Puerto trial should name names, says Nadal

Discussion in 'General Pro Player Discussion' started by CMM, Feb 7, 2013.

  1. Bartelby

    Bartelby G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2005
    Messages:
    12,948
    The current trial did not come about through testing, but an investigation and apparently drugs can move through the system so quickly that they aren't really testable.
     
    #51
  2. SLD76

    SLD76 Legend

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2009
    Messages:
    9,795
    Location:
    Minneapolis, North of the Wall
    someone could walk out of a clinic with a syringe in their arm and the other arm hooked to a blood spinning machine and it wouldnt be proof enough for Mustard.
     
    #52
  3. Murrayfan31

    Murrayfan31 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2010
    Messages:
    4,057
    That would be funny if Fuentes decided to name names and Nadal was on the list. ;)
     
    #53
  4. SLD76

    SLD76 Legend

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2009
    Messages:
    9,795
    Location:
    Minneapolis, North of the Wall

    by now, who knows if the evidence implicating any high profile spanish athlete hasnt been destroyed already
     
    #54
  5. YouCantBeSerious

    YouCantBeSerious Banned

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2009
    Messages:
    968
    Location:
    Land of the Free Buffet
    You obviously know nothing about Clembuterol.

    Contador's conviction is a typical overreaction, an attempt to err on the side of caution that proves nothing.

    I'm not saying Contador has never doped, I'm saying the conviction based on the minuscule amounts of Clembuterol found on his system is stupid, and that Nadal was right to support him.

    They also found trace amounts of a plasticizer in Contador's bloodstream, and that points to posible blood doping. That is far more likely than him using Clembuterol as a PED. That hypothesis is simply moronic.
     
    #55
  6. YouCantBeSerious

    YouCantBeSerious Banned

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2009
    Messages:
    968
    Location:
    Land of the Free Buffet
    Do you know what an accusation means? Do you know the difference between accusation and suspicion? I don't think every pro athlete deserves to be accused of doping. That's a horrible way of thinking.

    In the case of Armstrong, there were many people that came out throughout the years, people in his environment, that knew what he was doing. There was a basis to suspect, and those people obviously could accuse him of doping.

    How many indications in the case of Nadal do you see? About as many as in the case of Federer, Murray, or most any other tennis player.

    Going down this rabbit hole is dangerous. You can cast accusations of almost anything against anybody for a long time, and people start doubting and thinking they might be true. If I started accusing you of liking young boys over and over, some people might doubt whether that's right or not, even though I have no basis to believe that to be the case. That's the way human perception works. "Where there is smoke, there must be a fire." The problem is that this is not always the case.

    So be careful with your "it's OK to suspect and accuse even without any shred of proof" philosophy. It sounds suspiciously familiar to the Taliban, and might come back to bite you in the arse.
     
    Last edited: Feb 8, 2013
    #56
  7. Dedans Penthouse

    Dedans Penthouse Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2004
    Messages:
    4,165
    Location:
    Antarctica
    Judging by her rack, WTA pro Simona Helep is using deer antler spray


    [​IMG]
     
    #57
  8. Tennis_Hands

    Tennis_Hands Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2009
    Messages:
    4,214
    Location:
    Inside the service box - the business end
    That is quite probable.

    Given the level of interference and the circumstances, surrounding that case.

    http://ansamed.biz/en/news/ME.XEF76147.html

    http://www.sudinfo.be/sports/foot_i...re-la-coupe-du-monde-a-l-espagne-831186.shtml

     
    Last edited: Feb 8, 2013
    #58
  9. Mustard

    Mustard Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2009
    Messages:
    25,115
    Location:
    Cwmbran, Wales
    Yes, witness testimonies are legal evidence, but when plea bargaining is rife and/or there's no physical, objective evidence to back it up circumstantial evidence, it's very dodgy and clearly unreliable.
     
    Last edited: Feb 8, 2013
    #59
  10. sureshs

    sureshs Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2005
    Messages:
    35,764
    She has since had breast reduction surgery.
     
    #60
  11. Tennis_Hands

    Tennis_Hands Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2009
    Messages:
    4,214
    Location:
    Inside the service box - the business end
    So, it is a pure coincidence, that the testimonies from all those cyclists reflect what LA also admitted?

