Wednesday, October 1, 2014

USADA Anti-Doping Statistics: Q2 2014

The USADA's anti-doping statistics through Q2 (June 30) 2014 have been posted.

In Q2 2014:

9 Athletes Selected
15 Total Tests
Athlete NameTest Count
Michael C Bryan1
Robert C Bryan1
Jamie Hampton1
Christina M McHale1
Wayne Odesnik3
Sam Querrey1
Sloane Stephens1
Serena J Williams3
Venus E Williams3

Total for 2014 through Q2:

12 Athletes Selected
37 Total Tests
Athlete NameTest Count
Michael C Bryan1
Robert C Bryan4
Jamie Hampton2
John Isner3
Madison Keys1
Bethanie Mattek-Sands1
Christina M McHale2
Wayne Odesnik5
Sam Querrey2
Sloane Stephens4
Serena J Williams6
Venus E Williams6

Total for all of 2013:

10 Athletes Selected
61 Total Tests
Athlete NameTest Count
Michael C Bryan7
Robert C Bryan8
Mardy S Fish4
Liezel Huber2
John Isner10
Wayne Odesnik14
Sam Querrey2
Sloane Stephens1
Serena J Williams5
Venus E Williams8

 

87 comments:

  1. As I said in the previous comments section, that's a lot of testing for the Williams sisters compared to Odesnik this year. It's a lot of testing for Venus, period, given that she is clearly in the twilight of her career, rankings wise.

    I trust USADA more when it comes to target-testing based on suspicion than some other bodies I could name.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I thought the USADA can test foreign players when they play in the US? Why are all the players American? Or am I wrong about that? BTW I think using Odesnik as a benchmark is a good tactic. We all know he for one has served a ban so it makes sense that he has been tested the most. As far as I'm concerned, anyone who comes close to him regarding times tested must be suspicious. Getting testing 8-10 times seems high to me. But I'm still not convinced they actually want to catch anyone. Let's face it, the only reason Armstrong got outed was because someone blew the whistle on him.

    ReplyDelete
  3. BTW Venus being tested 8 times does seem alarming since she apparently has a disease (Sjogren's syndrome). Or does she? Why would they pick on someone who is clearly struggling just to keep playing? This makes me suspicious. Although I'm sure if she really does have Sjogren's she has a TUE for some form of medication to alleviate the symptoms.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Huh? She's had a major surge and improvement in her results this year. Definitely one I'd keep my eye on.

      Delete
  4. @ Lopi. If I understand correctly, USADA can test non-US players on US soil, but their primary mission is to monitor Americans. If their investigations/intelligence points to a non-US player doping, and an urgent test is necessary to prove culpability, than they would test that athlete. This appears to be a rare scenario, though.

    They brought Armstrong down because Travis Tygart appears to genuinely believe in fair sport, and this is the reason that I put more faith in their organisation than others that have conflicting motivations.

    Meanwhile, Spanish tennis player Guillermo Olaso de la Ric's appeal to the CAS has been rebuffed. 5 year ban for match fixing, which makes doping suspensions look pretty anemic.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Travis Tygart. Is he the one Armstrong threatened? I think so. He was a brave man to stand up to the bully. But maybe he had no choice since Armstrong threatened him and his family and he had no choice but to report it. Thanks for the info re. UDASA testing.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. He is the head of the USADA. (I think you have him mixed with Tyler Hamilton.)

      Delete
    2. But I thought he was the one interviewed on 60 Minutes who said that Armstrong threatened him and his family?

      Delete
    3. This is just a portion of the interview with Tygart. Armstrong was a bully.

      http://youtu.be/Qp68bYTTpoc

      Delete
    4. He said he had received threats and abusive e-mail, IIRC, but probably only from crazy fans. One was retired physician Gerrit Keats, who ended up doing community service for the offence.

      Delete
  6. These are weird numbers. Here's why.

