Wada says Sinner case 'million miles away from doping'

[anarosevoli]

Sharapova was two million miles away from doping, but WADA prosecuted her as an intentional doper deserving of a four year ban.

She took a forbidden substance while it was forbidden. That's not "two million miles away". She always took this substance like many other Russian cheaters and didn't mention it on her forms (where she mentioned Vitamin C lol). The intention was that of a cheater and doper in a country of systematic cheating and doping: Helping to not get this on the list of forbidden substances.

 

[Bartelby]

Meldonium was banned for political reasons as USADA discovered that it was the favourite pick-me-up of East European countries and wanted to ban Russia from the Olympics.

And now Russia and America are best buddies forever and the kind of gratuitous racism that rants about dopers from doper countries is no longer the political fashion thankfully.

She took a forbidden substance while it was forbidden. That's not "two millions away". She always took this substance like many other Russian cheaters and didn't mention it on her forms (where she mentioned Vitamin C lol). The intention was that of a cheater and doper in a country of systematic cheating and doping: Helping to not get this on the list of forbidden substances.

 

[anarosevoli]

Meldonium was banned for political reasons as USADA discovered that it was the favourite pick-me-up of East European countries and wanted to ban Russia from the Olympics.

And now Russia and America are best buddies forever and the kind of gratuitous racism that rants about dopers from doper countries is no longer the political fashion thankfully.

What a crazy conspiracy theory. You want to tell me that they knew Russians can't read E-mails? And explain why she listed vitamin C and not meldonium!

 

[Bartelby]

I documented all this scrupulously at the time, and Russia was indeed banned from the Olympics.

And I don't see why I should be lectured by a person who simply indulges in Russophobic racist tropes.

She delegated those emails to her agent and CAS ultimately decided that was an acceptable practics.

A lot of athletes don't admit to all the non-prohibited substances they take and it's not a punishable offence.

What a crazy conspiracy theory. You want to tell me that they knew Russians can't read E-mails? And explain why she listed vitamin C and not meldonium!

 

[mtommer]

Come on. Why make anything out of this if it's "MILLION MILES AWAY FROM DOPING". If that was true, that would mean they dragged his name through the mud over nothing for almost a year. It's total BS through and through and you tip your hat to them?

Yup, I tip my hat to them. It makes perfect sense. Their conclusion was as you stated, not their starting point. They want to maintain high standards and believe he should have been held more responsible for his team's oversight....and Sinner agreed to it. Chances are, WADA saw that ITIA's judgement would stand, and if pressed, they would lose. And they likely would have because once a governing body hands down their judgement, it will and does hold unless an appealer can demonstrate significant reasoning/evidence as to why it should be overturned. True justice means every case is treated on its own, without regard for any other case. Only a fool believes "consistent outcomes" equals real justice, WADA doesn't and ITIA doesn't and are the better for it. Efff some fans' perceptions and other players like Djokovic. If their turn ever comes, they'll be relieved to be treated individually exactly as Sinner...and clamoring for it.

 

[Bartelby]

Sinner could not possible win at CAS because it would allow anyone to get off a doping charge by getting one of their agents to play the fall guy for reward presumably.

Yup, I tip my hat to them. It makes perfect sense. Their conclusion was as you stated, not their starting point. They want to maintain high standards and believe he should have been held more responsible for his team's oversight....and Sinner agreed to it. Chances are, WADA saw that ITIA's judgement would stand, and if pressed, they would lose. And they likely would have because once a governing body hands down their judgement, it will and does hold unless an appealer can demonstrate significant reasoning/evidence as to why it should be overturned. True justice means every case is treated on its own, without regard for any other case. Only a fool believes "consistent outcomes" equals real justice, WADA doesn't and ITIA doesn't and are the better for it. Efff some fans' perceptions and other players like Djokovic. If their turn ever comes, they'll be relieved to be treated individually exactly as Sinner...and clamoring for it.

 

[anarosevoli]

I documented all this scrupulously at the time, and Russia was indeed banned from the Olympics.

And I don't see why I should be lectured by a person who simply indulges in Russophobic racist tropes.

