Am I missing something, or is NITB's (and some others on OTF) stance on Djokovic hypocritical?

We here a lot on this forum about Nadal, his fans are put into question as to whether they are 'anti-tennis' while Nadal himself gets a lot of scrutiny and criticism.
However for once I think we should on this forum, for this rare occasion, turn our attention away from Nadal and his fans; and analyse whether the stance on Djokovic has double standards and is hypocritical.

To start of, I say this; I believe that Djokovic is not doping, I think that he has achieved a fantastic stamina and endurance through legal means such as hard work in the gym and CVAC (and Djokovic himself has admitted to using CVAC, so one cannot accuse me of speculation here).
However that is very different from the stance others, including NITB, take on this forum.
Noleisthebest has said, and I quote exactly-
As an answer to the question of whether Djokovic is doping:

noleisthebest wrote:Absolutely, yes.

After this admission, noleisthebest has clarified twice that she still believes Djokovic is taking Performance Enhancing Drugs, but has also added that she believes he starting taking them after Nadal started.

Since then I expected noleisthebest to stop supporting Djokovic, considering she has also talked about how bad doping is for the sport.
But instead of that she said before a Federer-Djokovic match that she sees choosing who to support between the two like the father of the Williams sisters having to choose between Venus and Serena. Now considering that Federer is apparently not doping, this statement struck me as bizzare.
This is what logically doesn't make sense to me:
-NITB hates doping in tennis
-NITB thinks Djokovic is doping
-NITB doesn't think Federer is doping (well she hasn't said so and indicated the opposite numerous times)
-NITB still supports Djokovic, and has said before a Fed-Nole match that she sees them both as children (metaphorically obviously) who she can't choose between.

Now am I missing something, or does this approach from NITB not make sense? And to be fair to NITB, others on this forum have had similar sentiments, believeing Djokovic is doping but still showing support for him.
If he is doping (and I don't think he is), the best argument he has is the Lance Armstrong defence that at the time it was his only option etc. But is this defence a good enough reason to launch huge support of him?

For me, it doesn't stand up to logical scrutiny, and I think is not applying the same standards to Djokovic as is done to others.

It depends how you look at it. Is it the best logic, probably not, but people are entitled to opinions.

When in search of pure tennis which I think this forum is crying out for you find yourself stuck with Federer and I have seen NITB passionately support Paire who for me is a talent, but physically and mentally falls short of what makes a top 20 player. I think it is difficult for anyone who supports a player and then has strong suspicions of doping of that player. Loyalty is difficult one to turn off. Yes I find it hypocritical to launch a moral stance against doping and then justify supporting someone because it is the rage and everyone is doing it.

If Murray was found to be doping it would take time and adjustment to get used to and looking at the time and emotion invested in that player. For me instead of at the instance turning off all emotions related to that player and replacing it with dislike would be a hard transition to make. There would be so many questions of why, how and when. Imagine if Federer was caught doping. I think you find his fanbase wouldn't shrink so drastically.

well to me it is clear, I look at the players' game, nothing else. Who would win if no one had turned into those gladiators players we have nowadays which did not exist just a few years ago? That is how I look at it.

And the question is simple. Federer would still be number 1. He is the one with the moist energy efficient game. At the extreme Nadal is the one with the least energy efficient game (Hilighted those buckets of sweats showing how much more power and energy he needs to burn to send th eball on the other side of the net).

I am therefore not interested as much on who dopes and who doesn't. If I learnt that Federer was a doper, it would not change my view cause I know that game wise if he did not and no one else did he would still be number one. Sure it is only a personal opinion but an educated one based on simple observation.

It is though very clear, if you know someone (even worse the top player) dopes for sure and you know the system is covering up, I do not think there is anything wrong is doping in turn. That's the probem sport has been facing for years, not only tennis, but before Nadal too.

So the question is if so, why Nadal? Well to be fair I have always been highly suspicious of Hewitt before him, and even some before hewitt....and Nadal is simply the next one and more so the one whose tennis was clearly based on that extra physique/energy. In other words he made it simply too obvious, helped with all the other tricks such as time between points, waiting, on court coaching etc....

But let's be clear If Nadal retired tomorrow, I'd be after Murray, Djoko, Berdych, Ferrer etc.... The other players are less obvious..so I would not emphasise and talk so much about physique if the top physical players were not as dominating.

legendkiller wrote:It depends how you look at it. Is it the best logic, probably not, but people are entitled to opinions.

Fair enough, but if people are saying things that I feel is illogical and applying double standards, surely I am entitled to call it out?

legendkiller wrote: 
Yes I find it hypocritical to launch a moral stance against doping and then justify supporting someone because it is the rage and everyone is doing it.

This is my main point, and I am glad  you agree.
NITB supports Djokovic, a doper according to her, yet hates doping.

Tenez, this thread was mainly towards the position of NITB, not you. Despite you treating Nadal unfairly compared to Djokovic, the extent of the hypocrisy is not as huge as NITB's.
And this thread is not about people being right, but more on people being logically consistent. NITB may or may not be right as to whether Nadal and Djokovic are doping; but the stance she takes is not fair either way.

I do not want to talk on NITB's behalf but I think I could explain her view actually.

It;s the same thing with time taking between points. Nadal is the one who systematically started to take ridiculous time between points. Others followed suite simply because he was allowed too. I am pretty sure they would have never started to take extra time, certainly not nearly as much, had Nadal not started it right after that Miami 05 final!