    Most of these players who were tested only play ATP/WTA tour levels events (i.e. no Challengers etc). The exception to this bunch - Odesnik.

    In Q2 of 2014, Odesnik played a grand total of 1 match on US soil (lost in the first round of qualifying in Houston). He played in South America and Europe otherwise; with the exception of Wimbledon qualifying, he played only at challenger level.

    Now clearly, there are perfectly legitimate reasons to test Odesnik frequently. But the fact is, not a single other US player, man or woman, playing below Tour level was tested by USADA in this period.

    Not one US men's player playing Challengers in the US in this period was tested - there were events in Tallahassee, Savannah, and Sarasota, chock-full of US players. And not one US player playing in the same events as Odesnik was tested either (admittedly not many did play in the same events).

    So anyway, just questioning exactly how hard the USADA is trying.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Only the top athletes are subject to the "whereabouts" requirements. So, only tour level individuals are realistically subject to out-of-competition testing. This is nothing to do with USADA -- it is just the rules.

      How exactly would USADA test a rank 1200 player? They could show up at his house? But even if he was home, his mother could simply answer the door and say "No, he's not here." There would be no violation -- unlike the other players who are required to report their whereabouts and would receive a whereabouts violation for failing to submit to the test -- unless their name is Serena.

      Generally, in competition testing is done by the ITF, even if the tournament is in the US. So, this is not to say that no lower level people were tested -- just not out-of-competition, because there is no real way to efficiently do so.

      Delete
    2. Wayne Odesnik has been ranked outside the top 150 all year. But clearly he is subject to out-of-competition testing. Playing at a comparable level to him during this quarter (mostly higher ranked too) - Donald Young, Steve Johnson, Tim Smyczek, Dennis Kudla, Jack Sock, Bradley Klahn - and somehow not one of them was tested by the USADA.

      I fully accept there are rules and logisitics that place limitations on how much USADA can do on lower ranked players, but there's a decent sized group of players ranked in the 75-150 area who were all off the radar. Would have thought the USADA would have at least tried to test a couple of them.

      Delete
  7. Looks like the Cilic we all know and love is back. He lost to Murray 6-1, 6-3. I guess if he kept winning it would be too much. And here I thought he was stupid (after all, he got caught by those anti-doping bozos).

    ReplyDelete
  8. WADA has just published this document outlining the minimum % of eligible blood samples that should be analyzed for for certain prohibited substances in INDIVIDUAL SPORTS based on a PHYSIOLOGIC RISK ASSESSMENT OF THAT SPORT.

    The substances are erythropoiesis stimutators (i.e EPO simulators), and growth hormone / growth hormone releasing peptides.

    I was really surprised to see that tennis is thought to be among the sports LEAST likely to benefit from these agents.

    For example, the number of samples that should be tested for the EPO simulators is 60% for cycling, 15% for boxing, and only 10% for tennis.

    Logically, 30% of weightlifting samples should be tested for GH/GRRPs, The number for figure skating is 10%, while the number for tennis is only 5%.

    https://wada-main-prod.s3.amazonaws.com/resources/files/wada_td2014ssa_sport_specific_analysis_2.1_en.pdf

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Here's how I'd make sense of that.

      WADA have probably estimated that a high proportion of the factors that make someone a successful tennis player are not able to be improved by PEDs (eg hand-eye coordination, timing, mental toughness).

      And I'm not sure anyone who cares about this stuff would really disagree. The issue however is that at the top of the game, especially, where there are small margins between the players, a guy who is able to acquire some extra strength or endurance could gain a significant boost in his results.

      Contrast with cycling where strength and endurance are the key components of being successful, and that's why WADA have made this evaluation of saying cycling is at higher risk of PED cheats.

      Not saying I agree with it, but that would explain their thinking.

      Delete
    2. First, thanks for bringing this to our attention. A good find.

      I agree that those numbers for tennis are ridiculous.

