Cristophe Rochus: Doping rampant, mentions Nadal and Soderling

[President]

Credit to MTF for this article

Is doping a reality in tennis ?
Of course it is a reality. I was already saying that more than ten years ago. It is a sport that is more and more physical, so there are inevitably more temptations to take enhanching performance drugs. Now, with the Armstrong issue, we are now admitting it’s not because someone has never been controlled positive that it means that person has never been doping. When one can afford good doctors, to make some personal researches on the subject, and to have some resources, it is possible to take undetectable drugs products. So in my opinion, anti-doping controls are useless and they really don’t prove anything. Regarding Nadal, those rumors are rumors even if everyone wonders the same question : how can you be so strong in Roland Garros and one month later, you are apparently unable to play ? That’s why it looks so suspicious, but we have no proof. Maybe he is really injured.

We have to admit all these breaks, such as Nadal and some others, are really intriguing…
That’s the purpose ! It should not be obvious ! Everyone makes sure it is not clear. The less you lie, the less you give explanations, better it is ! Let’s take Robin Soderling. He has won Bastad in 2011, and ever since that, he has not played tennis. Apparently he is really sick (officially he has mononucleosis) when I am certain he was unbeatable back then. We can’t deny how much it sounds dubious. He was at the peak of his career, and the day after, he suddenly says he can’t play tennis anymore… I really think it’s unbelievable.

What about the federations ? Are they implicated or not?
It is all part of the rumors. We think “Oh wait, it is weird.” There are plenty of strange things happening, and we have the feeling the best players have nothing. It’s like everywhere, there are always people you can buy ! I guess someone like Armstrong might have the resources and the knowledge to pay someone to know how to avoid getting caught. It’s a certain thing : with money, everything is affordable ! Now, there is always a way to slip through the net. That’s the way it works because everyone has a benefit to take from it : the federations, the athletes…

How did you deal, as a tennisplayer, with these issues to keep practising your sport and to make it your job ?
When I entered the top 100, I said in the medias that it was a scandal to see all these doped players, and I received a letter from the ATP threatening me “This is the last time you ever talk about this. You have no proof, you have nothing”. Finally, all players I’ve mentioned got controlled positive. All Argentineans. Rather than all this hypocrisy, I think it would be better to legalize the doping. When I say that, I hear I can’t say that because it’s not a good thing and it’s dangerous anyway. But after speaking with the doctors, we are not even sure these products are dangerous for our health. At that moment, each one, in all honesty, is ready to take the risk or is not. My brother and I have always been clean. We could have taken growth hormones, but we never did it. We thought it was not worthy. Maybe we should have…. Maybe we would have never been caught up… Maybe my brother would be 17 centimenters (6.69 inches) taller and he would have been in the top 10… Everyone has to make choices. Do we really want to be in the worldwide top at all cost or are we content to be just a very good athlete, it’s all personal?

That being said, how can we put an end to all this ? We have the feeling all these doping stories will never end…
It will never end for one reason : sports are entertainment and we always want more. If, after ten stages in the Tour de France, the cyclists are racing at 25km/h (15.53 mph) because they are exhausted, it won’t be alright. If after a five setter which lasted for five hours in the semi-finals, the player says he can’t even get up so he can’t take part in the final, then the entertainment is over. It will never end. Too much money, too much entertainment at stakes. But as a spectator, I don’t mind watching these athletes, even if I know they are doped. For me, Armstrong still remains a great champion… doped or not ! Same for the others. They fought, the efforts are still there…

http://www.rue89.com/rue89-sport/201...s-le-legaliser


Very interesting stuff

[DRII]

Nadal's name is not in the passage you quoted...

[President]

Originally Posted by DRII

Nadal's name is not in the passage you quoted...

I just posted the full interview, read again.

[TMF]

Originally Posted by DRII

Nadal's name is not in the passage you quoted...

But he hasn't played tennis since last year Wimbledon.

[veroniquem]

Originally Posted by DRII

Nadal's name is not in the passage you quoted...

It's in the actual interview. You have to click the link at the bottom of the page but you also have to be able to read French!! I can and I checked the translation and it was legit.

