PTPA defaming Sinner for political gain? Might there truly be a 'Djokovic plot'?

[THUNDERVOLLEY]

Can you elaborate?

No, he cannot, since hes been repeatedly called out on this board for selective "evidence" (which is not countering evidence at all) that conveniently ignores the fact Sinner did not deliberately use PEDs for the criminal reasons Swiatek, Sharapova and Halep used the drugs.

 

[Bartelby]

Sinner was caught doping and he has been rightly, if inadequately, suspended.

No, he cannot, since hes been repeatedly called out on this board for selective "evidence" (which is not countering evidence at all) that conveniently ignores the fact Sinner did not deliberately use PEDs for the criminal reasons Swiatek, Sharapova and Halep used the drugs.

 

[THUNDERVOLLEY]

The real evidence (posted frequently on this board) disproves your pitchfork and torch routine.

 

[Bartelby]

Sinner has not been playing while well so I think that demonstrates he has been caught doping and is serving a (woefully-inadequate) suspension.

 

[The Great Gatsby]

The PTPA wants a new deal brought in by new partners, so what the new deal is and who will be involved will be announced after the lawsuit and not before.

How could it be otherwise? Whatever the details of the Tiley plans were, they have now been overtaken by events.

I guess if they can find the right judge this will come to pass. Otherwise I feel that this could hamper any future attempts at forming any kind of player's association from more credible parties.

Sinner was caught doping and he has been rightly, if inadequately, suspended.

One thing on Sinner: I personally don't believe he was doping, and I accept the findings and find no issues with them. Because if he were doping, I don't believe he would have been caught. Because I think the only way you can get caught is if you're stupid (or undisciplined), or poor.

I don't believe Sinner is stupid or undisciplined. I believe he's a very disciplined person and therefore would dose properly so he would't get popped. Only stupid or undisciplined people don't dose properly and get caught. Smart and/or disciplined don't do that.

Also, Sinner is obviously not poor. So he can afford to buy the best stuff that's out there that they can't test for yet. He would not be using something that's already banned and that they can already test for.

So Sinner strikes me as having average or slightly above average intelligence. Is very disciplined. And is very rich. So those kind of people don't get popped. No, only the sloppy or the poor athletes who can't buy the best stuff get popped.

That's how it is in track and field. Doping is rampant in that sport, but the disciplined and/or rich don't get caught. Only the sloppy and/or poor. Likewise in tennis. Those who are currently doping, if they're disciplined and rich, they'll never get caught. Only if they're sloppy and/or poor.

So Sinner is fine in my book. If he were really doping we would never know it, because he would never get popped.

Just to add: yes, I think Djokovic is doped to the gills. And I take my cues from the world of track and field. Anytime in track and field you see a performance that's so outside the normal and extraordinary, and almost unnatural, there's usually a very good explanation for it.

But of course Djokovic is very disciplined and very rich, so he's never going to get popped.

I used to not believe these kind of things though. I use to accept these performances on the level. I believed Lance Armstrong. Boy was I wrong.

 

[Bartelby]

1. One would like to think that law is applied correctly regardless of the judge and there are appeal processes. The matter is also being litigated in three different jurisdictions.

2. Sinner was caught doping and CAS would have given him a 12 months suspension as a minimum. Speculation about Sinner's discipline is of no relevance to the matter.

I guess if they can find the right judge this will come to pass. Otherwise I feel that this could hamper any future attempts at forming any kind of player's association from more credible parties.


One thing on Sinner: I personally don't believe he was doping, and I accept the findings and find no issues with them. Because if he were doping, I don't believe he would have been caught. Because I think the only way you can get caught is if you're stupid (or undisciplined), or poor.

I don't believe Sinner is stupid or undisciplined. I believe he's a very disciplined person and therefore would dose properly so he would't get popped. Only stupid or undisciplined people don't dose properly and get caught. Smart and/or disciplined don't do that.

Also, Sinner is obviously not poor. So he can afford to buy the best stuff that's out there that they can't test for yet. He would not be using something that's already banned and that they can already test for.

So Sinner strikes me as having average or slightly above average intelligence. Is very disciplined. And is very rich. So those kind of people don't get popped. No, only the sloppy or the poor athletes who can't buy the best stuff get popped.