      At least "Tug of War" only test for EPO 5% of the time. And we all know that Tug of War is much more about skill and technique, so really no reason to dope there.

      Seriously, that is a sport they list -- "Tug of War." Good thing they are so focused on cleaning up Tug of War. I would hate for that sport to be dominated by dopers. (Note, they test "Tug of War" for HGH more than they do Tennis. Maybe Odesnik was headed to an Australian Tug of War competition when the caught him with all that HGH).

      Delete
    3. It's not just strength and endurance though, it's also recovery. Being able to recover quickly after a gruelling SF say, and come back to play fresh in a final while maybe your opponent is still wasted, is key. PEDs can do that.

      Delete
    4. I agree with you; I include ability to recover under the general heading of "endurance", but no question PEDs that aid this. The same type of PEDS could also improve ability to practice for longer and at higher intensity, i.e. they all could contribute to giving a tennis player important marginal gains.

      Delete
  9. A few more things of note in that document.........

    1] They do not indicate what "scientific method" was used to assess "physiologic risk" in each sport. If it was rigorous, then I'm surprised that pertinent scientific literature is not cited. I suspect that it is more about "does the sport involve lifting >"x" Kilos, or continued aerobic activity for longer than 'x' minutes.

    2] While the technical document is to be adopted "in consultation" with international federations, it is not clear if the latter had a role in defining "physiologic risk". They certainly have a strong vested interest in how much of this more expensive testing is imposed on them.

    3] They talk about "all-inclusive assessment of risk" in a sport or discipline in relation to doping that considers a wide range of risk factors in addition to physiological risk, such as doping history, financial gain, gender, age, and status of the sport within a country etc. In this context how can tennis have the same numbers as Squash and racquetball, and (unbelievably) LESS than Badminton?

    ReplyDelete
  10. According to David Howman, Director-General of WADA, a quarter of all sport played globally is infiltrated by criminals. He's not only talking about PEDs but match-fixing and bribery...

    http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-10-06/criminals-infiltrate-25-of-sport-anti-doping-chief-says.html

    So it makes one wonder why they aren't doing anything to to stop the illegal activity.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Scientists find that the benefits of doping could last far beyond the period in which drugs are taken: http://www.bbc.com/sport/0/athletics/29510575

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This got some media attention a few months ago, but I'm happy to see it come up again. The problem is that the studies are in mice, not humans.... Ergo, compelling, but not proven.

      Delete
  12. The Doping Bull claims he has appendicitis but is controlling it with antibiotics and will still play Shanghai.

    THASP, in your medical opinion, is this excuse only mostly bullshit or total bullshit? What idiot athlete would risk rupturing an inflamed appendix, antibiotic treatment or no, mild case or no?

    ReplyDelete
  13. Nadal now has... appendicitis! Oh, and he'll still play the tournament, of course.

    By the end of his career, I predict he wins a Grand Slam while being weakened by a self-diagnosed incurable cancer.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. prized by journalist all the way ...

      Delete
    2. What a remarkable warrior this Nadal is! Every ailment, disease, affliction known to man and he still soldiers on. What an inspiration!

      Okay, getting serious now, I just have to laugh. He's playing a tournament when he has appendicitis? So he wins either way - if he loses, well he's injured! If he wins, he's a warrior!

      I'm still waiting for Nadal to develop a yeast infection. I think that may be the only ailment he has yet to get. Oh, and cancer like you mentioned above.

      Delete
  14. This is actually medically plausible, but highly atypical.

    The gold standard for treatment of acute appendicitis in adults is surgery, but non-operative management has been studied. Though inferior, it seems to work for many patients.

    In a study comparing operative management to oral antibiotics in patients with uncomplicated disease diagnosed with a CT scan, 12% of those treated without surgery required an operation within 30 days, and an additional ~25% had to go to the OR within a year. The caveat is that delaying surgery can be dangerous if the condition is more complicated than the scan suggested (CT can miss more complicated disease which should always prompt immediate surgery).

