Gasquet may have tested positive for cocaine

Kaptain Karl said:
But this isn't "the main argument." The topic addresses a player who got caught violating the standards set by (either, or both) the ATP and the ITF. He knew the rules. He violated them. He'll suffer the consequences.

No. The ATP is a Union. Unions frequently set the standards for another person to be part of their group. If they choose not to be part of it, they don't get the benefits.

Not so. He signed a contract to be a Professional Tennis Player. It's a contractual issue; not a legal one.





Except that's not the position of the "authority" in this case.

The Role Model argument is silly.
a) If Hollywood instituted testing like this, the whole place would be shut down.
b) Politicians? Washington DC and at least a third of the State Capitals in the USA would be operating on a Skeleton Crew. (And the argument that Pelosi, Kennedy, Barney Frank, Nixon, Newt or Larry Craig are "role models????" C'mon!)
c) CEO's? That would be up to the Boards of Directors.
d) The whole of society? I suspect you are using argumentum ad absurdum. Or are you promoting a Police State?

It's not a "legal" issue. It's a contractual issue.

Another misdirected point of debate. It's a contractual issue.

It's curious to me that you have spent so many keystrokes addressing the weaker arguments ... and pretending the stronger argument doesn't exist. A few TT-ers have pointed-out cocaine *does* give the user a sense of well-being and euphoria, which certainly can produce better performance. (Oops!)

BUT ... the issue is contractual; not "whether or not cocaine meets the definition of a performance enhancing drug."

How you manage to keep ducking the contractual obligation is a testament to your stubbornness. The difference you keep pretending doesn't exist is, Gasquet signed a contract promising to abide by the rules set forth by the Professional Organization. (Oops!)

A (brief) moment of clarity in your post.

Contracts make no sense? Then he shouldn't have signed it. He'd probably make a great Waiter in a nice restaurant. (Nobody "owes" him a Professional Tennis career.)

- KK
Click to expand...

Kaptain Karl, Thankyou for responding to my comments and ben hurs....your

points are well made and as I admitted later...."under contract" means
since gasquet agreed to this stuff, he signed the paper...he deals with the
consequences..

So not only was he an idiot for taking coke, but also signing the contract.

I also thankyou for narrowing the debate down to the very *CRUX* of the issue....the Contract that these guys sign

I feel sorry for these ATP guys, they are forced to sign contracts that
intrude their privacy.

KK is correct on my first two points(i'm wrong)...but the problem is it leads onto
another issue... are these contracts a breach of a persons rights?

Wasn't Nadal complaining about the intrusive nature of blood tests and so forth just after the Australian Open.

IF the ATP is supposed to protect players rights, how about protecting their privacy Kaptain Karl?
 
sureshs said:
Contract argument reminds me of the exploitative employment "contracts" of yesteryear which had to be knocked down in courts, one by one. When there were no other job options, employees signed off on whatever they were offered. Some contracts said they could be discriminated and harassed, but would not be able to have their day in court. Eventually, such clauses were declared illegal and void.

A professional tennis player really does not have any other option to play tennis other than joining the ATP. It is not like he can be an independent contracter and apply for participation. The contracts are also made with players who have barely reached the age of majority.

While in no way agreeing with Gasquet's drug abuse (if it is eventually upheld after due process), I think focusing on narrow contractual issues is not the issue here.
Click to expand...

maybe i should shut up and let this guy talk.

Some children are forced to sign unfair contracts that breach their human rights in third world countries, so do we just take it that these contracts
are ok and the child is an an idiot breaking one of it's "rules".

Secondly, about cocaine as a performing enhancing drug...link thanks
and then I will shut up....

PS: in no way do I condon what gasquet did either, i think he's an idiot
for taking coke..it's can be addictive too, but I waht hate to see this OP:

"Player banned two years for smoking pot" thus my emphasis on privacy.

PSS: gasquet hasn't been confirmed yet as taking coke, so maybe I should stop
assuming he did it.
 
Last edited:
Pete Bodo has a good article on this:
http://tennisworld.typepad.com/tennisworld/2009/05/richard.html

Some quotes from the article:
"Coke isn't classed as a performance-enhancing drug because it's a short term stimulant, and once its effects wear off the user is somewhat debilitated - not exactly the state in which you wish to find yourself midway through the third-set in a match at Roland Garros."