That's how it is in track and field. Doping is rampant in that sport, but the disciplined and/or rich don't get caught. Only the sloppy and/or poor. Likewise in tennis. Those who are currently doping, if they're disciplined and rich, they'll never get caught. Only if they're sloppy and/or poor.

So Sinner is fine in my book. If he were really doping we would never know it, because he would never get popped.

Just to add: yes, I think Djokovic is doped to the gills. And I take my cues from the world of track and field. Anytime in track and field you see a performance that's so outside the normal and extraordinary, and almost unnatural, there's usually a very good explanation for it.

But of course Djokovic is very disciplined and very rich, so he's never going to get popped.

I used to not believe these kind of things though. I use to accept these performances on the level. I believed Lance Armstrong. Boy was I wrong.

 

[The Great Gatsby]

1. One would like to think that law is applied correctly regardless of the judge and there are appeal processes. The matter is also being litigated in three different jurisdictions.

2. Sinner was caught doping and CAS would have given him a 12 months suspension as a minimum. Speculation about Sinner's discipline is of no relevance to the matter.

1. Well, if the law is applied correctly I would imagine this whole thing is going nowhere. That's why I said if they find the right judge. Meaning, a judge who wouldn't be applying the law correctly. Then they have a chance. Otherwise, no, I don't believe this is going anywhere.

2. Considering less than one billionth of a gram was found in his system, and offered no performance enhancement, a 12 month suspension would have been punitive. Insane, really. Three months even I feel is a bit excessive. 30 to 45 days I feel would have been appropriate. If there were more found in his system, an amount consistent with someone who is actually doping, then yes, 12 month minimum. And probably more like 2 to 4 years. But 12 months for less than one billionth of a gram is moronic.

Also, the speculation is simply my reasoning on why I have no issues with Sinner. Because I don't believe he's stupid enough to dope with clostebol.

Again, if Sinner was someone undisciplined like a Kyrgios or someone, and he got popped, I would 100% believe he was doping. But Sinner is a polar opposite of that, so if he were doping, he would never get caught.

Just to add for Kyrgios: no, I do not believe Kyrgios is doping. He doesn't work hard so it wouldn't help him anyway. Because even if you dope you still have to work extremely hard, and obviously Kyrgios doesn't work hard at all.

 

[Bartelby]

1. There is no doubt that the ATP/WTA engages in anti-competitive practices, so the only questions are justification and penalty, if any.

2. A 12 month suspension is the norm under strict liability principles and Sinner should not have been allowed to bypass his day in court.

3. I believe Sinner was doping, but I accept that his excuse was accepted as plausible. The penalty for non-intentional doping is quite high.

1. Well, if the law is applied correctly I would imagine this whole thing is going nowhere. That's why I said if they find the right judge. Meaning, a judge who wouldn't be applying the law correctly. Then they have a chance. Otherwise, no, I don't believe this is going anywhere.

2. Considering less than one billionth of a gram was found in his system, and offered no performance enhancement, a 12 month suspension would have been punitive. Insane, really. Three months even I feel is a bit excessive. 30 to 45 days I feel would have been appropriate. If there were more found in his system, an amount consistent with someone who is actually doping, then yes, 12 month minimum. And probably more like 2 to 4 years. But 12 months for less than one billionth of a gram is moronic.

Also, the speculation is simply my reasoning on why I have no issues with Sinner. Because I don't believe he's stupid enough to dope with clostebol.

Again, if Sinner was someone undisciplined like a Kyrgios or someone, and he got popped, I would 100% believe he was doping. But Sinner is a polar opposite of that, so if he were doping, he would never get caught.

Just to add for Kyrgios: no, I do not believe Kyrgios is doping. He doesn't work hard so it wouldn't help him anyway. Because even if you dope you still have to work extremely hard, and obviously Kyrgios doesn't work hard at all.

 

[The Great Gatsby]

1. There is no doubt that the ATP/WTA engages in anti-competitive practices, so the only questions are justification and penalty.

2. A 12 month suspension is the norm under strict liability principles and Sinner should not have been allowed to bypass his day in court.

3. I believe Sinner was doping, but I accept that his excuse was accepted as plausible. The penalty for non-intentional doping is quite high.