    Another caveat is that the diagnosis is not always correct, as even with CT, there are false positives and negatives.

    The final caveat is that there are other (less serious) conditions can mimic the condition.

    For what it's worth, I'm not a general surgeon but I am an MD, and in a patient that I truly believed had appendicitis, I wouldn't advise non-operative management (and certainly would not countenance elite athletic performance in hot conditions in this situation).

    It's plausible that the Dx might not have been that convincing, the CT scan not that impressive, and he was clinically getting better, so he was advised that conservative Mx was OK.

    If he gets an appendectomy in the future (which he should, if this is Kosher), we'll all see the scars in the shirtless training pics... Stay tuned.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. LOL I'm sure they'll find a way to operate on him and leave no scar. :D

      Delete
    2. Obviously everyone's body is different and reacts to things differently, but if Nadal has acute appendicitis he has to be in a lot of pain (or at least SOME pain).

      I know two people who've had acute appendicitis. While neither one was a world-class athlete like Nadal, they were extremely fit people: ate healthy, exercised/worked out several times a week, etc. Once appendicitis hit they were in immense pain - pain so bad they were bedridden. They had to have surgery the following week.

      I just find it hard to believe that Nadal is playing tennis while suffering from appendicitis.

      Delete
    3. well he's not now, having just lost to Lopez in straight sets. Lucky for him he has a good excuse for this lacklustre performance. Could appendicitis just be another pre-emptive excuse for Nadal? My guess is he's gone for the season.

      Delete
    4. If Nadal has appendicitis then Uncle Toni wins the Nobel Prize for medicine.

      Delete
    5. Nadal apparently planning to play Basel, Paris and London, and then have his appendix removed.... A laproscopic appendectomy will put him out for a few weeks......

      Delete
    6. well he had better hope it doesn't rupture in the meantime or he's in big sh*t (that is, if it's even real).

      Delete
    7. There is a high probability that despite the "pain", Nadal will play his best tennis in London.

      Delete
    8. This story stinks. Nadal says he felt dizzy during the match with Lopez, but that "it's nothing to be worried about". If you have appendicitis and you feel dizzy, and you're health-'aware' like Nadal, you certainly don't say it's nothing to be worried about. So, either you never really felt dizzy, and / or you don't have appendicitis. What a story..
      "He's such a nice, humble guy", but he sure can make up good BS stories :)

      Delete
  15. In other news, David Howman (WADA chief), commented on time it will take for the bio-passport to yield results (sooner for steroids, longer for other doping strategies), and said he wants to see more NADA testing in tennis.

    I'm sure Spain's Anti-Doping Agency, AEPSAD will be responding promptly to the last part.....

    http://www.thetennisspace.com/wadas-howman-bio-passport-to-yield-results-by-2015/

    ReplyDelete
  16. This is a fantastic BBC radio program dealing with doping in athletics, but primarily with Justin Gatlin.

    Gatlin worked with a doping coach, he doped himself, was banned multiple times. He is now back, tearing things up on the track, while being coached by someone elsewho was himself banned for doping. Despite all this, he is a candidate for IAAF athlete of the year. If it was fiction, you would think it was too far fetched.......

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b04kfhlh

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Of course it can't happen in tennis, can it?

      Come to think of it there have been some remarkable comebacks in tennis, no?

      Delete
  17. "The chief of Fifa's medical committee, Michel D'Hooghe, says there is "no doping culture" in professional football.

    He also suggests that football as a discipline does not benefit from doping like other sports and that the risk of sanctions is a serious deterrent to players.

    D'Hooghe's claims follow what was described as a doping-free World Cup in Brazil in which all 736 participants had their blood and urine tested."



    I cannot believe we are still hearing this kind of stuff...............

    http://www.goal.com/en/news/745/fifa/2014/10/09/5169946/fifa-medical-chief-no-doping-culture-in-football

    ReplyDelete
  18. Federer just won Shangai... silende...

