Rafa4LifeEver
G.O.A.T.
Is there any evidence to every athlete's doping? No, right? We can't speculate on these things, we can substantiate on what we have in front of us.
Sinner s woes are not over. WADA is considering appeal
- Thread starter roysid
- Start date
NeutralFan
G.O.A.T.
How old are you ? You're naive if you think any sport is clean lol.
Rafa4LifeEver
G.O.A.T.
I'm 30.
Sinner is a doper.
THUNDERVOLLEY
G.O.A.T.
Yea I mean I have read a bunch of your guys posts trying to piece together what happened here. I guess my question is for the pro sinner people is has there been an investigation that went down like this before?Sinner will tell us what happened in a few decades, in a book, like Andre. Just show a little patience. The ITF at the time will be “very disappointed.”
RSJfan
Legend
Who is “your guys posts.” I have a grand total of zero guys here (excluding my fav Dr Raul who unfortunately hasn’t yet chimed in). I’m definitely not researching WADA cases if that’s what your requesting.
As far as I can tell — and I’m not very interested in Carrot — what happened is the #1 player was caught doping. And nothing will happen to him because there is too much for tennis to lose. Also WADA is corrupt but that is another issue. And WADA was previously harassing my boy Brooksby knocking on his door at crazy hours day and night.
Last edited:
mtommer
Hall of Fame
There's anecdotal evidence (not conclusive evidence) that suggests or allows for suspicion/skepticism that is warranted.
mtommer
Hall of Fame
Sinner tested positive for a banned substance. The amount revealed was a very, very small amount. He was investigated. He gave a defense. That defense was deemed plausible enough not to warrant a ban.
Some people accept this. Some people believe it's a coverup for the sake of not hurting tennis and that lower tier players aren't afforded the same luxury in providing acceptable excuses, because frankly they aren't important enough to the popularity of the sport to matter.
Some people remain open to either or. That is my take and it's because I don't know if Clostebol is used as a masking agent for other more potent doping regiments or used in conjunction with said regiments (ie a substance that is used as a carrier or enhancer).
RSJfan
Legend
“Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.”
RSJfan
Legend
Exactly. How the heck do I know. Carrot looks relatively frail anyway. If he’s using that substance to mask something else it isn’t working. I would defer to my fav Dr Raul who may have some pretend expertise in this area.
mtommer
Hall of Fame
What constitutes extraordinary is often a matter of perspective.
tennis4me
Legend
"WADA shared details of the appeal deadline with The Associated Press on Tuesday". Didn't really say anything about what they're planning to do.
"WADA and Nado Italia, Italy’s anti-doping agency, are the only two agencies that could challenge the decision" - uh huh, as if Nado Italia going to do that to their own player.
This appeal by WADA and/or Nado Italia is as likely as a Chair umpire's decision getting overturned by Tournament Referee when a player appeals. As in the likelihood of that is "Never"? We'll see if I'm wrong.
"WADA and Nado Italia, Italy’s anti-doping agency, are the only two agencies that could challenge the decision" - uh huh, as if Nado Italia going to do that to their own player.
This appeal by WADA and/or Nado Italia is as likely as a Chair umpire's decision getting overturned by Tournament Referee when a player appeals. As in the likelihood of that is "Never"? We'll see if I'm wrong.
I get that. My question is do we have another example of some player, testing positive, it not being reported, then they come out after the investigation is done and say well we did an investigation, didnt tell anyone he was positive but we cleared him?
RSJfan
Legend
I don’t think that line will have the same legs.
You do realise the Emeritus Professor doping expert consulted for this case, together with the other two, explicitly stated they found no evidence for any other scenario, including the pretty obvious one you are suggesting? I'm pretty sure they understand the way doping works, and they state that the amount is too little to have been the result of a doping attempt. Accept it! It was a goddamn contamination accident ffs even the experts believe this to be the case!
And, why didn't they announce the stripping down of prize money and points of Sinner straight away after it happened? The fact that they hid this for so long shows they're trying to cover up the dirty deeds.
Yes: Marco Bortolotti, a very low-ranked player. https://www.itia.tennis/news/sanctions/no-fault-or-negligence-in-marco-bortolotti-s-doping-case/
As I mentioned in another post today, this case has been cited and explained over and over here. I can point to a dozen posts in this forum where the Bortolotti case is discussed.
So my question is, if you don't mind, why are you, and so many others claiming or believing that Sinner received a unique form of preferential treatment, unaware of the Bortolotti case? What does that say about the general level of awareness and understanding on the part of the many critics here yelling about cover-ups, favoritism, etc.?