"I feel torn about the way recreational drugs are part of the drug-testing regimen. It just makes the game look bad when a player gets caught - and they inevitably will get caught - doing something that so many of their players peers have done, or will do. By trying to show the world that the sport is squeaky clean, tennis ends up making itself look bad by embracing standards that are an especially distasteful blend of unrealistic and dehumanizing."

"The powers that be ought to do everything to ensure that the game is clean and free of performance-enhancing drugs, but that's where it ends. Cocaine is a "recreational" drug; tennis-playing users enjoy no professional benefit, and very likely suffer serious disadvantages from using it."

"Besides, what do I care if Richard Gasquet uses cocaine, as long as it isn't performance enhancing and he's not driving the school bus carrying my kid, or operating the the crane I have to stand under waiting for the light to change?"

Couldn't agree more ;)
 
^ Bodo doesn't give a damn about Gasquet.
I do.
Gasquet is still a kid - in my eyes, at least - and if a punishment or consequence can make him think twice about going down a path that is likely to do him - and those around him - harm, then I think that's a good thing.

Bodo has never been mistaken for an intelligent human.

If you want someone who exaggerates and sensationalizes, while twisting and omitting truths, and whose main goal seems to be to make himself appear 'cool' - Bodo's your guy.

But if you want honest, straightforward, no nonsense opinion, I strongly advise to look elsewhere.
 
Last edited:
Deuce said:
^ Bodo doesn't give a damn about Gasquet.
I do.
Gasquet is still a kid - in my eyes, at least - and if a punishment or consequence can make him think twice about going down a path that is likely to do him - and those around him - harm, then I think that's a good thing.

Bodo has never been mistaken for an intelligent human.

If you want someone who exaggerates and sensationalizes, while twisting and omitting truths, and whose main goal seems to be to make himself appear 'cool' - Bodo's your guy.

But if you want honest, straightforward, no nonsense opinion, I strongly advise to look elsewhere.
Click to expand...

Deuce, I also think bodo is a twit,but on this issue I think Bodo is
portraying the big picture quite nicely.

in response to what you just wrote...is banning him the right thing to do
anyway? He needs conselling and a mentor/someone to keep an eye on him
just banning him and giving him total freedom may well have the opposite
effect...he does more coke and gives up on his career.

anyway....the ban is the rule and that's that....gasquets future
is not the point I'm trying to raise :

my point is this...in a nut shell:

"the ATP want a TOTAL squeaky clean image and i don't know why but they do,probably helps them sell tickets is their thinking and thats fine but invading
the privacy of an individual, often not even at competition, is going
beyond the pale. To put it bluntly, it is an invasion of human rights for
the personal gain of another party. the ATP takes in all the gatemoney"

just KK and I and many others were debating about whether

a) what is the realtionship between gasquet and atp

i debated it was individual contrator -individual contrator

b) why is cocaine on the banned substances list, and in what capacity?

read this link about wada rules: 7th paragraph down

http://www.velonews.com/article/77383/boonen-tests-positive-for-cocaine

thus a huge point would be when and where gasquet was tested.

c) the CONTRACT...and my argument that the ATP contracts these players
are signing are suspiciously, if not over the line of breaching human rights
if the atp contract was brought into a court of law.

link 2: http://sports.in.msn.com/stories/article.aspx?cp-documentid=1824862

NOW ...I'm more than willing to admit that I'm wrong because I still
don't know some important information.....

was gasquet seen as "in competition"when he took that test?

If he was , obviously some of my arguments against the ATP fall down.
 
sureshs said:
Contract argument reminds me of the exploitative employment "contracts" of yesteryear which had to be knocked down in courts, one by one. When there were no other job options, employees signed off on whatever they were offered. Some contracts said they could be discriminated and harassed, but would not be able to have their day in court. Eventually, such clauses were declared illegal and void.
Click to expand...
Apples and oranges. The bolded part above doesn't apply either. He has many career opportunities before him.

... I think focusing on narrow contractual issues is not the issue here.
Click to expand...
We don't agree.





topher.juan said:
Pete Bodo has a good article on this:
Click to expand...
Hmm. This presumes you think Bodo has the ability to write a "good article." I think Bodo writes "for his own amazement." I think he's generally a hack.