    Close to be number one again, 10 years later, at the tender age of 33

    Tennis does not have a doping problem anymore.

    Not a farce, not a joke, just perfectly clean players winning tournaments the way it should be.

    Congrats everybody, including his doctors :-)

    ReplyDelete
  19. So a player can't win a tournament at 33? Tell that to Laver, Connors, McEnroe and Agassi. Many great players have won tournaments well into their 30's. I guess they were all doping, right apanchuful? Tell me what other suspect behaviour Federer displays, such as mysterious and prolonged absences from the tour or gruelling matches followed by miraculous recovery in the next match? Or injuries leading to tournament withdrawals followed by periods of non-stop winning. Look at Murray's performance since having back surgery or Del Potro. That's what happens to a player who is injured. He doesn't come back and win everything in sight. Federer was injured in 2013 and had a miserable year. That's what injury looks like. Not what Nadal does. Just saying. But feel free to back up your assertion that Federer dopes.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Are you for real? A player that defeated younger, fitter and fresher opponents isn't suspicious at all about doping 'because others dope'? I truly give up. Tennis and elite sport isn't clean of doping not only because of the 'corruption' of system and the athletes. The fans, even those around here, are part of the reason too. They destroy the sport with their (yours) sickening double standards. 'I don't speak about doping when my favorite player wins'. It's sad to see a bunch of users around here stating how they're so fed up about the sport's corruption, but no voice is heard in an anti-doping blog when their favorite player has some wins.

      Nice to see there are rotten apples even among us. This allows us to be extra careful.

      Delete
    2. Here we go again. Federer wins, out come the Boremen to implicate him in doping...one known incarnation (whose only contribution to this blog has been to implicate Federer) laying out the argument, and another unknown, never heard of before and never to be heard of again, incarnation corroborating those insights.

      We're damned if we do, damned if we don't. Had Federer lost, then the same Boremen identities would be arguing that this site is overrun with whining Federer fans unfairly blaming his losses on the opponents doping. Look at previous posts - it's been done over and over.

      Let's stop feeding the trolls. It's clear their only goal is to discredit this site.

      Delete
    3. Federer saved 5 match points in his 2nd round match against Mayer. A guy ranked 25 last week. If that one attempted passing shot of Mayer's hadn't clipped the net we wouldn't be having this conversation. I guess the Boremen would then agree that Federer isn't doping because he lost in the 2nd round? I don't think so. Other than Djokovic, who wasn't playing very well (probably baby on the brain) the highest ranked player Fed faced was Bautista Agut at 18. If he can't beat players ranked outside the top 10 anymore then it's time to quit.

      Delete
    4. Federer is not the same player in best of 5 sets, as he is in best of 3. He'd be far more suspicious if he were still winning Slams, and beating Djoker and Nadal in best of 5.

      Delete
    5. Your arguments can be easily applied to any other athlete you have mentioned here, even the most hated one: Nadal. You assume that the one who dopes, dopes always, in every little tournament. That's not true. And beginning to call someone names ('troll', 'boremen') is the most childish thing we can possibly do in a, supposedly mature blog to discuss doping problem in tennis (not just complain about Nadal).

      Delete
    6. Do you watch Tennis? Perhaps you would have seen how Federer changed his tactics...You know North-South movement and attacking the net at every given opportunity? Rather than grinding it out from the baseline.

      Delete
    7. Perhaps the Shanghai organizers let Federer dope all tournament like the US Open organisers were doing, you know to give them more revenue and such? Right Mr. Unknown? xD

      Delete
    8. This is exactly what i meant a weeks ago when i said this is a fed fan page.had this been another over 30 player nobody would be defending him but because its federer. Abot. 5 people leap to his defense.

