Maria Sliding Down

[2good4U]

The Russians were there. They just didn't call themselves Russians. Honestly who gives a crap about the cry baby Russians. Seriously unless you are Russian I don't get it. And People like Maria have houses all over the USA and barely goes to Russia. Even she doesn't give two craps about Russia. She lives in LA. I mean she could live on the Black Sea and hang out there. But she lives in LA. As screwed up as the USA is I guess its better than Russia.

The USA is better, IF you're a narcissistic hedonist!

 

[captainbryce]

Some sports body arbitrarily decides to ban medicine that had been perfectly fine for 15 years and then somehow she is labeled the bad girl when a month into the ban she tests positive for the same medicine she was using for 15 years. Cilic tested positive for a banned substance too and was suspended. Why not focus on him. Serena allegedly threatened to kill a lineswoman. I think she is more of a piece or garbage.

Serena has 17 known tue's. Yet nothing from the "keep tennis clean" crowd.

There’s a reason for that. TUEs are allowed, and Sharapova never requested one. She just took a banned substance (secretly, without permission from the WTA, with no documented medical indication). Therefore, Serena is clean; Sharapova is dirty! There’s a difference between a player taking a substance (continuously for 10 years) that according to its inventor “optimizing the use of oxygen" and that it "allows athletes to train under maximum strain”, which is banned in the United States, for a supposed heart condition (that no WTA doctor knew about) and diabetes (which was never disclosed), and a player with a known history of medical problems throughout her career (including recurrent pulmonary embolisms) taking Prednisolone while they are actually sick, with permission to treat a viral chest infection.

WADA’s code says that retroactive exemptions may be granted after an athlete needs to be treated for an “acute medical condition”. Williams can justifiably claim that she fell into this category, judging by the extensive behind-the-scenes footage included in the movie documentary Serena. The footage showed her bedbound and struggling with a chest infection in the build-up to the French Open final.

Apples and oranges!

 

[thrust]

She has been. I'd definitely say that the WTA has a lot more competition than it did years back when it was more predictable.

IMO, recent peak WTA years were 1998-2008. Today's top players, besides Serena and Venus, would be blown off the court by peak: Serena, Venus, Henin, Kim, Davenport, Hingis, Mauresmo, Pierce, ASV, Graf, Jankovic, Ivonovic.

 

[thrust]

IMO, recent peak WTA years were 1998-2008. Today's top players, besides Serena and Venus, would be blown off the court by peak: Serena, Venus, Henin, Kim, Davenport, Hingis, Mauresmo, Pierce, ASV, Graf, Jankovic, Ivonovic.

Oops, forgot peak Sharapova, in that era. Did her drug-medicine help?

 

[Bartelby]

Sharapova took a banned substance for less than a month.

There’s a reason for that. TUEs are allowed, and Sharapova never requested one. She just took a banned substance (secretly, without permission from the WTA, with no documented medical indication). Therefore, Serena is clean; Sharapova is dirty! There’s a difference between a player taking a substance (continuously for 10 years) that according to its inventor “optimizing the use of oxygen" and that it "allows athletes to train under maximum strain”, which is banned in the United States, for a supposed heart condition (that no WTA doctor knew about) and diabetes (which was never disclosed), and a player with a known history of medical problems throughout her career (including recurrent pulmonary embolisms) taking Prednisolone while they are actually sick, with permission to treat a viral chest infection.

WADA’s code says that retroactive exemptions may be granted after an athlete needs to be treated for an “acute medical condition”. Williams can justifiably claim that she fell into this category, judging by the extensive behind-the-scenes footage included in the movie documentary Serena. The footage showed her bedbound and struggling with a chest infection in the build-up to the French Open final.

Apples and oranges!

 

[AM75]

There’s a reason for that. TUEs are allowed, and Sharapova never requested one. She just took a banned substance (secretly, without permission from the WTA, with no documented medical indication). Therefore, Serena is clean; Sharapova is dirty! There’s a difference between a player taking a substance (continuously for 10 years) that according to its inventor “optimizing the use of oxygen" and that it "allows athletes to train under maximum strain”, which is banned in the United States, for a supposed heart condition (that no WTA doctor knew about) and diabetes (which was never disclosed), and a player with a known history of medical problems throughout her career (including recurrent pulmonary embolisms) taking Prednisolone while they are actually sick, with permission to treat a viral chest infection.