Some quotes from the article:
Click to expand...
I congratulate you, topher. Most people excerpt articles pretty poorly on forums. You seem to have selected just the right portions. (This coming from someone who doesn't agree with your stated position on the issue.)

________________

<Mod Mode> TT isn't the place to argue to Legalize Recreational Drugs Now!, or Hemp Lover's Unite. Go to those sites if you wish to advance such issues. </Mod Mode>

________________


I don't know enough about Cocaine to state opinions with the confidence Bodo does. (I'm not asking for anyone's personal experiences -- which would probable be zapped anyway. I'm merely stating what, to me, seem like some obvious rhetorical questions....)

Bodo said:
Coke isn't classed as a performance-enhancing drug because it's a short term stimulant, and once its effects wear off the user is somewhat debilitated - not exactly the state in which you wish to find yourself midway through the third-set in a match at Roland Garros.
Click to expand...
How does Bodo know this (the bolded part)? Is it accurate?

It just makes the game look bad when a player gets caught - and they inevitably will get caught - doing something that so many of their players peers have done, or will do. By trying to show the world that the sport is squeaky clean, tennis ends up making itself look bad by embracing standards that are an especially distasteful blend of unrealistic and dehumanizing.
Click to expand...
I see and hear this kind of defense frequently. Usually, it comes from someone who is a drug user themselves and hopes to ... normalize ... the behavior.

And I don't agree with his bolded portions. It is NOT "inevitable". It is neither distasteful, unrealistic nor dehumanizing to expect Pro players to not be idiotic.

... tennis-playing users enjoy no professional benefit, and very likely suffer serious disadvantages from using it.
Click to expand...
Same as above.... I question these assertions.

Besides, what do I care if Richard Gasquet uses cocaine, as long as it isn't performance enhancing ...
Click to expand...
Circular reasoning. Bodo would not make a very good high school debator.

- KK
 
Two years is a long time. A good fright of about 6 months would have been enough. We all do daft things in our lives, which is one big learning curve after all.
 
as none of us know the exact particulars, i think it is foolish to draw too many conclusions about gasquet's situation. i mean, a couple of days ago (with very little information) some posters were bemoaning his fate and implying he had a serious drug problem or might, in fact, be an addict! people, if you are pulled over once for speeding, it doesn't necessarily mean that you are a ****** on the roads!

in any case, i have no issue with a ban if the case is proven. i am in no position to judge gasquet's actions, nor his personal habits. i also admit to not knowing much about the tour's drug policies, my assumption being that most real pros don't take enhancers cos it's not that sort of sport. as with many drug policies, the penalty for getting caught may seem overly extreme. but as the pros are aware of the policies and penalties, you can't argue ignorance once you're busted. in order to stay out of trouble (for the duration of your career) i suppose you should exercise extreme care.
 
Deuce said:
^ I hope you're a college kid who still has the opportunity to grow up.
If you're older than that, you've my sympathy for seemingly being stuck with the thoughts you express.


^ It is interesting that you seem to be entirely unaware that the "media attention" is the vehicle by which children are influenced... and that is how the 'role model' context enters the equation.
Click to expand...
That's pathetic. Why not at least try to form an argument using reason and logic?
 
Julieta said:
My whole point is that it is a bad idea. And if someone does something dumb, whether it is "my business" or not, I have the right to express my opinion about that person's stupidity.
Click to expand...
Who is saying you don't have a right to express your opinion about someone's stupidity? That's far different from supporting an intrusive and unnecessary ATP policy.
 
Julieta said:
I think it is the ITF in this case. I am not sure what the current doping program policy is (you can read it on their website though) but my assumption is that ITF adopted WADA rules which includes out of competition testing. How much people get away with does vary by sport, just take a look at the traps some guys are sporting in the playoffs. The thing is that a lot of this isnt necessarily logical or fair with respect to privacy but when people are in the public eye they get a lot of benefits - huge paychecks and access to a different world - but at the same time one slip and they can fall right back down. High return, but high risk. It is not only drugs but other activities as well (Michael Vick). Interestingly in my global travels I have met a lot of people who have told me that was always one of the things they admired about America - that if people did something wrong, they paid for it, while in other countries money could buy you out of trouble. I dont think America is that way anymore though considering the whole Iraq mess but that is another topic all together.
Click to expand...
.
Your viewpoint boils down to: There are rules in place, players know about the rules, and it doesn't matter if the rules are stupid because players make a lot of money so that makes up for it. And if you think that, before the ATP makes a rule, it should consider things like logic and personal privacy issues, you don't understand because you don't have personal experiences with professional sports. Unfortunately, I'm not even exaggerating.
 