1. Well, the ATP and WTA engaging in anti-competitive practices is opinion. And I'd like to see the PTPA's argument in court (if it even gets that far) that it is...

How the ATP and WTA treat lower ranked players in terms of prize money can be argued as unfair, but I don't see anything anti-competitive about it. One can argue greed but nothing is anti-competitive. If you win you earn more prize money than you do if you lose. And there's nothing preventing a tennis version of the LIV golf tour. Of course only the top tennis players are going to get paid in such a scenario.

Tennis is sport as much as it is entertainment, and those who generate the most money are paid accordingly. The only remedy is for the top players to take less or the tournament themselves to take less (or both). Good luck with that.

2. Of course a settlement was reached.

3. What is the penalty for less than one billionth of a gram that offered no performance enhancement? (Hence the settlement.)

Also, if Sinner were 33 and killing people like he is, I would think he's doping. A guy 23 years old killing people like he is... eh, nothing out of the ordinary in that to me. A 23 year old guy as a dominant world number #1 I think is very normal. It happens all the time.

 

[Bartelby]

1. The suit will get to court unless the ATP/WTA settles.

2. Sinner got favourable treatment, not a deal.

3. Sinner was guilty and should be on a 12 month ban.

1. Well, the ATP and WTA engaging in anti-competitive practices is opinion. And I'd like to see the PTPA's argument in court (if it even gets that far) that it is...

How the ATP and WTA treat lower ranked players in terms of prize money can be argued as unfair, but I don't see anything anti-competitive about it. One can argue greed but nothing is anti-competitive. If you win you earn more prize money than you do if you lose. And there's nothing preventing a tennis version of the LIV golf tour. Of course only the top tennis players are going to get paid in such a scenario.

Tennis is sport as much as it is entertainment, and those who generate the most money are paid accordingly. The only remedy is for the top players to take less or the tournament themselves to take less (or both). Good luck with that.

2. Of course a settlement was reached.

3. What is the penalty for less than one billionth of a gram that offered no performance enhancement? (Hence the settlement.)

Also, if Sinner were 33 and killing people like he is, I would think he's doping. A guy 23 years old killing people like he is... eh, nothing out of the ordinary in that to me. A 23 year old guy as a dominant world number #1 I think is very normal. It happens all the time.

 

[The Great Gatsby]

1. The suit will get to court unless the ATP/WTA settles.

2. Sinner got favourable treatment, not a deal.

3. Sinner was guilty and should be on a 12 month ban.

1. I'll be surprised if it goes to court, or if the ATP/WTA settles. The PTPA has no leverage, and I would absolutely love to see the proof that they have to back up some of their grievances.

2. Actually, favorable treatment would be if the public never knew about a drug test that came back with less than one billionth of a gram and provided no performance enhancement. That would have been favorable treatment. What Sinner got was a settlement.

The same with Swiatek. I'm not fully convinced that we should have even known about her situation, and I can't stand Swiatek.

If it enhances their performance, then yes, the public should be aware of it and they should receive a substantial ban. If it doesn't enhance their performance, then what are we doing here?

Either way, I don't think Sinner is at the level of getting favorable treatment of that kind yet. I don't think even Alcaraz is at that level yet. He may be approaching it, but certainly not Sinner, yet. Djokovic is the only player right now that could get that kind of favorable treatment.

3. Yes, what he was guilty of didn't warrant a 12 month ban, that's why he's not getting that.

 

[Bartelby]

The findings of the initial hearing needed to be tested in CAS. They weren't so I consider all initial findings unreliable.

1. I'll be surprised if it goes to court, or if the ATP/WTA settles. The PTPA has no leverage, and I would absolutely love to see the proof that they have to back up some of their grievances.

2. Actually, favorable treatment would be if the public never knew about a drug test that came back with less than one billionth of a gram and provided no performance enhancement. That would have been favorable treatment. What Sinner got was a settlement.

The same with Swiatek. I'm not fully convinced that we should have even known about her situation, and I can't stand Swiatek.

If it enhances their performance, then yes, the public should be aware of it and they should receive a substantial ban. If it doesn't enhance their performance, then what are we doing here?