      Delete
    9. Unknown is completley right.for example cilic wins us open and he is suspicious (see comments on here after he won) fed wins and one user raises his suspicioons and gets completley destroyed by fed fans with replies.the argument about feds game not needing drugs is stupid.to be able to consistently come to the net and maintain an attacking gameplan needs endurance.the logic that if a player doesn't play a grinding game and comes to the net and attacks means there not doping. Is stupid imo.this would mean john isner ,stepanek llodra karlovic wawrinka shouldnt be suspected. I dont think fed is doping as i said before he is one of the few players that looks honest when talking about doping in interviews .but i just dont like that he is the one player not suspected

      Delete
    10. In my opinion nobody is above suspicion. If everyone is presumed innocent then there would be no need for drug tests. I just think that it's how some players win that can be suspicious. For example, players winning grueling matches that last for nearly 6 hours, players outlasting opponents physically, players having a dramatic increase in certain aspects of their game for a short period of time, players playing back-to back grueling matches and outlasting fresher opponents e.t.c

      But of course there could be other factors...

      Delete
    11. UntitledK9: Do you even play tennis? You can't exclude stamina just because agressiveness in play. There was plenty physical effort in Fed matches. That's like saying no doping ever existed in tennis before 2000 and I'm sure that's false. Jesus, McEnroe admitted to doping (without any repercussion) and he was a skinny S&V player. Even more preposterous, your attitude is like trusting baseball players don't dope because they barely need stamina.

      Delete
    12. BDS: It's ridiculous to include yourself in a 'side' with that ridiculous statement "We're damned if we do, damned if we don't". You're not part of Federer's team. You don't contribute to his success. Saying 'we' is the most embarrasing thing to say when mature people are trying to discuss doping in elite sport. Doping exists in elite tennis. That's a fact. You and many others have repeteadly stated that Nadal dopes. Yeah, a 14 GS champion dopes, yet a 17 GS champion doesn't. An athlete with 60 titles dopes, yet another with 80 is clean.
      Double standards don't contribute at all to fighting doping in sports. It just makes our entire position much weaker.

      Delete
    13. @Unknown: Of course there was effort during the match, last I checked energy is expended during physical activity. Like I said, there are other factors. Where did I say Tennis is only a skilled based sport and doesn't need stamina like Baseball? Look, every top player could be doping I'm just saying that I don't really feel that is was some eye raising performance (taking into account his entire career). Take someone like Nadal and his miraculous serve during USO 2010, we had never seen him produce such serves and considering he gained it in about two weeks, that was suspicious. Nobody could explain it and all we were left with was the "grip-change" excuse...
      -


      "Yeah, a 14 GS champion dopes, yet a 17 GS champion doesn't. An athlete with 60 titles dopes, yet another with 80 is clean. Double standards don't contribute at all to fighting doping in sports. It just makes our entire position much weaker."
      -
      I don't think it's about double standards when one exhibits far more red flags than the other, but does it mean the other is a clean athlete? Of course not. No one certainly knows. I guess I will wait for someone to write "The Curious Case of Federer"

      Delete
    14. Eyebrow raising performances are indeed suspicious. I'm not saying otherwise. But even that is sometimes natural. Cilic could have been clean in the USO for all we know. As a matter of fact, several doping experts (those that help TOP athletes to dope unnoticed) claim that it's the consistency in incredible performances that only state-of-the-art doping treatments can provide.

      Delete
    15. And they ARE double standards. People here make cynical remarks about Nadal, Cilic, Djokovic, Murray, even Wawrinka. But Federer? No way! He was just the most succesful tennis player ever. How could he dope if he doesn't even grunt? Sorry, but having other players with more flags doesn't mean anything. It just means that such player is probably a stupid, cynical or unlikable doper. Nothing else. And going to the extreme of defending the more succesful player ever just because 'he has less red flags' is an obvious double standard.

      Delete
    16. Once again I've said it's possible all top players could very well doping just based on the ITF's weak testing program.