West Coast Ace said:
Are you joking? a) of course he is an independent contractor - the players aren't hired and fired and aren't employed by the ATP - they fill out an entry form every week - depending on their ranking they may or may not get into an event; b) of course he has 'other options' - he could be a club pro. Or he could go start a rival tennis tour with no drug rules.
Click to expand...

They even get pensions from the ATP. The ATP is a monopoly and all players belong to it.

Can you play in a Masters and not be a member of the ATP?

Being a club pro is way beneath his level and you know it.
 
Peter Bodo's point about cocaine not being performance enhancing is taken, but look at it from a practical point of view. Imagine you are a lawyer writing the contract for the ATP. You list many drugs, throw in some blanket statements too, and then add a footnote: cocaine is permitted, but left to law enforcement officials in their own juridictions. Will this ever happen? I don't think so. People want players to be clean - they don't want to tell their children: hit a backhand like the Gasquet guy but leave out the coke part.
 
Deuce said:
The best 'life advice' I've ever heard is the very simple:
"Do whatever you want in life - just be sure of two things - don't knowingly hurt yourself or anyone else. Apart from that, do whatever the hell you want."
Click to expand...

Simple statements are not useful in complex situations, they just serve to make us feel good. As Einstein said: Keep it simple; as simple as possible, but no simpler.

Your two golden rules have many holes. If everyone followed them, no person unaffected by discrimination would speak out against it. Gandhi was doing fine as an England-trained lawyer under British rule. Most of the people who fought and died for civil rights were not black. Not to mention that militaries have to be disbanded since they have to actively seek out and kill people.

As for the second rule, extreme sports participants would never exist. They have trouble finding health insurance, so the risk of injury and death is provably real. You can always tell them: you have a different option. You could even say that the great vaccine inventors of the past were immoral, because some of them tried it on themselves and died. Not to mention Father Damien in the Hawaiian islands who helped lepers knowing fully that leprosy was contagious, and died of it.
 
Bodo, once again did not do his research. The tennis 'powers-that-be' do not choose whether to test for cocaine or not. The International Tennis Federation, like so many other sports federations, is a participant of WADA, which sets the doping standards for all sports. In that context, cocaine is a stimulant which can enhance performance is some sports and is therefore in WADA's banned list.

The WADA banned substance list is not an a-la-carte menu, where participants can pick which drugs to test for. They are bound to test for all of them and have policies in place to deal with positive results.

So, this is not a matter of the ITF or ATP playing moral big brother (not that they wouldn't be capable of doing so), but an accross-the-board doping policy, of which Gasquet was, or should have been, well aware of.

As for being wrongly accused, someone above mentioned Rusedski. He was not wrongly accused. The substance was found in his body. That wasn't in question, what was in question is how it got there. Same with the nandrolone case that ensnared a number of players some years ago. The question wasn't whether the substance was present in their urine (it was), but how it was administered to them.
 
Dgpsx7 said:
I like his backhand a lot more than I like him but I don't think he should get suspended for two years. He should get a fine and maybe a small suspension. He has great skills and I enjoy watching him play but his mental strength is that of a 16 year old girl just like the body of Gilles Simon.
Click to expand...

the rules are in place, he knows what is at stake. the amount of "time" does not matter, but the stupidity of the act does. just curious why he should get a slap on the wrist? what will a fine do?
 
thalivest said:
If it is true no big loss. A blip on the radar in the big picture of tennis. The only place he will be remotedly missed is TW World where inexplicably he is one of the most overhyped players out there here. I laugh at some of the comments in this thread "a rising star of tennis", "so talented", LOL! He isnt even a top 20 player these days and most of the time, his stay in the top 10 was a cup of coffee one, even shorter than Blake's, he has one Wimbledon semi and no other quarters of slams, no Masters titles, and he is approaching 23. With Nadal, Murray, Djokovic, Del Potro, Monfils, Tsonga, and others all his age group or younger he is not even a noteable rising star any longer. How would anyone care or it look bad for tennis. Only the most diehard tennis fans even know his name.
Click to expand...