WADA’s code says that retroactive exemptions may be granted after an athlete needs to be treated for an “acute medical condition”. Williams can justifiably claim that she fell into this category, judging by the extensive behind-the-scenes footage included in the movie documentary Serena. The footage showed her bedbound and struggling with a chest infection in the build-up to the French Open final.

Apples and oranges!

It's not banned in the USA. It's not approved by the Food and Drug Administration, b/c Grindeks seemingly never applied for an approval in the USA.

Apples and oranges!

 

[Deleted member 688153]

She's done. Let's be honest here.

Not fussed if she doped or not. Not like she was breaking any records (unlike lots of other Russian and East German athletes decades ago who were known dopers as part of state-sponsored doping programs for propaganda purposes).

The right side won there too, so whatever. Life goes on. It's in the past. We know which records are tainted, so no harm done.

As for Pova, I wish her a happy and safe retirement.

 

[SeeItHitIt]

Serena has 17 known tue's. Yet nothing from the "keep tennis clean" crowd.

TUE's, my pet peeve. If a TUE is OK with the governing bodies, then it should be public. It's not private medical information and this is not HIPAA. There should be a running list of all current (and former) players (WTA and ATP). For my part, I'd love to see a timeline graph showing match and tournament wins vs. granted TUE's.

 

[Service Ace]

TUE's, my pet peeve. If a TUE is OK with the governing bodies, then it should be public. It's not private medical information and this is not HIPAA. There should be a running list of all current (and former) players (WTA and ATP). For my part, I'd love to see a timeline graph showing match and tournament wins vs. granted TUE's.

Another thing I detest about humanity is how people let their agenda driven ideologies fool them into thinking whatever trash opinion they dream up are actually facts

https://abovethelaw.com/2015/07/athletes-do-not-leave-their-hipaa-rights-at-the-locker-room-door/

 

[Bartelby]

The very fact that a player receives a TUE and when they receive it is a publishable matter as it is administrative decision and not a medical one.

The medical details subtending the request and its granting could still be private.

In any event, you could make the consideration of an administrative exemption dependent on a certain level of authorisation of disclosure.

Another thing I detest about humanity is how people let their agenda driven ideologies fool them into thinking whatever trash opinion they dream up are actually facts

https://abovethelaw.com/2015/07/athletes-do-not-leave-their-hipaa-rights-at-the-locker-room-door/

 

[Service Ace]

You're an anonymous person on the web making a claim that you have/had access to meldonium and used it and saw results and then claim that that somehow removes all debate from the issue.

That's not how science works. How long did you use it? What was the regimen? How long did you take it before becoming aware of this noticeable transformation? What was the dosage? Doesn't sound like there was a blind in the test, let alone a double blind. So you have no idea if you were given a placebo if you would have come to the same results.

Your anecdotal evidence is only important to you, not to the rest of the world. And I'm not doubting the conclusions you drew but without the scientific method it's just anecdotal.

"...taints all her titles."

None of her titles are tainted because it wasn't banned.

Scenario:
Caffeine is the no. 1 PED in sports today (THAT is not debatable. The science is in. Multiple studies have been done. It's a PED). It is ubiquitous in endurance sports like iron man/tri athetes. Gels, drinks... it's everywhere.

WADA is again considering banning it (it was banned at one point then removed). Should they decide to ban it would that then taint every record held by every athlete who used caffeine?

First of all, comparing a naturally occurring substance like caffeine to a man made synthetic drug is desperate. Literally comparing apples and oranges.

Secondly, the operative word in the phrase "anecdotal evidence" is evidence and it remains evidence whether it hurts your case or not. And the fact that the empirical evidence has been corroborated lends more credence to the evidence being accurate than not.

Thirdly, there is scientific evidence to support the fact that it is a drug which was supported by a Word Doping Agency which has done much more investigative and scientific study into the drug than you, some "anonymous person on the internet making a claim that drug you have no experience with and have done no study into whatsoever is completely harmless."

The fact is when it comes to who is more credible when speaking on the subject, you're speaking solely from the POV of your agenda whereas the governing agencies, medical practitioners and subjects with first hand experience on the matter ALL contradict that bullish and flat out incorrect agenda you're trying to put forward.

 

[Bartelby]

There is nothing natural about caffeine, just as there is nothing natural about Corn Flakes.

WADA has explicitly said that it has no pharmacological evidence that Meldonium is a PED.

They banned it based on one sociological study that was funded by USADA on the grounds that its use was contrary to the spirit of competition.