    (and I haven't even started with the bolded part)
     
    #61
  12. ivan_the_terrible

    ivan_the_terrible Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2010
    Messages:
    1,675
    It's good to see you're keeping abreast on these things.


    Unfortunately, 20 years from now, she'll be getting an enhancement to reverse the reduction to please her hubby.
     
    #62
  13. YouCantBeSerious

    YouCantBeSerious Banned

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2009
    Messages:
    968
    Location:
    Land of the Free Buffet
    That's a good one!

    You are for the most part right that cycling and tennis are completely different. Cycling, as you said, is almost 100% strength and stamina. Forget boxing, cycling is probably even more brutal.
     
    #63
  14. YouCantBeSerious

    YouCantBeSerious Banned

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2009
    Messages:
    968
    Location:
    Land of the Free Buffet
    HAHAHAHA. That's one rack I'd like to hang my hat on.
     
    #64
  15. SLD76

    SLD76 Legend

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2009
    Messages:
    9,795
    Location:
    Minneapolis, North of the Wall
    except when the man in question admits to doping
     
    #65
  16. vernonbc

    vernonbc Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2009
    Messages:
    2,902
    Good post.
     
    #66
  17. Tennis_Hands

    Tennis_Hands Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2009
    Messages:
    4,214
    Location:
    Inside the service box - the business end
    YouCantBeSerious, I have you on "ignore", but I sometimes get to read your posts, when someone quotes you. I don't delude myself, when I respond to you, as I know that you will completely ignore anything that goes against your agenda and bias.

    Still:

    The majority of the posters, who write in the threads about doping, suspect certain players. And, they do that based on something. Very rarely (if ever) a shadow is cast over a player, who didn't do anything unusual or is connected to suspicious events (albeit, at this point in time, it is naive to believe, that the top pros in any sport are competing on cereals only).

    Ah, but what you are saying makes little sense. Just because there aren't many people, who accuse an athlete of doping (because they saw him or have other proof) doesn't mean, that he isn't. These two things are not mutually exclusive.

    Also, quite often there are such people, but they are afraid to talk for many reasons. Only after a certain process has began, they talk.

    No.

    Here is what we have with Nadal:

    1) Game, that is BASED on endurance. And, it is not a single match. We are talking about general level on the highest level for prolonged periods of time. Take away his option to use endurance (fast surfaces, where he cannot grind his equally leveled rivals down), and he isn't nowhere as consistent. Mind you, I am not saying, that Nadal doesn't possess highly advanced skillset. I am saying, that what distinguishes him from the other top competitors (well, untill recently), is endurance and speed. And, guess what can help with those two?

    2) The nature of his injuries itself. It is often overlooked aspect (in the heat of the debate, whether they are real or not) of doping. Problems with tendons/joints are often an indirect indicator ofdoping.

    3) The unusual pattern of his development as a tennis player, characterized by unusual peaks, often followed by equally unusual bottoms. Here I iclude his absences from the Tour, which, to me, are not always consistent with the official position of his camp.

    4) Officially supporting convicted dopers (see Contador). I am not sure, if I have witnessed such a high profile athlete to express support to equally positioned athlete in other sport, who has been officially banned. I believe that that is one of the few instances, where Nadal's PR failed to protect him by preventing him from saying that, and, as a result, Nadal spoke his mind (unlike the latest PR stint with the Fuentes List).

    I would say, that all those points are pretty valid. Whether one would choose to ignore them, is a whole different issue.

    But, don't tell me, that there isn't smoke.

    If I was to express my sympathies for people, who are known to have had problems with young boys in the past, I would say, that you are on to something.

    Well, think about what your said.

    For your standarts, I am sure.

    :roll:
     
    #67
  18. The_Order

    The_Order Legend

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2012
    Messages:
    7,132
    Is that you Rochus???
     
    #68
  19. ViscaB

    ViscaB Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    May 27, 2010
    Messages:
    2,203
    Location:
    Singapore

    On Clay Nadal can dominate with his topspin groundstrokes. You will find that he actually runs much less than his opponents in most matches.



    You are not showing any causal relationship. Please show us any research that backs up your claim. Also, what is the effect of hard-courts on his knees considering that according to you Nadal is a mostly physical player? Could that perhaps explain the relationships that you try to claim?



    Nadal has been extremely consistent in his career. Another non-argument.