She delegated those emails to her agent and CAS ultimately decided that was an acceptable practics.

A lot of athletes don't admit to all the non-prohibited substances they take and it's not a punishable offence.

Banned because of systematic doping. As I said. Still something to complain?

 

[mtommer]

Sinner could not possible win at CAS because it would allow anyone to get off a doping charge by getting one of their agents to play the fall guy for reward presumably.

Speculate all you'd like. As I said in another thread, he'll be playing in three months and there's nothing anyone will do to stop it. Not you. Not Dkjokovic. All done.

 

[Bartelby]

I've always been positive about Sinner's tennis, but this political favouritism is appalling.

Speculate all you'd like. As I said in another thread, he'll be playing in three months and there's nothing anyone will do to stop it. Not you. Not Dkjokovic. All done.

 

[Bartelby]

Russia was banned because of the American political campaign against Russia, which is now at an end so we'll see what happens in future.

Banned because of systematic doping. As I said. Still something to complain?

 

[mtommer]

I've always been positive about Sinner's tennis, but this political favouritism is appalling.

Oh, you are going to stop him from playing? Please, elaborate.

 

[RSJfan]

Million miles man I dont know.

 

[Bartelby]

I've stopped him from playing for three months, so no need to elaborate.

Oh, you are going to stop him from playing? Please, elaborate.

 

[NaDjoFed]

Sinner could not possible win at CAS because it would allow anyone to get off a doping charge by getting one of their agents to play the fall guy for reward presumably.

This does not make any sense. WADA had to offer a very convenient 3 months suspension instead of 12-24 months, and that's likely indicates that, Sinner's legal team was very optimistic about winning at the Court of Arbitration for Sport.

 

[FeroBango]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1891972696709398821

WADA it seems, is a million miles away from credibility.

 

[Bride of Alcaraz]

"This was a case that was a million miles away from doping," Wada general counsel Ross Wenzel told BBC Sport.
That is very unprofessional use of language more like Sinner's counsel than Wada's counsel...
Mafia pulling the strings probably.

 

[flyneurologist]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1891972696709398821

WADA it seems, is a million miles away from credibility.

if you are going to be judging integrity, at least be an independent thinker. try to answer when someone challenged your intellect. with all due respect, this so call specialist called Nadal a doper before.

I can easily contest everything this person says. This person really compared a case of topical steroid with EPO which stimulate red blood cell production (a bit laughable). Not only that but an EPO direct administration instead of topical steroid contamination are not apple to apple.

I explained above why strict liability is not the point why WADA does not have a strong case. They actually do have very STRONG case for strict liability but weak case for other things. hence they only get the three months. Again, fixating on strict liability is like obsessing over strict interpretation of the constitution. Won't win you case in the court of law. as most sentences are determined by plausibility.

Foot note: "And why did the masseur spray so much Clostebol on such a small finger wound that it was enough for two positive doping tests in the amount measured?" is an extremely ignorant thing to say for a doping expert. Transdermal contamination is an established fact. it can transfer simply by shaking hands let along a massage. and this physio applied to his finger daily for over a week (line 40 in proceedings). A simple pubmed from peer-reviewed journal will do the job. You don't have to trust whatever authority since you discredit all kind of authorities anyways (who cares about Fritz Sörgel if you don't trust three tribunal courts and WADA scientists. They are all part of the establishment and corruption and everyone is for their agendas. Ms Sorgel probably does not even read the report.)

But if you do care about science:
(PMC11668582) https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11668582/

Discussion section is helpful: “The transdermal application of clostebol acetate can produce detectable amounts of metabolites in urine, even after a single exposure. Depending on the protocols, the main clostebol metabolite (4-chloro-androst-4-en-3α-ol-17-one, M1) was found to be detectable up to 30–40 ng/ml (at peak concentration) for more than 10 days. In other studies, the transfer of clostebol from one subject to another occurred during hand shaking or sexual intercourse.”