Either way, I don't think Sinner is at the level of getting favorable treatment of that kind yet. I don't think even Alcaraz is at that level yet. He may be approaching it, but certainly not Sinner, yet. Djokovic is the only player right now that could get that kind of favorable treatment.

3. Yes, what he was guilty of didn't warrant a 12 month ban, that's why he's not getting that.

 

[THUNDERVOLLEY]

2. Considering less than one billionth of a gram was found in his system, and offered no performance enhancement,

Case closed. No professional athlete willingly takes a PED if there's no benefit he or se will receive from it. Sinners tests obviously proved he was not using anything for performance enhancement, unlike the levels found in (for a few examples) Swiatek, Halep and Sharapova, which suggest (strongly) that performance enhancement was the goal.

 

[Bartelby]

What an athlete thinks will benefit him and what does actually benefit him are two different things.

You attribute too much knowledge to a person who is not guided by direct scientific advice as he does something illicit in strict secrecy.

Case closed. No professional athlete willingly takes a PED if there's no benefit he or se will receive from it. Sinners tests obviously proved he was not using anything for performance enhancement, unlike the levels found in (for a few examples) Swiatek, Halep and Sharapova, which suggest (strongly) that performance enhancement was the goal.

 

[intrepidish]

All anyone here needs to know about our resident crank's commitment to fair play is how he never misses a chance to make excuses for Sharapova and her massive doping scandal.

 

[Bartelby]

You can be an apologist for Sinner's doping if you wish, but it makes you the crank uninterested in fair play.

All anyone here needs to know about our resident crank's commitment to fair play is how he never misses a chance to make excuses for Sharapova and her massive doping scandal.

 

[jeroenn]

All anyone here needs to know about our resident crank's commitment to fair play is how he never misses a chance to make excuses for Sharapova and her massive doping scandal.

(and still waiting to hear why we should believe the resident crank over those who actually were experts, but eh... when hell freezes over, I guess).

 

[Bartelby]

The initial hearing during which these experts presented their views resulted in a legal outcome where no suspension whatsoever was levied on Sinner for doping.

This was such an outrageous legal outcome that even WADA was forced to appeal it before backing down in a humiliating display that has tarnished its reputation.

(and still waiting to hear why we should believe the resident crank over those who actually were experts, but eh... when hell freezes over, I guess).

 

[jeroenn]

The initial hearing during which these experts presented their views resulted in a legal outcome where no suspension whatsoever was levied on Sinner for doping.

This was such an outrageous legal outcome that even WADA was forced to appeal it before backing down in a humiliating display that has tarnished its reputation.

You're not really keen on facts, aren't you?

 

[longtimelurker]

The more this gets discussed and brought to light the more Sinner is guilty. Facts are facts, rest is speculation. Guilty verdict with a very light sentence.

 

[Bartelby]

The laboratory tests came back showing that Sinner doped. It's you who are denying the facts.

You're not really keen on facts, aren't you?

 

[intrepidish]

You're not really keen on facts, aren't you?

He's not interested in facts per se. Generally he hopes to submerge them with a never ending stream of incoherent half truths and outright falsehoods in the service of whichever narrative he's selling.

 

[Bartelby]

Personal attacks are against forum rules, so stay silent when you are without an argument.

He's not interested in facts per se. Generally he hopes to submerge them with a never ending stream of incoherent half truths and outright falsehoods in the service of whichever narrative he's selling.

 

[jeroenn]

The laboratory tests came back showing that Sinner doped. It's you who are denying the facts.

I'm quite sure this has been explained to you a number of times, but just to make sure you're actually capable of some kind of reasoning:
- Testing Postive on a prohibited substance
and
- Intentionally doping (the act of using doping to enhance performance)
are two very different things. Do you agree?
Because if there were no difference, there wouldn't be any provisions in the anti doping rules dealing with unintentional situations.

Fact: ITIA concluded no intention. ( see Sinner ITIA PDF)
Fact: WADA concluded no intention. (see WADA statement)

In fact, no one (that mattered anyway) concluded intention.

Which leaves us with the final question:

What do you know that the rest doesn't know for you to conclude it was intentional and why should we take your word over that of the organizations, independent tribunals and experts?