    Contador like any cyclist is most likely a doper but the CAS concluded that the amount detected would probably not have helped his performance and also could have come from contaminated meat.


    Based on your simple conclusions and manipulative arguments I could proof in a same vein that you are a manipulator.
     
    #69
  20. Tennis_Hands

    Tennis_Hands Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2009
    Messages:
    4,214
    Location:
    Inside the service box - the business end
    Is this a fact?

    I would like you to support your claim with data. Especially against the big hitters like Sjoderling or Berdych, and, of course, against Federer.

    http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/si_online/special_report/news/2002/05/28/verducci/

    http://drugfreesportrec.blogspot.de/2011/10/steroid-use-and-injury.html

    You have no idea what you are talking about.

    I will just leave you at that.



    What is your measuring stick? Agassi's career?


    :rolleyes:


    CAS banned Contador.


    I will live with your expert opinion

    :roll:

    Special gift for you, since you are rocking Barcelona '92 Olympics avatar.

    http://ansamed.biz/en/news/ME.XEF76147.html

    So, are you paying tribute to the official start of the Spanish National Doping Program?
     
    #70
  21. ViscaB

    ViscaB Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    May 27, 2010
    Messages:
    2,203
    Location:
    Singapore
    I'm not going to argue with you. Your simplistic arguments tire me.

    You have no idea what a causal relationship is. Because stereoid users have a higher chance of getting the phyiscal issues (holding all other factors constant) you describe it does not mean at all that ALL knee ligament issues of sportsmen are caused by the use of steroids.
     
    Last edited: Feb 9, 2013
    #71
  22. veroniquem

    veroniquem Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2008
    Messages:
    31,109
    Location:
    New York
    And in the case of Nadal, it's due (mostly) to a foot malformation.
     
    #72
  23. YouCantBeSerious

    YouCantBeSerious Banned

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2009
    Messages:
    968
    Location:
    Land of the Free Buffet
    Is that supposed to make me feel important? It doesn't, and frankly I don't care whether anybody ignores anybody's posts. It's not like I care about your opinion anyway. It's funny that you accuse me of probably doing the exact same thing you do (ignore your posts). Think about that for a while (if you have the mental capacity to do so).

    The next time you read my name on a quote block, it's easy to ignore too. Please either do so, or refrain from posting such long replies, as they are extremely boring to reply to, and probably also extremely boring to read for other forum members.


    Like I said, this way of thinking is dangerous. There is something called "the benefit of the doubt" and "innocent until proven guilty". Those two concepts tend to be appreciated by citizens in free societies. Imagine if your government decided to prosecute you based on suspicions. That's exactly what you are doing here, by smearing somebody's image based solely on speculation. Not very classy, and it might come back to bite you in your butt one day.

    To me, this type of attitude is much more revealing of the person casting the accusations than of the object of such unfounded accusations.

    So you are saying that your favorite player is a doper too? Why do you seem to discriminate against Nadal then?

    What you just said means that just because nobody here has accused you of murder, it doesn't mean you are not a murderer. Does that mean I can just accuse you of being a murderer? Perhaps I won't do so, but what I can do (and I have basis to do so) is to accuse you of not being exceedently brilliant. This argument is pretty dumb.

    My point (which you seem to have missed) is that in the case of Armstrong, the people who knew he was doping were entitled to accuse him of doing so, because they had seen him. Accusations by such people were known, which cast public suspicion on Armstrong for a long time. Accusation and suspicion are two different concepts. Legitimate accusation requires knowledge (or the ability to prove). I don't expect you to understand these fine points, so perhaps it would be better if you continue ignoring my posts instead of making a fool out of yourself by attempting to reply to them.

    I'll respond to each point in order, but for now, the careful reader will have already noticed that earlier in your reply, you said that it would be naive to think that the top athletes of each sport don't dope (I think you said "run only on cereals"). In other words, you feel entitled to suspect regardless of any indications, which was my original point.

    In the case of Nadal, because you obviously dislike him, we have to contend additionally with the issue of confirmation bias. In other words, the kid doesn't stand a chance.

    So because he has great endurance he dopes? How about Borg, Connors, and Lendl? You could argue these three probably topped anybody currently on tour regarding stamina. Did they dope too? According to you, they probably did.