This is about as vague as it gets.

So little did WADA know about the drug that they never even know the excretion rate for the drug and banned innocent athletes, as a consequence, who had stopped taking it.

First of all, comparing a naturally occurring substance like caffeine to a man made synthetic drug is desperate. Literally comparing apples and oranges.

Secondly, the operative word in the phrase "anecdotal evidence" is evidence and it remains evidence whether it hurts your case or not. And the fact that the empirical evidence has been corroborated lends more credence to the evidence being accurate than not.

Thirdly, there is scientific evidence to support the fact that it is a drug which was supported by a Word Doping Agency which has done much more investigative and scientific study into the drug than you, some "anonymous person on the internet making a claim that drug you have no experience with and have done no study into whatsoever is completely harmless."

The fact is when it comes to who is more credible when speaking on the subject, you're speaking solely from the POV of your agenda whereas the governing agencies, medical practitioners and subjects with first hand experience on the matter ALL contradict that bullish and flat out incorrect agenda you're trying to put forward.

 

[Service Ace]

There is nothing natural about caffeine, just as there is nothing natural about Corn Flakes.

WADA has explicitly said that it has no pharmacological evidence that Meldonium is a PED.

They banned it based on one sociological study that was funded by USADA on the grounds that its use was contrary to the spirit of competition.

This is about as vague as it gets.

So little did WADA know about the drug that they never even know the excretion rate for the drug and banned innocent athletes, as a consequence, who had stopped taking it.

Caffeine is an alkaloid occurring naturally in some 60 plant species, of which cocoa beans, kola nuts, tea leaves and coffee beans are the most well-known. Other natural sources of caffeine include yerba maté, guarana berries, guayusa, and the yaupon holly.

Studies have shown that meldonium increases cognition and mental performance by reducing amyloid beta deposition in the hippocampus.[13]

Meldonium's inhibition of γ-butyrobetaine hydroxylase gives a half maximal inhibitory concentration (IC50) value of 62 micromolar, which other study authors have described as "potent."[19] Meldonium is an example of an inhibitor that acts as a non-peptidyl substrate mimic.[20]

WADA classes the drug as a metabolic modulator, just as it does insulin.[30] Metabolic modulators are classified as S4 substances according to the WADA banned substances list. These substances have the ability to modify how some hormones accelerate or slow down different enzymatic reactions in the body. In this way, these modulators can block the body's conversion of testosterone into oestrogen, which is necessary for females. Based on the overall effects these drugs have, they have been banned since 2001 from men's competitions and 2005 for women's.[31] On April 13, 2016 it was reported that WADA had issued updated guidelines allowing less than 1 microgram per milliliter of meldonium for tests done before March 1, 2016.[32] The agency cited that "preliminary tests showed that it could take weeks or months for the drug to leave the body".

 

[AM75]

Studies have shown that meldonium increases cognition and mental performance by reducing amyloid beta deposition in the hippocampus.[13]

* in transgenic Alzheimer's disease mice.

 

[nikdom]

Isn't she a 'successful businesswoman' and not just a tennis player by her own description?

Donno why she is desperate for tennis success. People will still buy stuff advertised by a rail-thin, blonde, caucasian woman.

 

[sportmac]

First of all, comparing a naturally occurring substance like caffeine to a man made synthetic drug is desperate. Literally comparing apples and oranges.

Secondly, the operative word in the phrase "anecdotal evidence" is evidence and it remains evidence whether it hurts your case or not. And the fact that the empirical evidence has been corroborated lends more credence to the evidence being accurate than not.

Thirdly, there is scientific evidence to support the fact that it is a drug which was supported by a Word Doping Agency which has done much more investigative and scientific study into the drug than you, some "anonymous person on the internet making a claim that drug you have no experience with and have done no study into whatsoever is completely harmless."

The fact is when it comes to who is more credible when speaking on the subject, you're speaking solely from the POV of your agenda whereas the governing agencies, medical practitioners and subjects with first hand experience on the matter ALL contradict that bullish and flat out incorrect agenda you're trying to put forward.

"desperate"? Come on. Seriously?

Provide proof that WADA or any other doping agency differentiates between natural and synthetic PED's.

The fact remains WADA is considering putting it on the banned substance list. So the question stands: If WADA bans it then are all records by those who used it tainted?