Money can make scientists say whatever the corrupt authority want them to say.
uscwang
Hall of Fame
An appeal by WADA is probably not the only thing cooking.
WADA weighs whether to appeal the decision to exonerate US Open champion Jannik Sinner | Tennis.com
The Italian tested positive twice for an anabolic steroid in March but ultimately was not banned because the ITIA determined he was not to blame.www.tennis.com
There are multiple news articles on the same. If WADA appeals it willl be a big dent in Sinners reputation and career. Not to mention, the suspension that comes with it
The US law enforcement could open a criminal investigation based on the controversial Rodchenkov Anti-Doping Act considering that IW and Miami are on US soil. It can be complicated.
Last edited:
Jack the Hack
Hall of Fame
Yes. An example has been posted here several times.
ITIA - No Fault or Negligence in Marco Bortolotti's doping case
ITIA - No Fault or Negligence in Marco Bortolotti's doping case
www.itia.tennis
In accordance with TADP Articles 9.1 and 10.1.2, Bortolotti’s results, prize money and ranking points from the Lisbon Challenger have been disqualified; however, as the player bore No Fault or Negligence, no subsequent results of the player will be disqualified.
You are wrong.
See my post #119 above. You may care to read the cited report, which includes this statement:
"In accordance with TADP Articles 9.1 and 10.1.2, Bortolotti’s results, prize money and ranking points from the Lisbon Challenger have been disqualified; however, as the player bore No Fault or Negligence, no subsequent results of the player will be disqualified."
Are you joking man? We've been talking about Bortolotti's case (ranking>#300) for days now. It's totally not the first time, why would it be. Its pretty standard procedure, all within clear rules.
Why didnt that happen with HALEP and Sharapova and others?
An Internet forum with no evidentiary requirements can enable random trolls to say whatever they want to say.
Simple, cause they couldn't give enough evidence of their claims. And why would you think these cases are all the same anyway? I'm willing to guess there are plenty details that make them all different, where's the surprise?
Honestly, don't you think this is a very simplistic question? It's like asking "why do some people go to jail while others don't"? I mean...
I mean I dont know about Sharapova, I know that HALEP fought the whole thing out in the open for at least a year. And after she was suspended and fined ect ect they said oh we dont got enough. So your saying she couldnt present the evidence initially so they just outed her and then she fought it?
Yeah, right. A criminal investigation. And your source for this nutty speculation is -- what? A well-placed mole within the Department of Justice? The fact that you and the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of California were law school classmates? You've been placed on a grand jury and are feeding secrets to this forum?
Better_Call_Raul
Legend
Climate Change "scientists" are guilty of this.
Ah, but you got them! Well done! Your medal is in the mail, should come any day now.
Last edited:
No the investigation process was just different. You're saying well the player has a chance to present evidence. How much time do they have before someone decides oh they have had to much time we are going to suspend them? And also announce they are doping.
I guess so. Or perhaps she was actually guilty. Before assuming there's something odd, we'd need to read the papers for both cases, no? Not sure what you expect asking this question. The obvious answer to "why are there two different outcomes" is likely to be "because it's two very different cases"!
Jack the Hack
Hall of Fame
If you sincerely want to know the answer to this, please read the Tennis Anti-Doping Programme rules at https://www.itia.tennis/tadp/rules/, particularly section 14.4, which covers confidentiality and when the ITIA discloses the findings publically. After familiarizing yourself with the rules, then go search for the public Independent Tribunal rulings for each of the athletes that you are concerned about. Compare the rules with the procedures that were followed to understand why and when disclosures occurred. The rulings usually expressly cite the rules they followed, who was involved, and how they came to the decisions that they did.
I mean in the end they basically said she wasnt guilty of doping on purpose. But thats after they suspended her for like at least a year. So I dont understand the process. And for people like you who keep claiming it's so incredibly simple, it isnt. Many people dont get how they do these investigations and how they determine who to out and who not to.
You mean you read the rules (or the many posts in this forum that have been clarifying them) and didn't get them? Or you don't understand because you haven't read much about it? They are not difficult once one takes the time to read them. The problem is everybody wants to make up an opinion BEFORE knowing them, in which case yeah that would be very confusing. And btw I don't mean to have a go at you mate, but it's really frustrating to keep explaining the same stuff for days. It's all written and debunked everywhere by now.
RSJfan
Legend
I’m not impressed. In a litigation/arbitrarion it’s not uncommon to have a “battle of the experts.” The fact finder is free to favor one sides expert(s) or the other or ignore both. I will wait to see what my fav Dr. Raul thinks before I decide if Carrot is a doper.