Citations 19 and 20:

19.Gessner L, Thevis M, Rothschild MA, Jübner M. Detectability of oxandrolone, metandienone, clostebol and dehydrochloromethyltestosterone in urine after transdermal application. Drug Test Anal. (2022) 14(10):1744–61. 10.1002/dta.3355 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

20.Kintz P, Gheddar L. Acétate de clostébol (Trofodermin®): vérification du passage transdermique d’un anabolisant souvent impliqué dans les affaires de dopage. Toxicol Anal Clin. (2024) 36(4):317–22. 10.1016/j.toxac.2024.10.001 [DOI] [Google Scholar]

WADA statement: https://www.wada-ama.org/en/resourc.../detection-clostebol-sports-accidental-doping

Bottom line is read research papers in addition to tweets if you do care about doping issues in sport.

 

[NaDjoFed]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1891972696709398821

WADA it seems, is a million miles away from credibility.

ah ok, if this guy says so. So all the experts that certified in the trial (considered among the best in the world by the way) are just covering up Carrot the doper. Conspiracyyyyyy!

I agree on the "negligence", it can be argue that Sinner is at fault here, on the doping is just ridicolous.

 

[FeroBango]

ah ok, if this guy says so. So all the experts that certified in the trial (considered among the best in the world by the way) are just covering up Carrot the doper. Conspiracyyyyyy!

I agree on the "negligence", it can be argue that Sinner is at fault here, on the doping is just ridicolous.

No, this expert makes more sense than the "experts" NaDjo has unwavering faith in.

In fact it's just common sense that escapes your lot.

Occam's Razor, man. This is no crazy conspiracy.

 

[flyneurologist]

No, this expert makes more sense than the "experts" NaDjo has unwavering faith in.

In fact it's just common sense that escapes your lot.

Occam's Razor, man. This is no crazy conspiracy.

Stop cowering when someone challenges your intellect.

 

[albertobra]

OK please explain why he is banned for 3 months then, if not for testing positive for a banned substance.

let’s get to the bottom of this.

Because WADA wanted to save its face.
Remember, it's who make the deal who is in trouble, not who accepts it.
Sinner comes out as the athlete who sets the mark for the next doping cases. As the athlete that stops this rediculous WADA autocracy as one sided decisions.
Unfortunately Simona Halep had her competition days ended by this autocracy.
But from now on this will change.
Sinner comes out very strong from this episode.

 

[Bartelby]

Sinner is a self confessed doper.

Because WADA wanted to save its face.
Remember, it's who make the deal who is in trouble, not who accepts it.
Sinner comes out as the athlete who sets the mark for the next doping cases. As the athlete that stops this rediculous WADA autocracy as one sided decisions.
Unfortunately Simona Halep had her competition days ended by this autocracy.
But from now on this will change.
Sinner comes out very strong from this episode.

 

[anarosevoli]

Russia was banned because of the American political campaign against Russia, which is now at an end so we'll see what happens in future.

Russia was banned because it is a nation of cheaters and dopers.

 

[flyneurologist]

Sinner is a self confessed doper.

None of these is factual or in the Bible (no pun intended).

 

[mtommer]

WADA it seems, is a million miles away from credibility.

So WADA is completely untrustworthy?

 

[FeroBango]

So WADA is completely untrustworthy?

Considering the Chinese and Jannik scandal, seemingly yes to a reasonable for extent.

 

[mtommer]

Considering the Chinese and Jannik scandal, seemingly yes to a reasonable for extent.

I see. So, um, why do you accept their sayso that Clostebol should be banned?

 

[FeroBango]

I see. So, um, why do you accept their sayso that Clostebol should be banned?

I don't necessarily. Consistency is key. Either legalize doping or stop selectively sucking up to Sinner alone as you may likely do too.

 

[Drighiz]

Considering the Chinese and Jannik scandal, seemingly yes to a reasonable for extent.

Circular argument, given that if you trust the system, Sinner's case is not a scandal at all

 

[AM75]

It's not WADA says that the case is 'million miles away from doping'. It's one of the WADA's bureaucrats expresses her/his personal opinion. Just to be precise.

 

[Kralingen]

Because WADA wanted to save its face.
Remember, it's who make the deal who is in trouble, not who accepts it.
Sinner comes out as the athlete who sets the mark for the next doping cases. As the athlete that stops this rediculous WADA autocracy as one sided decisions.
Unfortunately Simona Halep had her competition days ended by this autocracy.
But from now on this will change.
Sinner comes out very strong from this episode.