Yes, anecdotal evidence is evidence from anecdotes. No matter how many times or ways it's typed it's evidence that comes from anecdotes. That is not science. Emperical evidence in science is not one report or one person's anecdote. What "corroboration" are you referring to? You and your tennis partner? Again, not science.
I don't need to try the drug to believe in the scientific method.

“There’s really no evidence that there’s any performance enhancement from meldonium. Zero,” said Don Catlin, a long-time anti-doping expert and the scientific director of the Banned Substances Control Group.

There is no scientifically proven evidence. One study is not a scientific fact. That, again, is not how science works. WADA makes NO claims that it is a PED. Their own words: "There are 34 WADA-accredited anti-doping laboratories around the world that can help inform us when drugs on our monitoring program list are used by athletes. For meldonium, it quickly came to our attention that there were clear patterns of use by entire teams, which usually suggests a drug isn't being taken for medical purposes. How could every member of a team need the same medical treatment? A few studies in the scientific literature also showed that meldonium had a POTENTIAL performance-enhancing benefit."

"Potential" is as close as WADA comes to calling it a PED.

And Nature, the premier science journal on the planet, has called WADA out on their testing: https://www.nature.com/articles/454667a
"Drug testing should not be exempt from the scientific principles and standards that apply to other biomedical sciences."

My agenda? And what agenda might that be? The scientific method is not an agenda.

"governing agencies, medical practitioners and subjects with first hand experience on the matter ALL contradict that bullish..."

Well, then you should have no problem providing proof that counters the science.

 

[sportmac]

There is nothing natural about caffeine, just as there is nothing natural about Corn Flakes.

WADA has explicitly said that it has no pharmacological evidence that Meldonium is a PED.

They banned it based on one sociological study that was funded by USADA on the grounds that its use was contrary to the spirit of competition.

This is about as vague as it gets.

So little did WADA know about the drug that they never even know the excretion rate for the drug and banned innocent athletes, as a consequence, who had stopped taking it.

Correct, and then they had to very publicly and embarrassingly, UN-BAN them, hundreds of them. Basic science 101 and they didn't know it.

 

[sportmac]

Caffeine is an alkaloid occurring naturally in some 60 plant species, of which cocoa beans, kola nuts, tea leaves and coffee beans are the most well-known. Other natural sources of caffeine include yerba maté, guarana berries, guayusa, and the yaupon holly.

Studies have shown that meldonium increases cognition and mental performance by reducing amyloid beta deposition in the hippocampus.[13]

Meldonium's inhibition of γ-butyrobetaine hydroxylase gives a half maximal inhibitory concentration (IC50) value of 62 micromolar, which other study authors have described as "potent."[19] Meldonium is an example of an inhibitor that acts as a non-peptidyl substrate mimic.[20]

WADA classes the drug as a metabolic modulator, just as it does insulin.[30] Metabolic modulators are classified as S4 substances according to the WADA banned substances list. These substances have the ability to modify how some hormones accelerate or slow down different enzymatic reactions in the body. In this way, these modulators can block the body's conversion of testosterone into oestrogen, which is necessary for females. Based on the overall effects these drugs have, they have been banned since 2001 from men's competitions and 2005 for women's.[31] On April 13, 2016 it was reported that WADA had issued updated guidelines allowing less than 1 microgram per milliliter of meldonium for tests done before March 1, 2016.[32] The agency cited that "preliminary tests showed that it could take weeks or months for the drug to leave the body".

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/11/sports/tennis/effects-of-meldonium-on-athletes-are-hazy.html

 

[Service Ace]

Love all the people who have never done it and want to speak on it with absolutely zero foundation for their agenda. Next thing you'll be commenting on the Black experience in America or what it means to be a Woman in the modern business world. Ignorance in its purest form.

 

[Service Ace]

* Provides a ton on scientific documentation

"That doesn't count! Those are based on scientific STUDIES! I want HARD evidence."

Proceeds to counter by linking to a New York Times article.

Lol you people

 

[Chadillac]

TUE's, my pet peeve. If a TUE is OK with the governing bodies, then it should be public. It's not private medical information and this is not HIPAA. There should be a running list of all current (and former) players (WTA and ATP). For my part, I'd love to see a timeline graph showing match and tournament wins vs. granted TUE's.

Was it in 2013 Serena beat Maria in a the french open final and she failed a drug test? Serena applied for a retroactive tue and it was granted 10 days after the match was played.

It was that or 2015 vs safarova.

Imagine losing a grand slam final because "the authority" says your opponent can dope.