There's no obligation for a tennis fan to be well-versed in the process. You're approaching the matter from the wrong direction. The question you should ask yourself is, "Do I have any solid, well-founded reason to believe that the disposition of Sinner's case was not in accordance with the rules?" If you don't, you don't. That should be the end of it as far you're concerned.
But instead, you seem to be saying (like others here, to be fair), "Since I don't comprehensively understand how the system works, I'm going to be highly skeptical of the Sinner result and assume that the process must have been corrupt in some way."
There was no battle of experts in Sinner's case. All three agreed. You're manufacturing a factual dispute where none exists.
RSJfan
Legend
It’s about time you showed up. I thought you would keep prattling on about electric vehicles until you passed out. Now please provide your insights into this doping situation with your new fav, The Carrot. Do not make us wait a moment longer.
Better_Call_Raul
Legend
The WADA has often appealed doping decisions in other sports (swimming, bicycling, soccer, etc).
But despite the numerous doping cases in tennis there is no record of WADA ever appealing a tennis doping decision.
Why? Because tennis doping cases are tried by an ITIA Tribunal of indepndent scientists and doping experts who don't know Sinner from a hole in the ground.
The WADA has historically always deferred to the ITIA Tribunal and does not appeal their findings.
So everybody needs to get that silly notion out of their minds. It is not happening.
But despite the numerous doping cases in tennis there is no record of WADA ever appealing a tennis doping decision.
Why? Because tennis doping cases are tried by an ITIA Tribunal of indepndent scientists and doping experts who don't know Sinner from a hole in the ground.
The WADA has historically always deferred to the ITIA Tribunal and does not appeal their findings.
So everybody needs to get that silly notion out of their minds. It is not happening.
Last edited:
robyrolfo
Hall of Fame
You know it isn't a black and white thing, right? It's on an either/or question. I know nuance is apparently WAY too much for some of you to handle, but try your best. Most Western criminal justice systems are based on this concept...
I'm happy about this one. I swore off Barilla once they ridiculously started sponsoring Gauff. Now I feel better about the extra $0.50 for a box of De Cecco.
Exactly. This is reminding me of those wonderful times during the pandemic when you had Joe and Bob, who barely finished high school, talking like they knew better than scientists and scholars specializing in virology. What a lovely society we live in.
Aussie Darcy
Bionic Poster
So two Italian players test positive and are protected and their failed doping tests are kept under wraps until the investigation is finished and allowed to play while countless others from Errani to Haddad Maia to Sharapova to Jarry had it announced quickly and were suspended?
And then there’s Halep who had her career ruined only for it to turn out it was not her fault and that the ITIA messed it up so badly they actually had to pay her legal fees?
I’m not saying this isn’t in the rules as you quoted, it’s just that those rules aren’t applied evenly. And we’ve all seen it play out. It doesn’t take a genius to know why Sinners multiple failed tests weren’t announced to the world straight away and instead was swept under the rug until he was cleared, at which point he got to announce it to the world. Cause he’s the #1 and it would destroy the ATP. It reeks of bias and a cover up. Halep got hung out to dry while Sinner was protected.
Aussie Darcy
Bionic Poster
Sinner had his Indian Wells points and prize money stripped from him, that should’ve been announced straight away. Not keeping this under lock and key for 5 months as he headlines and wins tournaments.
Also, this doping has completely clouded his Olympics withdrawal which we never really believed as he was living it up on the beaches of Italy. The IOC and WADA knew he was still under investigation in July and would not have allowed him to play the Olympics because had the decision resulted in a ban and he won an Olympic medal it would need to be stripped from him. So he just happened to withdraw with tonsillitis.
Also, this doping has completely clouded his Olympics withdrawal which we never really believed as he was living it up on the beaches of Italy. The IOC and WADA knew he was still under investigation in July and would not have allowed him to play the Olympics because had the decision resulted in a ban and he won an Olympic medal it would need to be stripped from him. So he just happened to withdraw with tonsillitis.
Bartelby
Bionic Poster
See this is my impression as well just from an outside perspective. I am a little familiar with the drug testing in baseball in the states. I am not aware of a policy that says well if he has a good defense we dont tell anyone, yet will tell them after we have cleared him. And that seems to be the policy here. Which is in my opinion just weird.
See I guess my problem is what if they found he was doping on purpose after the investigation? They just let you play after you fail a test for a couple months? Then say oh he doped by the way we knew this 3 months ago but we kept letting him play. That makes no sense to me.
Similar threads