 

[Bartelby]

I have discussed all of this before. Sinner unintentionally doped and as such CAS would have banned him for at least 12 months. but WADA intervened to save him.

I'm quite sure this has been explained to you a number of times, but just to make sure you're actually capable of some kind of reasoning:
- Testing Postive on a prohibited substance
and
- Intentionally doping (the act of using doping to enhance performance)
are two very different things. Do you agree?
Because if there were no difference, there wouldn't be any provisions in the anti doping rules dealing with unintentional situations.

Fact: ITIA concluded no intention. ( see Sinner ITIA PDF)
Fact: WADA concluded no intention. (see WADA statement)

In fact, no one (that mattered anyway) concluded intention.

Which leaves us with the final question:

What do you know that the rest doesn't know for you to conclude it was intentional and why should we take your word over that of the organizations, independent tribunals and experts?

 

[jeroenn]

I have discussed all of this before. Sinner unintentionally doped and as such CAS would have banned him for at least 12 months. but WADA intervened to save him.

Now were are getting at least somewhere.
To conclude the outcome of the CAS appeal without it actually having taken place, is obviously just assumptions not based in any fact, same goes for the alledged 'WADA intervention'.
If the WADA saved him, then why appeal in the first place?

 

[Bartelby]

You've read my views before and, as I've not changed them, it's clear that you don't bother to even remember them.

Sinner is a banned doper. This is both a scientific and legal fact. And he got off too lightly compared to many others.

Now were are getting at least somewhere.
To conclude the outcome of the CAS appeal without it actually having taken place, is obviously just assumptions not based in any fact, same goes for the alledged 'WADA intervention'.
If the WADA saved him, then why appeal in the first place?

 

[intrepidish]

You've read my views before and, as I've not changed them, it's clear that you don't bother to even remember them.

Sinner is a banned doper. This is both a scientific and legal fact. And he got off too lightly compared to many others.

That's false as you know. On the other hand, Sharapova most certainly fits your description perfectly, yet you continue to strenuously deny this, even to this very day.

It's just one of the many reasons why many have noted your commitment to an agenda which has nothing to do with the facts and everything to do with whichever narrative you are selling at the moment.

 

[jeroenn]

You've read my views before and, as I've not changed them, it's clear that you don't bother to even remember them.

Sinner is a banned doper. This is both a scientific and legal fact. And he got off too lightly compared to many others.

Yes, we all have seen your views.

You know, reading your posts, going on about 'dopers' and 'caught doping' as if there is no difference between accidental and intentional, 'getting off too light', 'outrageous legal outcomes', initial findings 'unreliable' (without any foundation), calling us 'apologists for Sinners doping' while we only follow the actual facts as they were presented to us, and more of these statements, it seems to me you're way too emotionally invested in this.

Perhaps you just don't like Sinner.

Jannik Sinner is banned for 3 months for accidentally being contaminated with a prohibited substance out of his control, and he's swallowing his bitter pill for it (pardon the pun) as he ultimately carries the responsibility of the failings of his team.

Any other conclusion you publicly make with the fierceness as you are doing here, reflects more on you than anything else.

 

[Bartelby]

The doping control system in tennis has fallen into disrepute. An independent external review leading to reform is urgently required.

Yes, we all have seen your views.

You know, reading your posts, going on about 'dopers' and 'caught doping' as if there is no difference between accidental and intentional, 'getting off too light', 'outrageous legal outcomes', initial findings 'unreliable' (without any foundation), calling us 'apologists for Sinners doping' while we only follow the actual facts as they were presented to us, and more of these statements, it seems to me you're way too emotionally invested in this.

Perhaps you just don't like Sinner.

Jannik Sinner is banned for 3 months for accidentally being contaminated with a prohibited substance out of his control, and he's swallowing his bitter pill for it (pardon the pun) as he ultimately carries the responsibility of the failings of his team.

Any other conclusion you publicly make with the fierceness as you are doing here, reflects more on you than anything else.

 

[intrepidish]

Yes, we all have seen your views.

You know, reading your posts, going on about 'dopers' and 'caught doping' as if there is no difference between accidental and intentional, 'getting off too light', 'outrageous legal outcomes', initial findings 'unreliable' (without any foundation), calling us 'apologists for Sinners doping' while we only follow the actual facts as they were presented to us, and more of these statements, it seems to me you're way too emotionally invested in this.