 

[sportmac]

* Provides a ton on scientific documentation

"That doesn't count! Those are based on scientific STUDIES! I want HARD evidence."

Proceeds to counter by linking to a New York Times article.

Lol you people

Scientific documentation? Ok. You quoted some medical jargon from a Wikipedia entry (without providing the link) and then copied a few links as some kind of evidence.

Here's your [20] link abstract:

"Abstract
2-Oxoglutarate (2OG) dependent oxygenases are ubiquitous iron enzymes that couple substrate oxidation to the conversion of 2OG to succinate and carbon dioxide. In humans their roles include collagen biosynthesis, fatty acid metabolism, DNA repair, RNA and chromatin modifications, and hypoxic sensing. Commercial applications of 2OG oxygenase inhibitorsbegan with plant growth retardants, and now extend to a clinically used pharmaceutical compound for cardioprotection. Several 2OG oxygenases are now being targeted for therapeutic intervention for diseases including anaemia, inflammation and cancer. In this critical review, we describe studies on the inhibition of 2OG oxygenases, focusing on small molecules, and discuss the potential of 2OG oxygenases as therapeutic targets (295 references)."

Yep, that's "documentation" ok. What it is not is a study on meldonium in regards to performance enhancements in athletes.

Love all the people who have never done it and want to speak on it with absolutely zero foundation for their agenda.

Zero? Here's zero- again:
“There’s really no evidence that there’s any performance enhancement from meldonium. Zero,” said Don Catlin, a long-time anti-doping expert and the scientific director of the Banned Substances Control Group.

That's a much better foundation than your anecdotal evidence, you know, the evidence you gathered from an anecdote.

 

[Bartelby]

WADA did not know about the excretion rates for Meldonium until long after it was banned due to improperly banned athletes taking legal action.

Natural versus non-natural is one of the most over-used fallacies ever deployed. Opium is natural, but there are also synthetic analogues.

Your difference is one that does not make a difference here as what matters is performance-enhancement.

Yes, it was classified by WADA as you describe but nowhere is there anything on it being either performance enhancing or injurious to the athlete.

Their one piece of evidence was merely sociological and ordered by the American wing of WADA which targeted samples from one tournament.

Caffeine is an alkaloid occurring naturally in some 60 plant species, of which cocoa beans, kola nuts, tea leaves and coffee beans are the most well-known. Other natural sources of caffeine include yerba maté, guarana berries, guayusa, and the yaupon holly.

Studies have shown that meldonium increases cognition and mental performance by reducing amyloid beta deposition in the hippocampus.[13]

Meldonium's inhibition of γ-butyrobetaine hydroxylase gives a half maximal inhibitory concentration (IC50) value of 62 micromolar, which other study authors have described as "potent."[19] Meldonium is an example of an inhibitor that acts as a non-peptidyl substrate mimic.[20]

WADA classes the drug as a metabolic modulator, just as it does insulin.[30] Metabolic modulators are classified as S4 substances according to the WADA banned substances list. These substances have the ability to modify how some hormones accelerate or slow down different enzymatic reactions in the body. In this way, these modulators can block the body's conversion of testosterone into oestrogen, which is necessary for females. Based on the overall effects these drugs have, they have been banned since 2001 from men's competitions and 2005 for women's.[31] On April 13, 2016 it was reported that WADA had issued updated guidelines allowing less than 1 microgram per milliliter of meldonium for tests done before March 1, 2016.[32] The agency cited that "preliminary tests showed that it could take weeks or months for the drug to leave the body".

 

[Bartelby]

The allegations of Russian doping made by Rodchenkov and the McLaren Report have been revealed as fraudulent by the highest sports court in the world - CAS.

The implications for the Sharapova case are clear. WADA is a discredited organisation which campaigned to attack Russian sport and one front of their attack was Meldonium.

This scandal however exposes the wider fraud:

The scandal over Olympic doping has been running since 2014, and most of the allegations have been known for years. What's changed?
In a landmark ruling in February, the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS), the highest legal authority in such cases, reversed the life bans of 28 Russian sportsmen and gave them back their medals, many of them from the Sochi Olympics in 2014.

But it was only this week that a 160-page summary of the session exposed exactly how the allegations that led to the exclusion of entire Russian teams in various sports from Rio 2016 and PyeongChang 2018 failed to stand up to legal scrutiny.