Sinner comes out banned for 3 months.

He only comes out strong to those who believe his “story”. The rest of us are deeply saddened that the next great player has tarnished his and the sport’s reputation and thrown our game into disrepute.

 

[albertobra]

,

Sinner comes out banned for 3 months.

He only comes out strong to those who believe his “story”. The rest of us are deeply saddened that the next great player has tarnished his and the sport’s reputation and thrown our game into disrepute.

Well investigation was fully run and conclusive. Nothing really to add if you are a conspirationist.

 

[Kralingen]

,

Well investigation was fully run and conclusive. Nothing really to add if you are a conspirationist.

And ended with our #1 banned.

He will forever be associated with doping.

This is a horrible outcome for the sport. He embarrassed us on the world stage.

 

[Drighiz]

And ended with our #1 banned.

He will forever be associated with doping.

This is a horrible outcome for the sport. He embarrassed us on the world stage.

He might be associated with negligence, not with doping

 

[Kralingen]

He might be associated with negligence, not with doping

Keep your head in the sand, it’s easier that way

Sinner has brought incalculable shame onto the sport with this.

 

[Drighiz]

Keep your head in the sand, it’s easier that way

Sinner has brought incalculable shame onto the sport with this.

Only the people who are dumb or want to play dumb would keep bringing this up as a case of doping. Why don't you tell us what you think about the podcasters like Andy Roddick, who is saying exactly what I am saying. I invite you to watch that video and comment constructively.

 

[Drighiz]

Also the investigation did not end with the #1 banned, as you know full well. It ended with him being cleared. The agreement was not forced onto Sinner. Why don't you say things as they are

 

[Kralingen]

Only the people who are dumb or want to play dumb would keep bringing this up as a case of doping. Why don't you tell us what you think about the podcasters like Andy Roddick, who is saying exactly what I am saying. I invite you to watch that video and comment constructively.

Andy Roddick has a direct profit motive to wipe this away as he is interested in promoting the game. Those with our heads screwed on correctly understand that this ban will leave an irreversible stench on Sinner and the game in general.

I have had to explain the situation to a few friends of mine in real life and they all think it’s complete horseshit. His story sounds ridiculous and you know it. It’s not convincing at all to the normal person.

I hate that this saga is attached to tennis for the rest of my life. I deeply resent it. It sucks.

 

[Drighiz]

Andy Roddick has a direct profit motive to wipe this away as he is interested in promoting the game. Those with our heads screwed on correctly understand that this ban will leave an irreversible stench on Sinner and the game in general.

I have had to explain the situation to a few friends of mine in real life and they all think it’s complete horseshit. His story sounds ridiculous and you know it. It’s not convincing at all to the normal person.

Yeah I can imagine how impartially you explained it to them man. Watch the podcasts if you are interested in why some people instead believe in it. Not everyone has vested interests. On another thread I posted 4 or 5 of them. Honestly, come on why not watch them.

 

[Kralingen]

Yeah I can imagine how impartially you explained it to them man. Watch the podcasts if you are interested in why some people instead believe in it. Not everyone has vested interests. On another thread I posted 4 or 5 of them. Honestly, come on why not watch them.

They absolutely do have vested interests in propping up Sinner and waving away any and all controversy

I refuse to watch Roddick but I’ll watch someone else at lunch.

 

[JMR]

It's not WADA says that the case is 'million miles away from doping'. It's one of the WADA's bureaucrats expresses her/his personal opinion. Just to be precise.

It was WADA as an organization that (a) chose not to appeal the finding of the Independent Tribunal that Sinner had not intentionally used a PED, and (b) released an official statement to accompany the settlement agreeing that "Mr. Sinner did not intend to cheat, and ... his exposure to clostebol did not provide any performance-enhancing benefit and took place without his knowledge as the result of negligence of members of his entourage." Nothing more than that is needed. The "million miles" hyperbole is just colorful rhetoric intended to drive the point home to the slow-witted. It is not inconsistent with WADA's official position.