JS,
yor essential problem is not even me and my hipocrisy, it's the fact that Nole is a better player than Nadal and has exposed Nadal's one-dimensional tennis.
The fact that I consider Nadal death of tennis, pits of gamesmanship, just about anything ugly that can exist on a tennis court - he's got it all.
That is what irks you, not what I think about doping.

It was Nadal who started the heavy doping trend on tour and the rest followed.
The real gutless hypocrite is you, who can't even admit the obvious.
Take away dope and Nadal would have never beaten Nole on ANY surface, not even in 2006.

noleisthebest wrote:JS,
yor essential problem is not even me and my hipocrisy, it's the fact that Nole is a better player than Nadal and has exposed Nadal's one-dimensional tennis.

Yes, just like the USO and French Open this year

The fact that I consider Nadal death of tennis, pits of gamesmanship, just about anything ugly that can exist on a tennis court - he's got it all.

People are entitled to their opinion, many people love him- some people hate him like  you do. That is not what irks me, nor is it what I'm talking about in the article.

It was Nadal who started the heavy doping trend on tour and the rest followed.

Ooooh, the Lance Armstrong defence then. You're still a big fan of Djokovic, the doper then?
What is it you said on the other thread about Djokovic pulling the plug on doping, yet you think he's doping? So will he pull the plug on himself?

Rather than speculating what I am saying, why not read the article which makes it perfectly clear.

Making a thread to attack a posters view (and call them hypocrites) is a bit much.. don't you think?  I could tie you in knots with all the stuff you have come out with, but that's the point.

I think the criticism in the OP is fair, and I have also given an opportunity for NITB (or anyone else) to refute what I'm saying. 

I did raise this earlier with NITB, to which NITB responded by saying that I was 'too thick to understand' what was going on; so I think it's right that I clear up my view and show my evidence. 

I could tie you in knots with all the stuff you have come out with, but that's the point.

I'm not sure you could actually.
My point is not that NITB is right/wrong, everyone is entitled to their own opinion on that- but what I am  arguing is that even if she is right- it is still a logically inconsistent position. 
You could easily write a thread disagreeing with my opinion, even I could do that if I felt like it, point out blatant double standards and inconsistencies on the other hand you would struggle (for example if I was to berate Djokovic for taking time between points but not berate Nadal... then you would have every right to say I am not being fair).


As it is, NITB has failed to come up with any reasonable response to what I've said in the OP. 

This is such a thorny and fraught issue.  Of course I, like nearly everyone, wondered what Djokovic had taken that allowed him to win in situations he hadn't been able to succeed in before.  And I have never believed Nadal to be clean from his beginning because of the disgraceful PR manipulation if nothing else.  But that same reason makes me feel sympathy for him in a way - imagine being sent onto the world stage dressed like a surfer bum!  I have always been confident that Federer is clean because of his statements about freezing samples for future testing and because his relationship with tennis is so clearly respectful.  The joy of it for him seems to be making the tennis work, not crushing opponents.

What I do find hypocritical on this forum and others is the constant call for young players to work on their fitness and movement.  Dimitrov, for example - he burns out in 5 setters and needs to improve his fitness.  And you beat on Milos for poor movement and not enough aggression, even though he has this year improved his movement (within the bounds of who he is, which means improved his quick thinking) and taken on a new coach who is helping to encourage what once was his natural aggressive instinct.

I agree with Tenez that there will be a return to serve and volley - and a corollary is that young players should be encouraged to develop weapons not just fitness.  What's the old saying?  Old age and treachery will defeat youth and skill.  Youth needs to work on guile.

BN- I agree it's a thorny issue, but what I am calling for is consistency.
From what I've seen from your posts so far you have not made contradicting statements.

What I would say about your above post, if you allow me to temporarily digress from my own thread, is that your defence of Federer not doping is not really fullproof. You say he is 'respectful with tennis' and 'joy of it for him' etc. but that doesn't really get us anywhere. The freezing of samples is most convincing, but if I was a cynic (which I'm not, I believe that he was being genuine) it could be possible to argue that it was a clever statement- one which made him sound fantastic, but was not followed up and implemented (ie the freezing of samples never actually took place).

You are pushing me to develop my fan appeal post!  There is nothing about Federer to suggest such calculation.

bluenose wrote:You are pushing me to develop my fan appeal post!  There is nothing about Federer to suggest such calculation.

To clarify, I agree with you- I think Federer was being genuine.
However if we were being very cynical, I could twist it (unfairly in my opinion) to imply that Federer is more calculating than it appears.

I don't think it is unfair to suggest that. I won't accuse someone of that but I think it is very possible.

Fair point LS, but from what I've seen of Federer is that he's a good guy, so he should get benefit of doubt in my eyes.
Anyway, what did you think of the OP? Agree/Disagree?

I will say this once but I don't want to be drawn into it again ok? After this remark, j'ai fini! Comprende?

Yes I agree it is hypocritical. Im out.

luvsports! wrote:
Yes I agree it is hypocritical. Im out.

Glad you agree with me on this one

After this remark, j'ai fini! Comprende?

Je comprends

To further my point from the article:

-Recently NITB has supported Djokovic, because he defended his good friend Troicki who had been banned due to missing a blood test.
-Would NITB apply the same sympathy with Nadal, if he defended his compatriot in a parallel hypotethical scenario?

I don't think so.
Infact I think NITB would be very critical of Nadal if he had taken the contreversial step that Djokovic did.