      And relax, I didn't go to any extreme. All I stated was that I personally did not think his performance was suspicious. Going into the match I felt that he had a chance. This was a surface that suited one player's game better and said player executed a smart game plan, aggressive serving, net rushing e.t.c Djokovic had no time to really settle and dictate from the back of the court. The reason most think that Federer has adjusted such a style is to compensate now that as he's gotten older. And as Jenny said: "Federer is not the same player in best of 5 sets, as he is in best of 3"

      Also the way you seem to be going off, is Federer expected to lose every single match to players younger than him? It's not like Federer has been some journeyman throughout his career. And why are you so upset that Federer is been given leeway by some? It's in some ways justified:

      http://www.newstatesman.com/sport/2013/10/last-days-roger-federer
      - "There are lots of rumours about drugs in tennis; I’ve never heard anyone mention Federer in that regard"

      Neither have I, have you? If you found a really old Journal Du Dimanche article regarding Federer, please share.

      - "It just means that such player is probably a stupid, cynical or unlikable doper. Nothing else"

      Possibly but here's the thing, with doped athletes who conquered and reached the pinnacle of their sport, there were almost always rumors and mumblings: Armstrong, Bonds, Johnson e.t.c

      So instead of your "Player A is doping, so is Player B is also" why not list reasons why you think player B might be doping rather than making a passing statement, that will be much more interesting :)

      Delete
    17. If you haven't heard anything about Fed doping when he has been competing toe-to-toe against Agassi, Nadal, Djokovic, Murray, Gaudio, Coria, Nalbandian (all suspicious and just two related to doping cases), if you haven't read anything on the internet regardng Federer then you're obviously only focusing on other people. Likely on those that have been beating Fed or are close to the most hated one because some people here are biased like that.

      If you haven't read that all consistent elite athletes dope by 'doping experts', then I invite you to look something about Heredia, Conte, Fuentes, etc. Want direct relations with Federer? Well, you can find several after a 10 seconds search. They're as reliable as with other tennis players, though. But you people don't seem to care sometimes... (double standards ;) )

      You want other reasons that aren't 'incredible stamina', 'incredible recovery time', 'incredible achievements' because somehow they don't apply to Federer? Well, I don't know. Perhaps the fact that he suffered his first notable injury after years of playing when the biological passport sampling began. And after some time of experimenting, he regained his strength and stamina. But oh well, I suppose circumstancial things like these just apply to non-Fed athletes.

      Delete
    18. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    19. For everybody here Nadal and Djokovic and Murray are very suspicious, in that order.

      How come somebody that is competing on equal terms over the years and well in his 30s, cannot be suspicious?

      I am not saying that proves anything, but if there would be any proof about the other 3, would not we know a little bit about it?

      Delete
    20. Nope, I’ve read extensively about doping in not just in tennis but also in Track and Field, Baseball and Cycling. In regards to Tennis, I try to look into every elite player. There have been articles both in the English and Foreign media that have eye opening to say the least, I have quite an archive. So I'm no way impartial on that front, hence why I asked you to provide if any articles have been written on Federer as I may have missed it.

      Trust me I focus on Federer, but so far no one has been able to provide any in-depth look as to why he may be doped (based on suspicious performances, random injuries e.t.c) or even said that he was connected to a dodgy doctor. I’ve also haven’t read of his fellow colleagues expressing doubts about his performances. For someone as popular as he is, if he is on drugs there are bound to be people who feel that he a cheat and then voice their opinions. We’ve seen it with Rochus, Koellerer and others.

      - "You want other reasons that aren't 'incredible stamina', 'incredible recovery time', 'incredible achievements' because somehow they don't apply to Federer?"

      You're missing the point. I just said that Federer hadn’t exhibited those flags in a way that seemed out of the norm. And how is incredible achievements a red flag? Like I said, it’s not what athletes have achieved, its how they have achieved them.

      For example:
      I won the Tour de France - Brilliant
      However, I won it not by 8 seconds but by 7 minutes destroying the field in the process – What?