 

[Rovesciarete]

Well investigation was fully run and conclusive. Nothing really to add if you are a conspirationist.

Indeed. Rinse and repeat.

 

[JMR]

Occam's Razor, man. This is no crazy conspiracy.

I can't stand it. This is a complete misapplication of Occam's Razor, for two reasons.

1. Occam's Razor is a logical tool intended to facilitate comparisons between competing hypotheses that are equally well-grounded in the evidence, i.e., that equally fit the established facts. Occam's Razor is not a device for rejecting evidence in favor of unsupported speculation. Suppose I were to say, "I was late for the appointment because I had to swerve to avoid a deer on the road, and then I got a flat tire, and when I discovered that I had no spare, I had to call the auto club -- here, check my phone records -- and it took a long time for them to arrive." If you then said, "That's too complicated. I think you were just asleep, and Occam's Razor says I am right!" that would be an improper invocation of the tool. Just sophistry. Evidence, when it exists, always controls.

2. The notion that Sinner's being an intentional "doper" is somehow a simpler explanation for Sinner's exposure than the one he provided is itself fallacious. A deliberate doping program by a monitored athlete would entail all kinds of complications and stratagems relating to procurement of the drugs, administration of the drugs, recruitment of helpers, avoiding detection and otherwise covering everything up, etc. This would be a large web of ongoing illicit activity, not some "simple" fact that can be plugged into a misunderstood logical formula.

 

[flyneurologist]

if you are going to be judging integrity, at least be an independent thinker. try to answer when someone challenged your intellect. with all due respect, this so call specialist called Nadal a doper before.

I can easily contest everything this person says. This person really compared a case of topical steroid with EPO which stimulate red blood cell production (a bit laughable). Not only that but an EPO direct administration instead of topical steroid contamination are not apple to apple.

I explained above why strict liability is not the point why WADA does not have a strong case. They actually do have very STRONG case for strict liability but weak case for other things. hence they only get the three months. Again, fixating on strict liability is like obsessing over strict interpretation of the constitution. Won't win you case in the court of law. as most sentences are determined by plausibility.

Foot note: "And why did the masseur spray so much Clostebol on such a small finger wound that it was enough for two positive doping tests in the amount measured?" is an extremely ignorant thing to say for a doping expert. Transdermal contamination is an established fact. it can transfer simply by shaking hands let along a massage. and this physio applied to his finger daily for over a week (line 40 in proceedings). A simple pubmed from peer-reviewed journal will do the job. You don't have to trust whatever authority since you discredit all kind of authorities anyways (who cares about Fritz Sörgel if you don't trust three tribunal courts and WADA scientists. They are all part of the establishment and corruption and everyone is for their agendas. Ms Sorgel probably does not even read the report.)

But if you do care about science:
(PMC11668582) https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11668582/

Discussion section is helpful: “The transdermal application of clostebol acetate can produce detectable amounts of metabolites in urine, even after a single exposure. Depending on the protocols, the main clostebol metabolite (4-chloro-androst-4-en-3α-ol-17-one, M1) was found to be detectable up to 30–40 ng/ml (at peak concentration) for more than 10 days. In other studies, the transfer of clostebol from one subject to another occurred during hand shaking or sexual intercourse.”

Citations 19 and 20:

19.Gessner L, Thevis M, Rothschild MA, Jübner M. Detectability of oxandrolone, metandienone, clostebol and dehydrochloromethyltestosterone in urine after transdermal application. Drug Test Anal. (2022) 14(10):1744–61. 10.1002/dta.3355 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

20.Kintz P, Gheddar L. Acétate de clostébol (Trofodermin®): vérification du passage transdermique d’un anabolisant souvent impliqué dans les affaires de dopage. Toxicol Anal Clin. (2024) 36(4):317–22. 10.1016/j.toxac.2024.10.001 [DOI] [Google Scholar]

WADA statement: https://www.wada-ama.org/en/resourc.../detection-clostebol-sports-accidental-doping

Bottom line is read research papers in addition to tweets if you do care about doping issues in sport.