Exactly why I think today's players or today's competition is not what it was years ago. Only a handlful of players that are good/consistent. To have Gasquet even as a top 20 player is a joke. He has no heart and gives little effort. His pull out at the USO was the last straw for me...bye bye Richard!
 
Azzurri said:
:roll:

in what amount? you must have watched a Seinfeld episode lately.
Click to expand...
I was thinking the same thing. Have been meaning to look it up on one of the Urban Legend websites. Until RG can tell us where he bought the bread product with the evil poppy seeds, this ranks right there with 'the dog ate my homework'.
 
Larry Lava said:
Yes, there is a relationship between poppy seeds and opiates but since cocaine is not an opiate, this article doesn't address Gasquet's positive cocaine test.
Click to expand...

What about this:

"Poppy seeds ( in a large ammount) as well as darvocet and other opioids pain pills will give you a positive test for opioids , never cocaine."

So cocaine test failure cannot be blamed on poppy seeds?
 
skip1969 said:
as none of us know the exact particulars, i think it is foolish to draw too many conclusions about gasquet's situation. i mean, a couple of days ago (with very little information) some posters were bemoaning his fate and implying he had a serious drug problem or might, in fact, be an addict! people, if you are pulled over once for speeding, it doesn't necessarily mean that you are a ****** on the roads!

in any case, i have no issue with a ban if the case is proven. i am in no position to judge gasquet's actions, nor his personal habits. i also admit to not knowing much about the tour's drug policies, my assumption being that most real pros don't take enhancers cos it's not that sort of sport. as with many drug policies, the penalty for getting caught may seem overly extreme. but as the pros are aware of the policies and penalties, you can't argue ignorance once you're busted. in order to stay out of trouble (for the duration of your career) i suppose you should exercise extreme care.
Click to expand...

Poppy seeds can cause (or rather used to cause before the higher cutoff) false positives in urine drug screens, which are called screens because while they are highly sensitive, they have low specificity (ie: can react with similar substances and give false positives). Drug screens on their own are useless in legal situations. They must be followed by confirmatory testing. The confirmatory tests are much more specific for the substance being tested for, and are not affected by poppy seeds. Gas chromatography-mass spectrometry is the usual confirmatory method, and if you look it up you will find that it is much more specific than the usual immunoassays, which are the methods used for screens.
 
sureshs said:
What about this:

"Poppy seeds ( in a large ammount) as well as darvocet and other opioids pain pills will give you a positive test for opioids , never cocaine."

So cocaine test failure cannot be blamed on poppy seeds?
Click to expand...

NO... any ingestion of Opiates will not produce a fail in tropane alkaloids...
 
Two years would be too long if he indeed is found guilty, cocaine is not cheating but i must say it is pretty stupid

It should be said, Gasquet aint the smartest guy to ever hit the tour thats for sure
 
sureshs said:
\People want players to be clean - they don't want to tell their children: hit a backhand like the Gasquet guy but leave out the coke part.
Click to expand...

that seems irrelevant to me. Richie Gasquet has been playing tennis since he was a child just like many of us, but he was actually talented enough to reach SEVEN in the world. that is an amazing achievement but that should not force him to change his personality simply because people see him on tv.

if someone starts doing coke because Richard Gasquet does it #1 they are extremely weak of mind and #2 they have inattentive parents
 
Kaptain Karl said:
Apples and oranges. The bolded part above doesn't apply either. He has many career opportunities before him.

Hmm. This presumes you think Bodo has the ability to write a "good article." I think Bodo writes "for his own amazement." I think he's generally a hack.

- KK
Click to expand...

In response to what you wrote, i agree bodo can sometimes write as if he trying to get as many comments as possible, for example, notice how harsh
he was at the beginning of the article on Gasquet..the guy reached #7!
he knew some poster would say "that's harsh"

I also agree this is not the place for legalisation debate etc.. 10 char.

where i disagree is getting back to the CRUX of the matter the CONTRACT and where you replied to sureshs.

