Has anyone actually been found out to be on a silent ban?

[papertank]

Every time someone is out for a long period of time, like recently Soderling and Nadal, there will always be a few people that say they aren't injured but are on a silent ban for doping. Has this ever actually been the case for anyone? Why is it such a popular response for why someone is out?

[Sabratha]

I don't believe either of them doped and their stories check out.

[ivan_the_terrible]

Originally Posted by papertank

Every time someone is out for a long period of time, like recently Soderling and Nadal, there will always be a few people that say they aren't injured but are on a silent ban for doping. Has this ever actually been the case for anyone? Why is it such a popular response for why someone is out?

We may never know since the ITF is notoriously secretive when it comes to the big names (Agassi & meth).

A big name getting caught & publicly outed would be very detrimental to the image of "tennis is a clean sport".

Some folks believe it is impossible to hide such a secret, but think of the Carl Lewis situation in 1988 - he tested positive leading up to the Olympics and should've never competed in it. However, it was hushed up and he ended winning the gold after Ben Johnson was busted.Lewis' drug use only came to light decades later (not sure about the exact date).

no. if that happened it would no longer be silent. there are plenty of silent bans over the years. you just never heard about them because they were silent.

[DeShaun]

Originally Posted by ivan_the_terrible

We may never know since the ITF is notoriously secretive when it comes to the big names (Agassi & meth).

A big name getting caught & publicly outed would be very detrimental to the image of "tennis is a clean sport".

Some folks believe it is impossible to hide such a secret, but think of the Carl Lewis situation in 1988 - he tested positive leading up to the Olympics and should've never competed in it. However, it was hushed up and he ended winning the gold after Ben Johnson was busted.Lewis' drug use only came to light decades later (not sure about the exact date).

I wonder if authority does not find out, make a judgement call, and proceed on a case-by-case basis in any sport. Take the case of Lewis, in which he tested positive for some relatively "less invasive seeming" light weight bronchial inhibitor, or some such sounding substance. When images of anabolic steroids come to mind, so too did/does imagery of needles and more invasive seeming imagery. Also in the case of Lewis, the vast majority of the Santa Monica track club where he and other Olympic track athletes trained also tested positive for that same bronchial inhibitor, though nobody's levels were off the charts reportedly and so, it seemed not an unhealthy thing to be taking and it was widespread in which many individuals over had been convinced of not only its benefits but also of its "safety;" suggesting not so much the case of one outstandingly evil man's secret desire to cheat at no bounds, as though some common reservoir of peer pressure was poisoning everybody's well, for which authority may have wanted to avoid nailing just one guy to the stake.

[ivan_the_terrible]

Let me add that the knock against the silent ban theory is that the likelihood of a top player getting caught is pretty slim. In order to have a silent ban, one would have to have stringent out of competition testing which doesn't exist today. The majority paltry amount of testing in tennis is done during the slams, sometimes there is no testing during other tournaments!

Remember Odesnik was never caught by testing, he was busted by Australian customs.

For perspective, Victor Conte of Balco fame was quoted as saying 60% of the athletes in past Olympics were on PEDS. How many were caught? Just a few unlucky ones from Eastern Europe! Also of note, 117 athletes were excluded from the Games for drug use before it began- these names were never announced.

[tudwell]

What is the penalty for doping? Puerta got banned for life, didn't he? Is there a policy that allows for only a few-month-long ban, whereby a top player can feign injury and avoid public suspicion?

[ivan_the_terrible]

Originally Posted by DeShaun

I wonder if authority does not find out, make a judgement call, and proceed on a case-by-case basis in any sport. Take the case of Lewis, in which he tested positive for some relatively "less invasive seeming" light weight bronchial inhibitor, or some such sounding substance. When images of anabolic steroids come to mind, so too did/does imagery of needles and more invasive seeming imagery. Also in the case of Lewis, the vast majority of the Santa Monica track club where he and other Olympic track athletes trained also tested positive for that same bronchial inhibitor, though nobody's levels were off the charts reportedly and so, it seemed a not terribly unsafe thing to take and widespread like many individuals over had been convinced of not only its benefits but also of its "safety;" suggesting not so much the case of one outstandingly evil man's secret desire to cheat at no bounds, as rather a larger reservoir of peer pressure somehow. . "poisoning" if you like, everybody's common well.

While I agree it wasn't as potent as steroids, it shows that authorities (despite having rules that say he should be excluded), secretly allowed him to compete. A similar case is that of Hope Solo (Womens soccer goalie)- she tested positive for a masking agent, came up with the usual excuse of "I didn't know etc etc" and was allowed to compete and they won the gold. Glaringly on the USADA website, another athlete (not a big name) using the same drug was suspended for 6 months.