Perhaps you just don't like Sinner.

Jannik Sinner is banned for 3 months for accidentally being contaminated with a prohibited substance out of his control, and he's swallowing his bitter pill for it (pardon the pun) as he ultimately carries the responsibility of the failings of his team.

Any other conclusion you publicly make with the fierceness as you are doing here, reflects more on you than anything else.

Exactly right. He attempts to transform the actual statements from the relevant authorities to something unrecognizable and then attempts to obfuscate when it is noted.

And of course his defenses of Sharapova make it very clear that this is not about a commitment to 'clean tennis' on his part.

 

[Bartelby]

Sinner will soon be back to haunt tennis and I am not the topic of this thread. If you have no further arguments to "spray" at me, then desist!

Exactly right. He attempts to transform the actual statements from the relevant authorities to something unrecognizable and then attempts to obfuscate when it is noted.

And of course his defenses of Sharapova make it very clear that this is not about a commitment to 'clean tennis' on his part.

 

[THUNDERVOLLEY]

All anyone here needs to know about our resident crank's commitment to fair play is how he never misses a chance to make excuses for Sharapova and her massive doping scandal.

Indeed. She was one of the worst, most obvious cases of PED abuse, yet some--either for teary-eyed fanboy reasons, or acting as Russian propagandists--will defend Sharapova. To history, she was and will always be a criminal PED abuser.

 

[Bartelby]

The banning of Sinner for doping is the topic, but your view that he is "innocent" is indefensible. You can't, as a consequence, stay relevant as you've stopped defending him.

Indeed. She was one of the worst, most obvious cases of PED abuse, yet some--either for teary-eyed fanboy reasons, or acting as Russian propagandists--will defend Sharapova. To history, she was and will always be a criminal PED abuser.

 

[messiahrobins]

Sinner right now absolutely laughing. had a 3 month holiday basically and somehow has strengthened his no.1 hold lol.

 

[Bartelby]

Who said "crime doesn't pay"?, even if it was merely a question of "rule-bending" by others.

 

[JMR]

1. The suit will get to court unless the ATP/WTA settles.

1. I'll be surprised if it goes to court, or if the ATP/WTA settles. The PTPA has no leverage, and I would absolutely love to see the proof that they have to back up some of their grievances.

Just to be clear, the PTPA suit (at least the one in the United States) is already in court. The Complaint has been filed. Perhaps you guys are referring to the possibility that the case will go to trial, which is a separate question. A trial would be well down the road regardless of the validity of the legal theories. Before possibly reaching that stage, there will likely be many other steps, such as: a motion to dismiss; extensive discovery (possibly divided into two stages, relating to the class questions and the merits of the claims); a motion to certify the class; a motion or motions for summary judgment, etc. Settlement could occur at any time. If the case survived all the way, only then would it go to trial, probably years from now.

 

[Bartelby]

This is all well-known and somewhat uninteresting. Language is also a malleable tool. "Wanting one's day in court" doesn't mean your complaint has been filed with the court, does it?

My simple point was, and the one you missed, is that the PTPA would probably be happy to force the AT{/WTA to the negotiating table, but the latter would be happy for a very long process.

The whole point of this thread, by the way, is completely absurd as it seeks to link conspiratorially Sinner's doping with the PTPA's action whereas he is merely cited.

Just to be clear, the PTPA suit (at least the one in the United States) is already in court. The Complaint has been filed. Perhaps you guys are referring to the possibility that the case will go to trial, which is a separate question. A trial would be well down the road regardless of the validity of the legal theories. Before possibly reaching that stage, there will likely be many other steps, such as: a motion to dismiss; extensive discovery (possibly divided into two stages, relating to the class questions and the merits of the claims); a motion to certify the class; a motion or motions for summary judgment, etc. Settlement could occur at any time. If the case survived all the way, only then would it go to trial, probably years from now.

 

[JMR]

My simple point was, and the one you missed, is that the PTPA would probably be happy to force the AT{/WTA to the negotiating table, but the latter would be happy for a very long process.

