Navratilova on the Sinner case: “The system must be blown up”

[RSJfan]

So since WADA never appealed the decision the positive tests were not released? Why were they then released at all after so much time?

CHINADA didn’t charge the swimmers with ADRV and WADA didn’t appeal so — even if you think both were wrong — based on those decisions the rules say there should have been no disclosure. My understanding of the case is the swimmers information was leaked. And that WADA subsequently had to respond to charges of an alleged coverup. WADA is investigating the leak. And the FBI is investigating WADA. Dr Raul is investigating electric vehicle subsidies.

 

[insideguy]

CHINADA didn’t charge the swimmers with ADRV and WADA didn’t appeal so — even if you think both were wrong — based on those decisions the rules say there should have been no disclosure. My understanding of the case is the swimmers information was leaked. And that WADA subsequently had to respond to charges of an alleged coverup. WADA is investigating the leak. And the FBI is investigating WADA.

Good lord. So are we to assume there are a crap ton of positives that never get disclosed?

 

[RSJfan]

Good lord. So are we to assume there are a crap ton of positives that never get disclosed?

You can assume whatever you want. However, I don’t understand why you apparently think it fair that athletes who have not conceded a rule violation and are not determined by an independent third party looking at the evidence (either weighing in on a provisional suspension or an independent tribunal after a full investigation) to have committed a rule violation should have the investigation or its facts revealed. Other than people love gossip and think they’re entitled to it for their amusement. Especially about celebrities and athletes. If you want amusement I recommend Raul’s posts on EVs.

Some anti-doping organizations (i.e., WADA stakeholders) have been arguing to WADA for rule changes providing for more privacy; that cases like Sinner resulting in ADRV but where the athlete is found to have “no fault or negligence” should not be published because it is unfair to the athlete. Not to upset you but WADA is considering the request.

 

[insideguy]

[

You can assume whatever you want. However, I don’t understand why you apparently think it fair that athletes who have not conceded a rule violation and are not determined by an independent third party looking at the evidence (either weighing in on a provisional suspension or an independent tribunal after a full investigation) to have committed a rule violation should have knowledge of or facts of an investigation revealed. Other than people love gossip and think they’re entitled to it for their amusement. Especially about celebrities and athletes. If you want amusement I recommend Raul’s posts on EVs.

Some anti-doping organizations (i.e., WADA stakeholders) have been arguing to WADA for rule changes providing for more privacy; that cases like Sinner resulting in ADRV but where the athlete is found to have “no fault or negligence” should not be published because it is unfair to the athlete.

???? I think you are utterly misunderstanding me. I am attempting to understand this. Nothing more or less. I agree with you to a certain extent. What I am not understanding here is if what you say about disclosure is correct. Then we can assume that there are many positives that are never released. Which is fine. If WADA appeals a decision it goes public, which I dont really understand. Because on one end we are saying well these athletes should remain anonymous until they either agree to a punishment but since WADA appeals a particular case it goes public anyway. In the sinner case didnt it go public about the positive test before WADA said they would appeal? Was this also leaked?

 

[RSJfan]

???? I think you are utterly misunderstanding me. I am attempting to understand this. Nothing more or less. I agree with you to a certain extent. What I am not understanding here is if what you say about disclosure is correct. Then we can assume that there are many positives that are never released. Which is fine. If WADA appeals a decision it goes public, which I dont really understand. Because on one end we are saying well these athletes should remain anonymous until they either agree to a punishment but since WADA appeals a particular case it goes public anyway. In the sinner case didnt it go public about the positive test before WADA said they would appeal? Was this also leaked?

I said apparently. Sorry if I got your view wrong.

Sinner was found by the Tennis Independent Tribunal to have committed two ADRVs; a finding of a ADRV(s) triggers public disclosure. His type of situation is what I mentioned previously some ADO’s think is unfair to athletes and want changed — public disclosure where there is a finding of ADRV(s) with “no fault or negligence.”

If no ADRV is found but WADA appeals the fact of the appeal itself MAY be disclosed but not the decision or the underlying facts, unless the athlete agrees to such disclosure.

 

[jmnk]

Those that whine most about the rules have never gone beyond the WADA Code title page, if that. So they never speak about specific rules, what should be changed and why.

I would argue if I could........

 

[insideguy]

I said apparently. Sorry if I got your view wrong.

Sinner was found by the ITIA to have committed two ADRVs; a finding of a ADRV(s) triggers public disclosure. His type of situation is what I mentioned previously some ADO’s think is unfair to athletes and want changed — public disclosure where there is a finding of ADRV(s) with “no fault or negligence.”