Between 2005 and 2015, Grigory Rodchenkov headed Moscow's anti-doping testing lab before resigning in the wake of the scandal and eloping to the US, where his words laid the foundation for the portrayal of "state-sponsored" doping in Russia involving athletes, coaches, and officials at all levels. He remains in an American witness protection program and testified via Skype "behind a screen, which concealed the entirety of his upper body save for his forearms and hands"according to CAS.

‘Rodchenkov's evidence is hearsay with limited probative value’ – CAS
He maintained that there was a "Sochi plan" designed to pump Russian athletes with performance-enhancing drugs and then swap any contaminated samples for pre-stored urine during the 2014 Games. He also described that he was the inventor of the Duchess Cocktail, a powerful mix of PEDs allegedly distributed to a list of Russian athletes. Many were later excluded from competing on the basis of the Duchess list.

However, when cross-examined, Rodchenkov admitted that he "never: (a) distributed the Duchess Cocktail; (b) seen an athlete take the Duchess Cocktail; (c) witnessed instructions being given to athletes and coaches to use the Duchess Cocktail; (d) seen an athlete give a clean urine sample; or (e) seen an athlete tamper with a doping sample." He also admitted that no test of the effectiveness of the Duchess cocktail was ever conducted, and when asked about its exact make-up, which has been a matter of some contention, he "stated that he needed five minutes to explain, and therefore refrained from doing so."

He also repeated claims that a team of officials, nicknamed "Magicians," had developed a technique for opening tamper-proof sample bottles in order to manipulate them and clear Russian athletes, but added that he personally "never observed first hand any bottles being opened or de-capped" and did not know the "precise method" used by them.

How did the panel respond to Rodchenkov?
The exiled official turned out to be a star witness for the Russian appellants in the case. In its conclusion, it said that his assertion of the guilt of Alexander Legkov, the Sochi gold-winning skier who led the appeal, constituted a "bare assertion which is uncorroborated by any contemporaneous documentary evidence." On the use of Duchess by a specific athlete, which a specific official reportedly told Rodchenkov about, the panel ruled that it is "hearsay" of "very limited" value. As to his claims of a Sochi plan, ahead of which clean urine samples were delivered to him, CAS stated that the witness's words were "not corroborated by any further evidence."

 

[ollinger]

There is nothing natural about caffeine, just as there is nothing natural about Corn Flakes.

caffeine is found in nature.....corn flakes perhaps not

 

[Bartelby]

The point was that you can't use it simply as it is found in nature? Humans have to do work on it to make it function as a drug.

And the other central point is that the distinction was irrelevant to the question of performance-enhancement.

Flakes of corn, to be pedantic, can not be found in nature either as corn is a completely human invention.

caffeine is found in nature.....corn flakes perhaps not

 

[intrepidish]

The only question I have is, do you people think Bartleby is paid by a Sharapova PR group to try and sow confusion on tennis boards and social media? It's absolutely hilarious the totally discredited arguments he posts 100s of times after having been debunked but he does this as basically a full time job.

Sharapova, victim of conspiracy bla bla. Rinse and repeat.

Even little kids know what Sharapova was doing and why it was wrong.

Did we ever learn what medicine she is taking for the conditions which were supposedly addressed by the other now banned drugs? Surely she must have replaced those?

 

[Bartelby]

Shouldn't you produce these 'little kids' who know what Sharapova was doing?

CAS - the highest sporting court in the world - just discredited the evidence of the person who isupposedly blew the lid off doping in Russian sport.

WADA - who has been using his testimony to back their moves against Russia also banned the drug Meldonium which they knew was predominantly used by Russians.

And they did this with zero research and little notification, and so Sharapova was caught up in what is now revealed to be an anti-doping campaign based on discredited evidence.

The only question I have is, do you people think Bartleby is paid by a Sharapova PR group to try and sow confusion on tennis boards and social media? It's absolutely hilarious the totally discredited arguments he posts 100s of times after having been debunked but he does this as basically a full time job.

Sharapova, victim of conspiracy bla bla. Rinse and repeat.

Even little kids know what Sharapova was doing and why it was wrong.

Did we ever learn what medicine she is taking for the conditions which were supposedly addressed by the other now banned drugs? Surely she must have replaced those?

 

[intrepidish]

Shouldn't you produce these 'little kids' who know what Sharapova was doing?

CAS - the highest sporting court in the world - just discredited the evidence of the person who isupposedly blew the lid off doping in Russian sport.