[bluetrain4]

I don't doubt that doping happens. In fact, I bet it happens way more than we'd like to imagine. But, other than the players who were actually caught, it's all rank speculation as to who has doped and when, which never leads to any productive discussion.

[joeri888]

Originally Posted by bluetrain4

I don't doubt that doping happens. In fact, I bet it happens way more than we'd like to imagine. But, other than the players who were actually caught, it's all rank speculation as to who has doped and when, which never leads to any productive discussion.

This. And this is why all the testing and stuff should be increased BIG TIME. However, there's no incentive for the ATP or ITF to test more, because it costs money and catching players will cost them more money.

[*Sparkle*]

Originally Posted by bluetrain4

I don't doubt that doping happens. In fact, I bet it happens way more than we'd like to imagine. But, other than the players who were actually caught, it's all rank speculation as to who has doped and when, which never leads to any productive discussion.

There are moments of productive discussion, but as the only actual productive thing is for there to be more testing, which is outwith our control, all threads on doping go over the exact same ground and quickly descend into bickering and an excuse to bash players you don't like, especially the ones that beat your favourite.

I'm in favour of more widespread and better testing, but until that happens, these threads will continue to be mainly about rumour mongering and conspiracy theories mixed with some sour grapes, especially if mods allow players' names to be given, or hinted at, frequently with no better reason than them being good at tennis, or "they're all at it".

[joeri888]

Like the UCI, I think it would be completely unacceptable to ban players from a sport in silence. Now if you have a temporary suspension to wait for confirmation of results, that's entirely different, but if there truly are positive doping cases in tennis, imo everything should be done to make sure this becomes clear and becomes a serious issue.

I also think that we should not go the way of a more and more physical sport.

[DropShotArtist]

History repeats itself. This is exactly how it was in cycling. In the beginning no one believed or wanted to believe it. Specially not the ardent fangirls. But smart guys like Rochus and me, we see through the clouds. Nadal is probably the main culprit. Sod mentioning surprised me a bit though.

[joeri888]

Originally Posted by DropShotArtist

History repeats itself. This is exactly how it was in cycling. In the beginning no one believed or wanted to believe it. Specially not the ardent fangirls. But smart guys like Rochus and me, we see through the clouds. Nadal is probably the main culprit. Sod mention surprised me a bit though.

Don't be naive. Djokovic 2.0 was because of eating glutenfree? Federer found out 'what was necessary to become a grandslam champ' in 2002 when he started working with some unknown italian coach? You can make a case for any top player, and individuals should be held innocent until proven otherwise. However, that doping is a serious problem in all sports can not be and should not be neglected.

[vllaznia]

Just waiting to read again from Mustard saying that Lance Armstrong is innocent because he didn't fail a doping test.

[The Bawss]

Originally Posted by vllaznia

Just waiting to read again from Mustard saying that Lance Armstrong is innocent because he didn't fail a doping test.

Yes, that will be hilarious. I haven't seen him recently but I am looking forward to his reaction to what Lance said on Oprah.

[TMF]

Originally Posted by The Bawss

Yes, that will be hilarious. I haven't seen him recently but I am looking forward to his reaction to what Lance said on Oprah.

It's best for Mustard to admit that he's wrong. Just come out clean like Armstrong did.

[Mustard]

Originally Posted by vllaznia

Just waiting to read again from Mustard saying that Lance Armstrong is innocent because he didn't fail a doping test.

But Lance Armstrong didn't fail a doping test. So where's innocent until proven guilty? The system is full of plea bargains, thereby corrupting the whole process. I don't see how any conviction can be safe in such an environment as that. I read in a newspaper yesterday that the USADA wanted to do a deal with Armstrong to allow him to keep his first 5 Tour de France titles. When Armstrong refused all their plea bargains, and then said that he would no longer defend himself, the USADA went for the maximum punishment, and then the USADA had the audacity to act like a drug free sport was their motivation for throwing the whole damn library at Armstrong. Their real reason was to punish Armstrong for resisting all their plea bargains.