If no ADRV is found but WADA appeals the fact of the appeal itself MAY be disclosed but not the decision or the underlying facts, unless the athlete agrees.

This makes no sense to me. Why does ADRV trigger a public disclosure if the athlete is found not at fault?

Or is it the number of times he was caught that triggers it?

 

[RSJfan]

I would argue if I could........

“More transparency!” — Eggovic

 

[Bride of Alcaraz]

Navratilova says thinks without thinking, she even called the POTUS-elect a rapist!
Can't trust someone who posts fiction about people

 

[insideguy]

Navratilova says thinks without thinking, she even called the POTUS-elect a rapist!
Can't trust someone who posts fiction about people

Good lord man the irony here is beyond comprehension.

 

[RSJfan]

This makes no sense to me. Why does ADRV trigger a public disclosure if the athlete is found not at fault?

Or is it the number of times he was caught that triggers it?

Exactly the point some ADOs have made. I didn’t write the rule. WADA said it’s rules commission is thinking about it.

Such a change would arguably be at odds with WADA’s whole strict liability schtick. WADA is willing to look at fault at the sanction stage but they still get crazy about any ADRV apart from fault so they want the athlete to be publicly castigated by clowns like Kyrgios to keep all athletes on their toes. Obviously I’m speculating on their reaction to these rule change requests.

No, any number of ADRVs will do. Including one.

 

[insideguy]

Exactly the point some ADOs have made. I didn’t write the rule. WADA said it’s rules commission is thinking about it.

No any number of ADRVs will do. Including one.

So these Chinese athletes didnt fall under the ADRV rule?

 

[RSJfan]

So these Chinese athletes didnt fall under the ADRV rule?

CHINADA didn’t charge the swimmers with ADRV and WADA didn’t appeal so — even if you think both were wrong — based on those decisions the rules say there should have been no disclosure.

Bold added.

 

[insideguy]

Bold added.

Both were accidental contaminations. One was supposedly through food, the other supposedly through cream.

But the charging agency didnt charge, sinner either. You say CHINADA didnt charge. Well Sinner wasnt charged either. Yet his results were released BEFORE the WADA appeal.

You have stated that that if the charging agency doesn't charge and WADA doesn't appeal then the positive test doesn't get released.

Yet that did happen with Sinner. Because we knew he tested positive before WADA appealed.

 

[RSJfan]

Both were accidental contaminations. One was supposedly through food, the other supposedly through cream.

But the charging agency didnt charge, sinner either. You say CHINADA didnt charge. Well Sinner wasnt charged either. Yet his results were released BEFORE the WADA appeal.

You have stated that that if the charging agency doesn't charge and WADA doesn't appeal then the positive test doesn't get released.

Yet that did happen with Sinner. Because we knew he tested positive before WADA appealed.

For real or did Raul put you up to this.

3x a charm:

Carrot was charged and found to have committed two ADRVs. Per the rules the decision was made public. After reviewing the ITIA case files WADA decided to appeal. End story.

“Player [Carrot] has been charged with ADRVs under Articles 2.1 and/or 2.2 of the TADP, …“ — Paragraph 5, Decision of the Tennis Independent Tribunal

”Conclusion: The Player has committed two ADRVs, pursuant to TADP Articles 2.1 and 2.2. “ Paragraph 116, Decision of the Tennis Independent Tribunal

The Swimmers case was shut down by CHINADA with no provisional suspension and no ADRV = no disclosure. WADA declined to appeal = no disclosure.

 

[insideguy]

For real or did Raul put you up to this.

3x a charm:

Carrot was charged and found to have committed two ADRVs. Per the rules the decision was made public. After reviewing the ITIA case files WADA decided to appeal. End story.

“Player [Carrot] has been charged with ADRVs under Articles 2.1 and/or 2.2 of the TADP, …“ — Paragraph 5, Decision of the Tennis Independent Tribunal

”Conclusion: The Player has committed two ADRVs, pursuant to TADP Articles 2.1 and 2.2. “ Paragraph 116, Decision of the Tennis Independent Tribunal

The Swimmers case was shut down by CHINADA with no provisional suspension and no ADRV = no disclosure. WADA declined to appeal = no disclosure.

Ok got it now

 

[jm1972]

Female does the bare minimum in terms of working out and lifting weights and gets accused of using steroids. Good job dumbass

Here's a before picture for those of you that were not alive then...

 

[THUNDERVOLLEY]

Because the White House leaked them to the NYT for political reasons.

^ This is why most of your posts are dismissed as either trolling or ideologically twisted propaganda.