WADA - who has been using his testimony to back their moves against Russia also banned the drug Meldonium which they knew was predominantly used by Russians.

And they did this with zero research and little notification, and so Sharapova was caught up in what is now revealed to be an anti-doping campaign based on discredited evidence.

You have been answered with facts many, many times. I knew you could not resist replying yet again as soon as I wrote. You seem to have nothing to do but spread nonsense about this case. Again I wonder if this is some sort of PR outreach from her people in which you are a participant.

Has anyone revealed what drugs is she taking now for those 'serious' conditions for which she needed medications for years and years?

Fortunately, as she fails more and more often in 3rd sets, people are drawing the obvious conclusion.

 

[Bartelby]

So where are all these 'little kids' that you promised us? Their opinion would be significantly better than yours. I suspect. In fact, I'm sure they'd love Sharapova's autograph.

You have been answered with facts many, many times. I knew you could not resist replying yet again as soon as I wrote. You seem to have nothing to do but spread nonsense about this case. Again I wonder if this is some sort of PR outreach from her people in which you are a participant.

Has anyone revealed what drugs is she taking now for those 'serious' conditions for which she needed medications for years and years?

Fortunately, as she fails more and more often in 3rd sets, people are drawing the obvious conclusion.

 

[Chadillac]

Shouldn't you produce these 'little kids' who know what Sharapova was doing?

CAS - the highest sporting court in the world - just discredited the evidence of the person who isupposedly blew the lid off doping in Russian sport.

WADA - who has been using his testimony to back their moves against Russia also banned the drug Meldonium which they knew was predominantly used by Russians.

And they did this with zero research and little notification, and so Sharapova was caught up in what is now revealed to be an anti-doping campaign based on discredited evidence.

Hate > facts, not sure why you waste your time with these people

 

[Bartelby]

If you make a post, then you are inviting a reply ... so your choice is then to either ignore that reply or restate your case.

I always find these accusations that you are 'sowing confusion' so revealing of the author's fears that I usually can't resist replying.

Hate > facts, not sure why you waste your time with these people

 

[stringertom]

Sliding down a fire pole? I'd pay to see that!

 

[captainbryce]

Oops, forgot peak Sharapova, in that era. Did her drug-medicine help?

People tend to forget how good “peak Sharapova” was. Even when she lost, she was still a much better player than she is now.

 

[captainbryce]

TUE's, my pet peeve. If a TUE is OK with the governing bodies, then it should be public. It's not private medical information and this is not HIPAA. There should be a running list of all current (and former) players (WTA and ATP). For my part, I'd love to see a timeline graph showing match and tournament wins vs. granted TUE's.

Actually, it is private medical information. Athletes do not have to disclose specific medical conditions to the public, only to the doctors, and only to tennis officials IF a substance treating the condition could be a banned substance. The only reason for TUEs to be public is to unfairly bias the public (namely people like you) against certain players. Disclosing them serves no other purpose, which is precisely why they should NOT be.

 

[Bartelby]

The purpose of disclosing that they are given a TUE in real time, while private information is kept private, is to ensure that the system is transparent and fair for players and the betting public.

Actually, it is private medical information. Athletes do not have to disclose specific medical conditions to the public, only to the doctors, and only to tennis officials IF a substance treating the condition could be a banned substance. The only reason for TUEs to be public is to unfairly bias the public (namely people like you) against certain players. Disclosing them serves no other purpose, which is precisely why they should NOT be.

 

[captainbryce]

The purpose of disclosing that they are given a TUE in real time, while private information is kept private, is to ensure that the system is transparent and fair for players and the betting public.

If they are given a TUE, then the system IS fair! It only becomes “unfair” if they are NOT given a TUE and then test positive. How many TUEs a player gets is completely irrelevant, especially when information about what the TUE is for us confidential. Frankly, it’s none of anyone’s business unless the athlete chooses to disclose that. And who has one or not has absolutely no bearing on betting or oddsmakers favorites. So that’s a ridiculous line of reasoning.

 

[Bartelby]

The player is asking for an administrative favour, and can only ask it if he or she surrenders private details, and it appears that the process is rather casual and, of course, lacking in transparency.

Have you seen the rules they have in place for horse racing? It's not based on the athlete's doctor ringing up an ITF official and getting the nod while faxing in the form!

 

[Bartelby]

It pays to be a first responder in tennis.

Sliding down a fire pole? I'd pay to see that!