Vamos~

If we knew about it it would not be a silent ban, no?

[ivan_the_terrible]

Originally Posted by tudwell

What is the penalty for doping? Puerta got banned for life, didn't he? Is there a policy that allows for only a few-month-long ban, whereby a top player can feign injury and avoid public suspicion?

Truth is that no one knows. Apparently, the ITF is under no obligation to announce anything.

[DeShaun]

Originally Posted by ivan_the_terrible

While I agree it wasn't as potent as steroids, it shows that authorities (despite having rules that say he should be excluded), secretly allowed him to compete. A similar case is that of Hope Solo (Womens soccer goalie)- she tested positive for a masking agent, came up with the usual excuse of "I didn't know etc etc" and was allowed to compete and they won the gold. Glaringly on the USADA website, another athlete (not a big name) using the same drug was suspended for 6 months.

Maybe the interpretation on rules is subject to the profile of the athlete under question and these "rules" are rather a bundle of suggestive guidelines than any exhaustive collection of cookie cutters.

[Sentinel]

The only confirmed case i know was sureshs who didn't post for 6 months and claimed he was on vacation. However, I am sure he;s off the juice now since his thread are now full of fail.

What is the point of a silent ban ? If the only fallout is that you can't compete for a few months, but no one knows then they might as well just let the person keep competing. Athletics has a 2 year first time ban, second time it's life. What's the point of a short ban ????

[tudwell]

Originally Posted by ivan_the_terrible

Truth is that no one knows. Apparently, the ITF is under no obligation to announce anything.

Interesting. I know some people suspected Henin when she retired so suddenly in 08 but came back later. I can't imagine they would force Nadal to miss only Wimbledon, for example, back in 09 if he had been caught doping. Surely that was a legitimate injury.

[Bartelby]

Tennis is run by big organisations called bureaucracies which run by rules and procedures that are publicly available so if you believe in 'silent bans' you really have lost faith in all public institutions.

[mistik]

I dont buy that silent ban stuff.He was looking very slow against Rasol.The only thing that made that match 5 setter rather than a straight set victory for Rasol is Rafas serve was good that day.

[Arafel]

Originally Posted by ivan_the_terrible

While I agree it wasn't as potent as steroids, it shows that authorities (despite having rules that say he should be excluded), secretly allowed him to compete. A similar case is that of Hope Solo (Womens soccer goalie)- she tested positive for a masking agent, came up with the usual excuse of "I didn't know etc etc" and was allowed to compete and they won the gold. Glaringly on the USADA website, another athlete (not a big name) using the same drug was suspended for 6 months.

It wasn't a masking agent, it was a diuretic. She was taking something prescribed by her doctor that is used to treat menstrual irregularities. If you research it, you'll see that it's actually very likely her explanation is true.

[BrooklynNY]

Originally Posted by Bartelby

Tennis is run by big organisations called bureaucracies which run by rules and procedures that are publicly available so if you believe in 'silent bans' you really have lost faith in all public institutions.

Uhhh yeah.... Public institutions are run by individuals.

Penn State is a very recent example of a public institution failing it's people.

[フェデラー]

Originally Posted by Sentinel

The only confirmed case i know was sureshs who didn't post for 6 months and claimed he was on vacation. However, I am sure he;s off the juice now since his thread are now full of fail.

What is the point of a silent ban ? If the only fallout is that you can't compete for a few months, but no one knows then they might as well just let the person keep competing. Athletics has a 2 year first time ban, second time it's life. What's the point of a short ban ????

That's exactly what the ITF would avoid if these "silent bans" are real. Could you imagine the damage to the image of the sport if one of it's biggest, most important players, Nadal, was caught doping? The "fallout" would be massive. He brings so much money to the sport, rivaled only by Federer, and if people knew Nadal was doping, a lot of people would lose money over it. Keeping the ban short means that he "learns his lesson" (no prize money at all), but the ITF cannot afford to keep him out for too long otherwise they would lose money from him not being at events.

[DeShaun]

Originally Posted by Bartelby

Tennis is run by big organisations called bureaucracies which run by rules and procedures that are publicly available so if you believe in 'silent bans' you really have lost faith in all public institutions.

Why induct all institutions born by the public or its elected officials meant to serve civil society itself into the class of institutions which are essentially private for profit whose only "public" -ness consists in their public availability of their financial statements, their charters, their rules of order, which together singularly really does not seem to qualify them as belonging to the same class of "public institutions" born of the public or its elected officials, meant to serve civil society. C'mon, you're playing sloppy with terms.

[6-1 6-3 6-0]

Originally Posted by decades

no. if that happened it would no longer be silent. there are plenty of silent bans over the years. you just never heard about them because they were silent.

So how did you hear about them?