    Confirmation bias. You are assuming beforehand he takes anabolic steroids, in order to explain his injuries, because the explanation fits your prejudice against Nadal. The fact is Nadal doesn't suffer any of the other side effects of anabolic steroids (such as increased hair in the limbs, deepening of the voice, and changes in facial bone structure). You conveniently ignore all these things, which is more grievous given the fact that Nadal's joint problems can be solely explained by his playing style, which puts extraordinary stress on his joints. (This fact has been illustrated in detail via scientific papers in well known publications).

    Again, confirmation bias. If he takes anabolic steroids, how long do you think peaks and bottoms should last? Does the fact that Nadal has been at the top of the game for many months at a time mean anything? Do you think steroid peaks last 5, 6, 7 months at a time? You obviously know nothing about steroids. The fact Nadal is worn out usually at the end of the year is his playing style, and the fact he often plays more matches than the rest of top players. Look up the numbers.

    This is just dumb. If you are doping, the last thing you want to do is publicly support somebody you know to be a doper and attract unwanted attention upon yourself. Instead, you would want to dissociate yourself from people you knew to dope. To me, it is a very clear indication that Nadal is innocent, and that he believed Contador to be innocent as well. Usually, guilty people tend to suspect other people of their same misconducts.

    Apparently you know very little about basic psychology and the human condition as a whole. Maybe you should start ignoring less and paying attention and trying to learn more.

    Ignore the points? Unlike you, I don't ignore. I address and debunk using logic.

    If you did that, I would think you believe the person you are defending to be innocent. Like a said earlier, if you were guilty and defended other pedophiles, that would be the dumbest move ever.

    Standarts? :)
     
    Last edited: Feb 9, 2013
    #73
  24. mariecon

    mariecon Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2013
    Messages:
    1,960
    Location:
    the Great White North
    mwahahahahahahahaha. Yeah right!:shock:
     
    #74
  25. Mustard

    Mustard Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2009
    Messages:
    25,115
    Location:
    Cwmbran, Wales
    Don't you know that Nadal's career was nearly over at the end of 2005, and that he's needed to wear specially modified shoes ever since?
     
    #75
  26. Tennis_Hands

    Tennis_Hands Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2009
    Messages:
    4,214
    Location:
    Inside the service box - the business end
    So, nearly over, that a simple orthothics change enabled him to compete at the highest possible level.

    :roll:

    Doping is known to cause that type of injuries. It is a fact. Deal with it.
     
    #76
  27. Vrad

    Vrad Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2012
    Messages:
    618
    I don't think you are representing Tennis_Hands' position correctly at all. In fact, he explicitly states that he is not implying a causal relationship. He is saying that this factor, combined with other factors, makes him (and others) more suspicious about a certain player.

    Maybe you wouldn't be so tired out if you weren't erecting straw men which don't accurately reflect others' positions.
     
    #77
  28. monfed

    monfed Guest

    It's ok if Ralph needed a little bit of an edge to make a name for himself, everyone isn't as talented as Fed so Ralph needed to do some jugglery,what's wrong with that?
     
    #78
  29. vive le beau jeu !

    vive le beau jeu ! G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2006
    Messages:
    11,564
    Location:
    Ometepe, Pink Granite, Queyras, Kerguelen (...)
    yeah, names ! names ! names !
    [​IMG]
    ... let's play the puerto-bingo ! :)




    [​IMG]
    oh crap... we lost. :?
     
    #79
  30. corners

    corners Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2008
    Messages:
    5,441
    What's the difference between an organic and synthetic steroid? How are organic steroids obtained - from animal organs? Why are organic steroids so much better for the body over time?

    As you point out, players that can't afford the best must settle for synthetics? Doesn't this un-level the playing field in a manner that is fundamentally contradictory to the spirit of sport?
     
    #80
  31. vive le beau jeu !

    vive le beau jeu ! G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2006
    Messages:
    11,564
    Location:
    Ometepe, Pink Granite, Queyras, Kerguelen (...)
    [​IMG]

    it was an miracle, my friends... AN MIRACLE !!!
     
    #81
  32. Topspin_80

    Topspin_80 Rookie

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2012
    Messages:
    165
    Yeah , probably from the same source Andy Murray gets them , forget not that Andy is tennis-wise 100% Spaniard , made in Barcelona !!!!!!!
     
    #82

Share This Page