3 effective winning shots in a rally, for me they are not talented enough to win in today's game. Not everything is down to fitness, but the consistency to be able to trust the talent to execute the shot. Look at the recent Wawrinka v Djokovic match at the AO. Did that come down to fitness or was it Wawrinka buckling at the most crucial points in the match? For me it came down to Wawrinka mentally not having it. He had that match on his racquet and couldn't push it home. Some might struggle physically, but if they got themselves 10% fitter then they could withstand the brutal rallies. Same with Murray and Federer. Murray should've been home and dry and again mentally kapoot.

Of course it's all down to fitness. Who won that Warinka v Djoko match? Who covered more ground? who was more tired at the end? Stan was buckling of course cause he was asked to deliver that fragile talent on key points and that was made harder for him knowing that if he missed them his chance of winning as the match extends woudl actually diminish.....despite making Djoko run twice as much. When Djoko had to put the ball away versus Nadal in his 3 or 4 clay matches in 2012, it was Djoko who threw all the easy points and buckled. Because though they look easy points to close for you and me it's a very different matter when you know you have to deliver the sharp shots at the end of a 10 shot rally..and the fact all the greats "choke" at time. Hence all the great talented players of the 90s coudl not win the FO....despite some getting close (McEnroe, Edberg).

But just speed up the conditions slightly and the goal posts become larger, the attcking players get relaxed and the match turns into a one way traffic where the attacking player gets a reputation of of mental strength (Pete, Edberg, McEnroe on grass = strong mentally; Same players = weak mentally on clay) and this is why I have always said that physique is so important for mental strength. And of course you can say that all the clay courters of teh 90s (Wilander, Chang, Bruguerra...etc...) were crap mentally and talent wise on grass.

Jimmy Connors analogy of tennis being 90% mental is true today as it was back then.

90%? So how do you explain 8 slams on grass and HC and not even a final on clay? I tell you grass and HC are much easier for the mind!!!! cause you don;t have to think about teh physique (well that was true in teh 80/90s). And it is true that at that time if you played on grass and fast HC....then the mental side was very important cause physically it was less important. That is why Connors was right then and simply wrong now.

There are examples of players that do prove your point about the fitness...

Yes. Nadal, Djoko and Murray consistently reaching the business end of the most exhausting tournaments and winning them!

Of course it's all down to fitness. Who won that Warinka v Djoko match? Who covered more ground? who was more tired at the end? Stan was buckling of course cause he was asked to deliver that fragile talent on key points and that was made harder for him knowing that if he missed them his chance of winning as the match extends woudl actually diminish.....despite making Djoko run twice as much. When Djoko had to put the ball away versus Nadal in his 3 or 4 clay matches in 2012, it was Djoko who threw all the easy points and buckled. Because though they look easy points to close for you and me it's a very different matter when you know you have to deliver the sharp shots at the end of a 10 shot rally..and the fact all the greats "choke" at time. Hence all the great talented players of the 90s coudl not win the FO....despite some getting close (McEnroe, Edberg).

Ten Wawrinka was serving for a 2 set lead and got tight. This why a strong mindset is as important as fitness. Imagine had Stan taken that second set. What different match that would've been. This is the case I make. All the guys are of a high standard of fitness. Some guys can outlast opponents, others can't. Others can tough wins from matches of which they are outplayed. This is something Djokovic has been a master of the last 3 years. Is it him just running and running? No. It's more than that. It is the opponent creating self doubt that he can't hit a winner when it matters. Murray is the best example of mentally shrinking on the big points. Look at Tsonga and Seppi at last years FO against Djokovic. I thought when watching it that Djokovic would win not because of fitness, but because the other guys would buckle under pressure and they did. That's why I think Connors point is relevent now than ever. Take Cillic against Murray. Was hitting him off the court. One duff service game and he folded. Davydenko the master of blowing it. Guys that have the physical attributes but not that mental ones.

I agree speed up the courts. The game really needs it. Make grass quick again and speed up Arthur Ashe!

Back to the good, old doping.....After Sampras saying that he believes tennis is doping free during his exo in LA two days ago, P. Bodo of tennis.com comes up with a good article, I like his last paragraph best:

http://www.tennis.com/pro-game/2013/03/they-said-what-sampras-doping/46705/#.UTfXDhml3go