No point you've attempted to make here could be missed, since each is repeated many times. In any case, the point is probably incorrect. While I don't believe the tennis authorities have shared their litigation defense strategy with anyone in this forum, including me, "a very long process" is usually not a defendant's primary objective in a suit like this. The initial goal is to get rid of the suit as quickly and cheaply as possible. Delay is basically a fallback position if the first rounds of motions practice fail. But even then, a defendant may choose to push for a trial if it is convinced of the strength of its case, especially if the defendant is not inclined toward settlement.

 

[Bartelby]

I can't see how the ATP/WTA suit can be gotten rid of "quickly and cheaply" short of the defendants' capitulation and I can't see that happening.

Where I live despite the invention of processes designed to get the parties to settle quickly, this is still not happening. This may be different elsewhere.

No point you've attempted to make here could be missed, since each is repeated many times. In any case, the point is probably incorrect. While I don't believe the tennis authorities have shared their litigation defense strategy with anyone in this forum, including me, "a very long process" is usually not a defendant's primary objective in a suit like this. The initial goal is to get rid of the suit as quickly and cheaply as possible. Delay is basically a fallback position if the first rounds of motions practice fail. But even then, a defendant may choose to push for a trial if it is convinced of the strength of its case, especially if the defendant is not inclined toward settlement.

 

[ChaelAZ]

There is nothing altruistic for Djo here. So you never know.

 

[THUNDERVOLLEY]

And of course his defenses of Sharapova make it very clear that this is not about a commitment to 'clean tennis' on his part.

...and it quite laughable, when the world knows how guilty Sharapova was with her PED scandal.

The banning of Sinner for doping is the topic, but your view that he is "innocent" is indefensible. You can't, as a consequence, stay relevant as you've stopped defending him.

You are the one constantly accusing Sinner of being an intentional doper when the evidence does not say that at all, which exposes you as someone with an eternal axe to grind all due to your favorite Russian players and sports program officially outed as the most corrupt PED users in history.

 

[Bartelby]

I've stated unambiguously that Sinner is an unintentional doper and for that a mininum of 12 months suspension would have been decided by CAS.

I consider that the first hearing fell into factual and legal error and came up with a decision not even WADA could live with, but WADA ended up disgracing itself as well.

...and it quite laughable, when the world knows how guilty Sharapova was with her PED scandal.



You are the one constantly accusing Sinner of being an intentional doper when the evidence does not say that at all, which exposes you as someone with an eternal axe to grind all due to your favorite Russian players and sports program officially outed as the most corrupt PED users in history.

 

[Fabrivitx]

Djokovic the prince of seething old man haters. He cannot accept the beating.

 

[longtimelurker]

Djokovic the prince of seething old man haters. He cannot accept the beating.

The last reply was in April, are you still coming to terms that Sinner doped on multiple occasions?

 

[big ted]

One could say The Djoker does not wish to be a direct litigant and wants to focus on being a PTPA advocate.

But it is telling that not a single superstar is on the list. No Fed, Rafa, Murray, Sinner,...
It is a list of clowns. Pathetic. What it tells us? It tells us that there is no support from top players for the PTPA.

The 12 litigants named as plaintiffs in the PTPA lawsuit against the ATP, in the U.S. filing in the Southern District of New York are:

1. Vasek Pospisil - Canadian player, co-founder of the PTPA, and former Wimbledon doubles champion (2014).
2. Nick Kyrgios - Australian player, known for reaching the 2022 Wimbledon final.
3. Reilly Opelka - American player, a four-time ATP Tour champion.
4. Sorana Cirstea - Romanian player, a two-time Grand Slam quarterfinalist.
5. Tennys Sandgren - American player, now retired, with a notable Australian Open quarterfinal run.
6. Nicole Melichar-Martinez - American doubles specialist.
7. Anastasia Rodionova - Australian player, now retired.
8. Varvara Gracheva - French-Russian player, active on the WTA Tour.
9. Zheng Saisai - Chinese player, formerly ranked in the top 40.
10. Noah Rubin - American player, retired, known for his junior Wimbledon title.
11. John-Patrick Smith - Australian player, active in doubles.
12. Aldila Sutjiadi - Indonesian player, active in doubles.

half of those players are jerks