[Clarky21]

Originally Posted by Mustard

But Lance Armstrong didn't fail a doping test. So where's innocent until proven guilty? The system is full of plea bargains, thereby corrupting the whole process. I don't see how any conviction can be safe in such an environment as that. I read in a newspaper yesterday that the USADA wanted to do a deal with Armstrong to allow him to keep his first 5 Tour de France titles. When Armstrong refused all their plea bargains, and then said that he would no longer defend himself, the USADA went for the maximum punishment, and then the USADA had the audacity to act like a drug free sport was their motivation for throwing the whole damn library at Armstrong. Their real reason was to punish Armstrong for resisting all their plea bargains.

He's still a lying, filthy doper. He admitted he doped, and did everything he could do to avoid getting caught. He's scum.

[President]

Originally Posted by Mustard

But Lance Armstrong didn't fail a doping test. So where's innocent until proven guilty? The system is full of plea bargains, thereby corrupting the whole process. I don't see how any conviction can be safe in such an environment as that. I read in a newspaper yesterday that the USADA wanted to do a deal with Armstrong to allow him to keep his first 5 Tour de France titles. When Armstrong refused all their plea bargains, and then said that he would no longer defend himself, the USADA went for the maximum punishment, and then the USADA had the audacity to act like a drug free sport was their motivation for throwing the whole damn library at Armstrong. Their real reason was to punish Armstrong for resisting all their plea bargains.

What? The guy has now apparently ADMITTED to doping. What more do you want?

[dafinch]

Originally Posted by Mustard

But Lance Armstrong didn't fail a doping test. So where's innocent until proven guilty? The system is full of plea bargains, thereby corrupting the whole process. I don't see how any conviction can be safe in such an environment as that. I read in a newspaper yesterday that the USADA wanted to do a deal with Armstrong to allow him to keep his first 5 Tour de France titles. When Armstrong refused all their plea bargains, and then said that he would no longer defend himself, the USADA went for the maximum punishment, and then the USADA had the audacity to act like a drug free sport was their motivation for throwing the whole damn library at Armstrong. Their real reason was to punish Armstrong for resisting all their plea bargains.

So, not only do you seem to be condoning cheating, but also aggressively attacking and threatening to sue those who have the temerity to even accuse you of cheating(which both Armstrong and Jones did). Furthermore, you came to the shocking conclusion that when somebody who is guilty resists plea bargains, he or she tends to get a stiff sentence when they are found guilty. See, that's the whole POINT...

[SLD76]

Originally Posted by Mustard

But Lance Armstrong didn't fail a doping test. So where's innocent until proven guilty? The system is full of plea bargains, thereby corrupting the whole process. I don't see how any conviction can be safe in such an environment as that. I read in a newspaper yesterday that the USADA wanted to do a deal with Armstrong to allow him to keep his first 5 Tour de France titles. When Armstrong refused all their plea bargains, and then said that he would no longer defend himself, the USADA went for the maximum punishment, and then the USADA had the audacity to act like a drug free sport was their motivation for throwing the whole damn library at Armstrong. Their real reason was to punish Armstrong for resisting all their plea bargains.

you are seriously deluded and shameless.

man, there isnt sand deep enough to bury your head in when it comes to athletes you like, I suppose.

[bullfan]

Originally Posted by Mustard

But Lance Armstrong didn't fail a doping test. So where's innocent until proven guilty? The system is full of plea bargains, thereby corrupting the whole process. I don't see how any conviction can be safe in such an environment as that. I read in a newspaper yesterday that the USADA wanted to do a deal with Armstrong to allow him to keep his first 5 Tour de France titles. When Armstrong refused all their plea bargains, and then said that he would no longer defend himself, the USADA went for the maximum punishment, and then the USADA had the audacity to act like a drug free sport was their motivation for throwing the whole damn library at Armstrong. Their real reason was to punish Armstrong for resisting all their plea bargains.

Actually, that is incorrect. Lance did fail a test, and then they backdated a prescription. It's what Emma O'Reilly said, and Lance sued her. He did say he owed her an apology. He called her one of the ones he couldn't remember suing, but they sued everyone.