I don't think this is an employer-employee relationship..more like individual
business to individual business....

the point? well how does this contract stand up in court if it's breaching privacy?

Obviously what is really important is whether Gasquet was seen as in
competition or not?

and yes, youre'n right about one thing cocaine is on wada list but only in comp....link

read this link about wada rules: 7th paragraph down

http://www.velonews.com/article/7738...ve-for-cocaine

Thanks for your replies
 
obsessedtennisfandisorder said:
I don't think this is an employer-employee relationship..more like individual
business to individual business....

the point? well how does this contract stand up in court if it's breaching privacy?

Obviously what is really important is whether Gasquet was seen as in
competition or not?
Click to expand...

according to this link:

http://www.cbssports.com/tennis/story/11728284

given he pulled out before his second round match

I guess he would be seen as in competition....so i lose on the "own time" argument....well done KK.

So that basically means Gasquet is screwed big time.....IF...the later results are also positive.

I still think the ATP policy is disturbingingly big brother contracts thou...thats for another time.
 
obsessedtennisfandisorder said:
... where i disagree is getting back to the CRUX of the matter the CONTRACT and where you replied to sureshs.

I don't think this is an employer-employee relationship..more like individual
business to individual business....

the point? well how does this contract stand up in court if it's breaching privacy?
Click to expand...
You are losing me. The contract is more like a Union contract. To play Pro tennis, you join the Union and agree to play by their rules. (It isn't an employer/employee thing.)



obsessedtennisfandisorder said:
I guess he would be seen as in competition....so i lose on the "own time" argument....well done KK.
Click to expand...
Thanks. But I wasn't so focused on that point.

- KK
 
sureshs said:
Simple statements are not useful in complex situations, they just serve to make us feel good. As Einstein said: Keep it simple; as simple as possible, but no simpler.

Your two golden rules have many holes. If everyone followed them, no person unaffected by discrimination would speak out against it. Gandhi was doing fine as an England-trained lawyer under British rule. Most of the people who fought and died for civil rights were not black. Not to mention that militaries have to be disbanded since they have to actively seek out and kill people.

As for the second rule, extreme sports participants would never exist. They have trouble finding health insurance, so the risk of injury and death is provably real. You can always tell them: you have a different option. You could even say that the great vaccine inventors of the past were immoral, because some of them tried it on themselves and died. Not to mention Father Damien in the Hawaiian islands who helped lepers knowing fully that leprosy was contagious, and died of it.
Click to expand...
^ Those are such enormous leaps of logic that I cannot begin to address them.
Rather surprising for you.

Beacon Hill said:
That's pathetic. Why not at least try to form an argument using reason and logic?
Click to expand...
^ You mean something along the lines of your highly intellectual reply to me above?

I did respond to you in detail. It was deleted, along with the posts of yours to which I responded.
Then, the next day, the said posts were 'reinstated'. That was the last I saw of them. If they are still there or not, I don't know. But feel free to check for yourself, and read what I wrote if it's still there.
 
Deuce said:
^ Those are such enormous leaps of logic that I cannot begin to address them.
Rather surprising for you.
Click to expand...

Exactly my point. When you start looking at everything, simple rules don't make sense any more. They start having so many exceptions that they are not simple and they are not rules. What is an enormous leap of logic for you is the main focus of life for someone else, for whom the rule does not make sense.
 
This just in today, saw it in the paper: Obama admin to move away from "the war on drugs" mentality and emphasize rehab and treatment over prison.

Long overdue.

But the little we have seen of this guy, he might make a 180 degree turnaround like he did with release of torture photos. Now he also wants to detain people indefinitely without trial.

And people thought he was different from Bush. Serves them right though, for believing politicians.
 
sureshs said:
This just in today, saw it in the paper: Obama admin to move away from "the war on drugs" mentality and emphasize rehab and treatment over prison.

Long overdue.

But the little we have seen of this guy, he might make a 180 degree turnaround like he did with release of torture photos. Now he also wants to detain people indefinitely without trial.