You have no evidence for any of the crap in your post above and never will. All of your screaming has been inspired--at the end of it all--by being angered that the corrupt Sharapova was rightfully exposed, charged and punished for PED use. That is a matter of the historical record, and similar cases will continue, since certain people and certain countries invest in cheating with PEDs. Live with it.

 

[Bartelby]

One name links both stories: Tygart.

^ This is why most of your posts are dismissed as either trolling or ideologically twisted propaganda.

You have no evidence for any of the crap in your post above and never will. All of your screaming has been inspired--at the end of it all--by being angered that the corrupt Sharapova was rightfully exposed, charged and punished for PED use. That is a matter of the historical record, and similar cases will continue, since certain people and certain countries invest in cheating with PEDs. Live with it.

 

[Shaj]

Nothing to do with doping?? How the freak do you know Martina? STFU. There is no sense in you.

 

[Bartelby]

She is doing her job, which appears to be defending the establishment. In the ITIA versus WADA battle, loyalists choose the ITIA.

Nothing to do with doping?? How the freak do you know Martina? STFU. There is no sense in you.

 

[Smecz]

I see zero in common with Sinner and Swiatek - except that wealth helped in each case.

Swiatek produced unopened bottles from the same batch that were contaminated.
Sinner came up with a convoluted and unbelievable story confirmed by his own employees.

Whether someone took doping consciously or unconsciously... Everyone should be punished according to the rules established by WADA.!!

The penalties for Sinner and Swiatek are simply ridiculous, they were practically not punished...

Tolerance in sports is shifting so that athletes can take doping, after all we are slowly entering an era of changes in technology and sports...?!

After all who knows whether in 20 or 30 years doping will not be allowed, since now these penalties are somehow ridiculous.!!

 

[vokazu]

Shut up she is a living legend.

A living legend is not always a beacon of truth.

LGBT group drops Martina Navratilova over transgender comments

Martina Navratilova has been removed as an ambassador by Athlete Ally, an organisation that supports LGBT athletes, following her comments on transgender inclusion

amp.theguardian.com

Martina called Margaret Court a racist and a homophobe, while she is a Transphobe and a Saudiphobe herself.

Saudi envoy 'pained' by criticism from Navratilova, Evert

Navratilova and Evert "have turned their back on the very same women they have inspired and it is beyond disappointing", Princess Reema wrote.

www.thedailystar.net

 

[kangaroo1973]

A living legend is not always a beacon of truth.

LGBT group drops Martina Navratilova over transgender comments

Martina Navratilova has been removed as an ambassador by Athlete Ally, an organisation that supports LGBT athletes, following her comments on transgender inclusion

amp.theguardian.com

Martina called Margaret Court a racist and a homophobe, while she is a Transphobe and a Saudiphobe herself.

Saudi envoy 'pained' by criticism from Navratilova, Evert

Navratilova and Evert "have turned their back on the very same women they have inspired and it is beyond disappointing", Princess Reema wrote.

www.thedailystar.net

Saudiophobe for a good reason. Take a look at SAUDI s human rights record. *******

 

[vokazu]

Saudiophobe for a good reason. Take a look at SAUDI s human rights record. *******

So what, Australia violates human rights by sending asylum seekers and refugees to offshore detention centres which have awful condition. They even feed them rotten food that make them vomit.

US and its allies killed hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Many other countries violate human rights.

 

[Gary Duane]

Navratilova makes a fair point about starting from scratch. The anti-doping regime in tennis clearly has devolved to the point where a major function is no longer keeping the sport "clean," but rather protecting the strict liability structure for its own sake, maximizing in terrorem deterrence (look at Raducanu and her antiseptic spray phobia), and punishing players for bad staff management and other non-competition-related miscues. I've made the point here many times that WADA's appeal in the Sinner case is primarily designed to serve these ends, and to protect WADA more than to protect tennis.

Step back for a second from our immersion in the tennis context, especially the miscellaneous grievances about how other players were treated in the past, and ask whether a rational, straightforward drug-testing system, focused just on ensuring fair competition, would threaten to hand out huge suspensions for offenses in which no intentional PED use occurred and the accidental PED exposure that happened did not result in any impact to competition.

In another post, I cited the summary of the Sinner case in the New York Times (https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/5806315/2025/01/10/jannik-sinner-doping-case-tennis-explained/), in which it was noted that both WADA and the ITIA accepted that Sinner did not dope intentionally. Some anonymous person added a comment that could represent the way this case looks to outside observers who may not be steeped in tennis lore or the various maniacal online doping conspiracy theories that have come to seem "normal" to this forum:


Maybe this commenter is a Sinner fan; maybe not. Maybe he or she is just a puzzled "neutral" wondering why tennis is so screwed up.