WADA general counsel, Ross Wenzel, says Jannik Sinner’s two positive tests weren’t compatible with doping an any level… not even microdosing.

All of the samples from Jannik’s tests within the 12-month period prior to the 2 positive tests were completely clean.

“The purpose was to look for every similar clue, every possible trace of the incriminating substance in all samples. The response from all laboratories on such a large number of samples was that nothing was found. Whatever people may think of this case, it is clear that this is not a case of doping or misconduct. I think it is necessary to understand this fact well.”

Come outside

 

[FeroBango]

Andy Roddick has a direct profit motive to wipe this away as he is interested in promoting the game. Those with our heads screwed on correctly understand that this ban will leave an irreversible stench on Sinner and the game in general.

I have had to explain the situation to a few friends of mine in real life and they all think it’s complete horseshit. His story sounds ridiculous and you know it. It’s not convincing at all to the normal person.

I hate that this saga is attached to tennis for the rest of my life. I deeply resent it. It sucks.

Sinner fetishists of the forum and those that are career-minded (Tennis media) are the only idiots who can believe this. I can't believe that the Sinner story is even debated to be plausibly true.

 

[Mustard]

The corruption with the whole Sinner case is so obvious.

 

[Bartelby]

Both Sinner and WADA appeared for the defence. Like the dog that didn't bark, WADA was the body that never prosecuted.

It was WADA as an organization that (a) chose not to appeal the finding of the Independent Tribunal that Sinner had not intentionally used a PED, and (b) released an official statement to accompany the settlement agreeing that "Mr. Sinner did not intend to cheat, and ... his exposure to clostebol did not provide any performance-enhancing benefit and took place without his knowledge as the result of negligence of members of his entourage." Nothing more than that is needed. The "million miles" hyperbole is just colorful rhetoric intended to drive the point home to the slow-witted. It is not inconsistent with WADA's official position.

 

[Bartelby]

Sinner being an intentional doper is not incompatible with Occam's razor even if Sinner being an unintentional doper is the simpler explanation.

Both hypotheses fit the facts of two failed lab tests.

The legal process failed in the first instance and was aborted in the second, so did it really produce a host of "established facts" that can be relied on?

I can't stand it. This is a complete misapplication of Occam's Razor, for two reasons.

1. Occam's Razor is a logical tool intended to facilitate comparisons between competing hypotheses that are equally well-grounded in the evidence, i.e., that equally fit the established facts. Occam's Razor is not a device for rejecting evidence in favor of unsupported speculation. Suppose I were to say, "I was late for the appointment because I had to swerve to avoid a deer on the road, and then I got a flat tire, and when I discovered that I had no spare, I had to call the auto club -- here, check my phone records -- and it took a long time for them to arrive." If you then said, "That's too complicated. I think you were just asleep, and Occam's Razor says I am right!" that would be an improper invocation of the tool. Just sophistry. Evidence, when it exists, always controls.

2. The notion that Sinner's being an intentional "doper" is somehow a simpler explanation for Sinner's exposure than the one he provided is itself fallacious. A deliberate doping program by a monitored athlete would entail all kinds of complications and stratagems relating to procurement of the drugs, administration of the drugs, recruitment of helpers, avoiding detection and otherwise covering everything up, etc. This would be a large web of ongoing illicit activity, not some "simple" fact that can be plugged into a misunderstood logical formula.

 

[JMR]

Sinner being an intentional doper is not incompatible with Occam's razor even if Sinner being an unintentional doper is the simpler explanation.

Both hypotheses fit the facts of two failed lab tests.

"Let's confine the evidence to the bare minimum of facts that are not incompatible with my position, and exclude everything else because I don't like it," is not a logical argument, not a good-faith argument, and certainly not a persuasive argument. And sophistry in defense of sophistry is a particularly poor expenditure of anyone's online time.

 

[Bartelby]

What other established facts are there that would meet any scientific threshold?

"Let's confine the evidence to the bare minimum of facts that are not incompatible with my position, and exclude everything else because I don't like it," is not a logical argument, not a good-faith argument, and certainly not a persuasive argument. And sophistry in defense of sophistry is a particularly poor expenditure of anyone's online time.