And people thought he was different from Bush. Serves them right though, for believing politicians.
Click to expand...

please leave politics out of this forum, but since you opened the door, the reason behind not releasing the photos seems pretty valid. What will it do for us? Let us see pictures of crap we can probably already imagine. What will it do for the troops in harms way? **** off the takfiri even more.

But anyway, what was your point? Except that the war on drugs is ludicrous; that we can agree upon.
 
sureshs said:
This just in today, saw it in the paper: Obama admin to move away from "the war on drugs" mentality and emphasize rehab and treatment over prison.

Long overdue.

But the little we have seen of this guy, he might make a 180 degree turnaround like he did with release of torture photos. Now he also wants to detain people indefinitely without trial.

And people thought he was different from Bush. Serves them right though, for believing politicians.
Click to expand...

You can add Pelosi to that list. EVERYTHING that comes out of her mouth has changed in the last 3 days, let alone the last three terms of congress.
 
Gasquet apparently had 3x (151 ng/ml) as much cocaine in his system as would have been needed to trigger a positive test (50 ng/ml).

I have no idea how much that equates to in terms of taking it, or quite how low the threshold is in the first place though
 
Last edited:
shadows said:
Gasquet apparently had 3x (151 ng/ml) as much cocaine in his system as would have been needed to trigger a positive test (50 ng/ml).

I have no idea how much that equates to in terms of taking it, or quite how low the threshold is in the first place though
Click to expand...

it is a really low threshold. You would pass a drugs test for the US military with 151ng it said in a newspaper article I read.
 
yeah I don't know how much coke that is exactly but I do know it leaves your system it just a few days.
 
Let's put this in perspective...

I read John McEnroe's autobiography, "You Cannot Be Serious" a few years ago, and I came away with the impression that Mac, who idolized Vitas Gerulaitis (who had a serious cocaine problem) probably did some coke too (perhaps this was partially the explanation for his abysmal 1983 season) along with being married to Tatum O'Neil (another big-time druggy). Mac doesn't come out and admit this, but I get the impression that along with Vitas, Mac and Borg and a lot of other big-time stars were doing recreational drugs now and then back when the tennis boom was at its peak and the top stars were on par with rock stars in terms of popularity.

So why act like Gasquet is sub-human if he tooted a little coke. I grew up during those years and had lots of pot and coke shoved at me by friends... but never cared anything for the stuff. Clinton, Bush and Obama have all done plenty of drugs and booze. Jeeeezzz! Grow up, people. Banning Gasquet for two years for this is idiocy! Why not ban McEnroe from the announcer's booth or the senior tour?

I've criticized Gasquet for not being truly fit. How many times has he been up a set and break on Nadal, Murray and a lot of other really talented players only to fade and lose because a lack of true fitness. The talent is there. And I'd still rather watch Gasquet play -- for his unique and beautiful style of play -- than just about anyone else on the tour.

Gasquet has a lot to offer men's tennis. Perhaps a six month ban would be apporpiate, if Gasquet is truly guilty. It might give him time to get over some minor injuries, improve his fitness and tweak his game... get over burnout, whatever, and return with some passion.

Although that said, I don't think one can say Gasquet has not put forth an effor this year. After all, he's 2-0 this year against Tsonga and 1-0 this year against Simon. Head-to-head against his fellow Frenchmen, he's still the best French player on the tour in 2009. If he's managed to play that well and remain just outside the top 20 while being indifferent, injured and snorting coke, then this guy is one helluva talent.

Anything more than six months is totally counterproductive for everyone concerned: Gasquet, the ATP and the fans.
 
^^^^ great points. I could see if coke somehow was a performance enhancer, but give the guy a break, 2 years is pretty harsh punishment for succumbing to the forces of the Miami party machine, if you will.

*shakes fists in anger at Miami*
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

F
Gasquet Possitive For Cocaine?¡¡¡
Replies
2
Views
764
falcon12
F
J
Gasquet cleared
Replies
24
Views
2K
roysid
roysid
O
Gasquet on the Adria and ATP Tour
Replies
25
Views
2K
EdSWright
E
T
Why doesn't the ITF test for CERA?
Replies
28
Views
3K
NamRanger
N
J
  • Locked
Ugo Humbert tests positive for Covid-19
Replies
13
Views
1K
ronalditop
R
Back
Top