Most important:

"I've made the point here many times that WADA's appeal in the Sinner case is primarily designed to serve these ends, and to protect WADA more than to protect tennis."

Power always protects itself. I don't trust anything WADA does or says.

 

[diggler]

I've heard a suggestion that the tour supplies all the medications and supplements. That takes all the guesswork out of legality. Or better still, legalise everything. What is performance enhancing anyway? If you take a pain killer, surely your performance is better than if you didn't take it.

 

[Bartelby]

Why would you think WADA is out to get Sinner? The proposition is absurd.

And why would the ITIA process that exonerated Sinner not also be power protecting itself?

Most important:

"I've made the point here many times that WADA's appeal in the Sinner case is primarily designed to serve these ends, and to protect WADA more than to protect tennis."

Power always protects itself. I don't trust anything WADA does or says.

 

[jmnk]

I've heard a suggestion that the tour supplies all the medications and supplements.

that is not true. They state 'you can get the supplements from XYZ. XYZ has historically been solid and there have not been any contamination issues in the past. HOWEVER, past performance is not an indication of the future - you as a player are still responsible if whatever you got from XYZ happens to be contaminated'. Surely if stuff from XYZ was contaminated it would help player's case as far as potential penalty - but that's as far as that 'guarantee' goes.

As far as medication goes - I'm not sure but I think that XYZ does not provide medications, especially the ones requiring prescription.

Obviously it goes without saying that XYZ in question is US based company, with prices reflecting US economy.

That takes all the guesswork out of legality. Or better still, legalise everything. What is performance enhancing anyway? If you take a pain killer, surely your performance is better than if you didn't take it.

 

[kangaroo1973]

So what, Australia violates human rights by sending asylum seekers and refugees to offshore detention centres which have awful condition. They even feed them rotten food that make them vomit.

US and its allies killed hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Many other countries violate human rights.

Sureeee....

 

[Raiden]

that is not exactly the case. There's more to it. The labs actually found that the tablets were contaminated _more_ on the inside rather than on the surface. Which implies the contamination did happen in production. So if one makes an argument that the sealed bottles were provided by Swiatek and that makes it less legit, he would also have to assume that Swiatek's team were somehow able to masterfully contaminate the tablets. Possible - of course.

But all those cases are judged on the basis of 'what's more probable'. There's hardly any other contamination like case where the player was able to provide better evidence than Swiatek. Again - that does not mean 'for sure', but it does mean 'Swiatek contamination is way more probable than virtually any other case in the past'.

Nonsense.

Those other cases were superior. They had legit confirmations of contamination (the ITIA indpendently procured the same item as the player did (not from the player but from elsewhere, like a shop or a restaurant or whatever other sources the item was available) and that third party item turned out to be contaminated too. That's what real proof of contamination looks like. But Swiatek's case the ITIA went up and down pharmacies all over Poland and found the product. Bought it. Tested it. Not one was contaminated. Only the player's sample was "contaminated". Whatever that implies.

 

[jmnk]

that is not exactly the case. There's more to it. The labs actually found that the tablets were contaminated _more_ on the inside rather than on the surface. Which implies the contamination did happen in production. So if one makes an argument that the sealed bottles were provided by Swiatek and that makes it less legit, he would also have to assume that Swiatek's team were somehow able to masterfully contaminate the tablets. Possible - of course.

But all those cases are judged on the basis of 'what's more probable'. There's hardly any other contamination like case where the player was able to provide better evidence than Swiatek. Again - that does not mean 'for sure', but it does mean 'Swiatek contamination is way more probable than virtually any other case in the past'.

Nonsense.

would you mind to elaborate which part of the above in nonsense?

Those other cases were superior. They had legit confirmations of contamination (the ITIA indpendently procured the same item as the player did (not from the player but from elsewhere, like a shop or a restaurant or whatever other sources the item was available) and that third party item turned out to be contaminated too. That's what real proof of contamination looks like.

hmm, ok. Would you mind citing a case or two where " ITIA indpendently procured the same item as the player did [...] and that third party item turned out to be contaminated too"? I've read about few cases, never heard about that, but I'm not claiming I know _all the cases_. Please provide some citation about those cases.

But Swiatek's case the ITIA went up and down pharmacies all over Poland and found the product. Bought it. Tested it. Not one was contaminated.

hmm again. Could you point me to a section in ITIA verdict in Swiatek case where they say that ITIA 'found the product in Poland' and 'bought it' and 'tested it' and 'it was not contaminated'?

Only the player's sample was "contaminated". Whatever that implies.

that implies exactly what the ITIA decided. That on the balance of probabilities Swiatek explanation is plausible.

 

[Rosstour]

Not in tennis but in AFL in Australia the national doping regulator gave a team the green light to systematically dope their players as the players weren’t aware of the substances they were given. WADA appealed and the players were banned for negligence as they have a personal responsibility to ensure that they are not violating the anti doping laws.

It’s more of an issue with Sinner because the physio was personally employed by him and not part of a club. He should be aware of what is being used on him in such a tight knit group of people. The cream had a doping warning on it so there really is no excuse in his case.

The issue is that if you allow these kinds of cases to go unpunished, which is how ITIA has dealt with some of them, then you will see more top players pushing the boundaries and engaging in behaviour that is in clear violation of the rules.

Oh it's already happening

The Sinner Effect is real. Zverev, Alcaraz, Swiatek and others have showed up on a new level of jacked

 

[Galvermegs]

Navratilova has been on point recently. She has basically called UK Government ministers pedophile enablers recently, and on this farcial investigation Sinner is being subjected to she is again right.

1 out of 2 isnt bad as meatloaf almost sang..

 

[Raiden]

would you mind to elaborate which part of the above in nonsense?

hmm, ok. Would you mind citing a case or two where " ITIA indpendently procured the same item as the player did [...] and that third party item turned out to be contaminated too"? I've read about few cases, never heard about that, but I'm not claiming I know _all the cases_. Please provide some citation about those cases.

hmm again. Could you point me to a section in ITIA verdict in Swiatek case where they say that ITIA 'found the product in Poland' and 'bought it' and 'tested it' and 'it was not contaminated'?

that implies exactly what the ITIA decided. That on the balance of probabilities Swiatek explanation is plausible.

The part I highlighted — but then you knew that. You must be the type who likes to play dumb

 

[vive le beau jeu !]

The system must be blown up

 

[jmnk]

The part I highlighted — but then you knew that. You must be the type who likes to play dumb

@Raiden Thank for for clarifying. I must have missed the fact that you have highlighted part of my post. My bad. Sorry.

So your position is that Swiatek explanation is in no way 'more credible' than similar explanations given by players in other cases. I ask again then:

hmm, ok. Would you mind citing a case or two where " ITIA indpendently procured the same item as the player did [...] and that third party item turned out to be contaminated too"? I've read about few cases, never heard about that, but I'm not claiming I know _all the cases_. Please provide some citation about those cases.

hmm again. Could you point me to a section in ITIA verdict in Swiatek case where they say that ITIA 'found the product in Poland' and 'bought it' and 'tested it' and 'it was not contaminated'?

 

[vokazu]

Most important:

"I've made the point here many times that WADA's appeal in the Sinner case is primarily designed to serve these ends, and to protect WADA more than to protect tennis."

Power always protects itself. I don't trust anything WADA does or says.

Sinner fans don't like WADA lol. How am I not surprised.

 

[Drob]

Since the verdict was 'no ADVR' at all WADA does not have authority to make the case public

hope you are right

it is unthinkable that Iga would be so brazen as to contaminate her own bottles, reseal them and then submit them to ITIA as evidence of contamination

think you must be right. hope

 

[Drob]

Navratilova says thinks without thinking, she even called the POTUS-elect a rapist!
Can't trust someone who posts fiction about people

Right. Not "Rapist". Only legally liable for "sexual assault".

We must parse our words carefully when speaking of IL DUCE, sorry, i mean, THE DONALD. Yes, everyone please choose your words carefully.

And when not assaulting sexually HE is also not a "whoremonger", please no. He is only criminally liable for falsifying payments of hush money to a prostitute to keep her from telling the public he paid her for sex, nothing more.

And definitely not an "incompetent, irresponsible, stupid, lying, cheating, stealing, corrupt con-artist" imposter who calls himself a businessman and did not constantly stiff, er, sorry, "avoid" creditors. No, it is merely that companies supposedly worth billions he controls or controlled at the time used bankruptcy laws to stiff, oops again, avoid creditors . . , no, i mean just gave those worthy companies a "fresh start."

Let's be most circumspect, indeed, he deserves the most careful choice of words.

Let's be circumspect, oh my!

 

[Gary Duane]

Sinner fans don't like WADA lol. How am I not surprised.

You must have me mixed up with someone else. I am no fan of Sinner.