      So yes I want other reasons that could apply to Federer, I’m really curious.

      - “Well, I don't know.”
      I know.

      - “Perhaps the fact that he suffered his first notable injury after years of playing when the biological passport sampling began. And after some time of experimenting, he regained his strength and stamina.”

      Fair point. Now the next step would be to ask the question if Federer using something to help him but maybe had to stop and if so what type of drugs? What would other benefits had been? Anyone want to weigh in?

      Though before 2013, what would have been suspicious to you?

      @apanchuful
      There has been a ton of circumstantial evidence that we know off and have been documented just on this blog alone.

      Delete
    21. I've seen atypical physical transformations or weird patterns in a lot of top 100 players during a lot of years. Obviously, they don't get to be criticised here as often (or at all) because they don't beat Federer. Some people that, in my opinion, have doped but not as constantly as others, before 2013: Monaco, Verdasco, López, Robredo, Simon, Gasquet, Monfils, Karlovic, Isner, Hewitt. Those who dope constantly but can't achieve what the 'big 4' achieved: Ferrer, Tipsarevic, Berdych...

      Delete
    22. I meant in regards to Federer but yes, I agree on those players you've mentioned as well. Thasp posted about some of them back during the "Picture" days and commented on their physiques, but the blog has changed direction since then.

      Those were fun though: "Knocking me out with those Serbian thighs"

      Delete
  20. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  21. I don’t think this was posted:

    https://twitter.com/scambers73/status/519446130271453184

    "Tennis should expect results from biological passport by 2015, Wada director general David Howman says"
    http://www.thetennisspace.com/wadas-howman-bio-passport-to-yield-results-by-2015/

    -
    The website seems to be down, however

    ReplyDelete
  22. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/othersports/athletics/11158284/Justin-Gatlin-hits-back-at-doping-accusations-and-tells-the-haters-to-stop-discrediting-his-name.html

    "Justin Gatlin hits back at doping accusations and tells the 'haters' to stop 'discrediting' his name"

    “For the few haters out there, seems like that’s what they want to do, discredit my name and label me with laboratory rats in Oslo, and say, ‘Oh, steroids are in your system for decades and decades. I’m sad to say that a lot of people out there feel that, ‘Once a doper, always a doper’. But that makes no sense. That means you don’t believe your system is working.”

    The research was actually in mice, but I'd trust any rodent species over Gatlin this season, and if anyone wonders what about Gatlins true colors, read his instagram posts in reaction to a Norwegian runners protestations about his current success, and past history as a "drugger"

    "Gatlin took it to whole new level this week, according to the Big Lead, posting crude mum insults after Olstad — a college 1500m runner — uploaded a picture of chocolates he’d been sent from his mother. Alongside a picture of chocolates, Olstad had written: “The best chocolate from the best mom! Thank you!" Gatlin’s response, since deleted, read: “Your mom gives the best b*** j*** too. She’s awesome. U can call me daddy like she does.” Gatlin later added: “Slap your mom for me u non counting idiot. While your at it add some wins for me too. Then go do your research if you want to state true facts. Haters like you will never make it in life. U don’t even no me lil boy lol but u goooooot to hate like your doing a justice right? “Point is focus on your own lame life. I’m still winning your still crying. U don’t sprint! Your not a pro! Hell your not American so go home! I check you stats and u suck! Lmao so this is 5min of fame right here champ. FYI tell your mom hi for me.”


    http://www.news.com.au/sport/sports-life/justin-gatlins-instagram-post-shows-sprinters-true-colours/story-fno61i58-1227087200590

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Justin Justin, why so angry? I'm sure the mother had nothing to do with her son's instagram post.

      Delete
    2. Seems like a case of roid fueled rage caused Gaitlin to post such cringeworthy crap.

      Delete
  23. Come on, please, some sense of humor... I am just winding you up Fed fans, I don't really think he is doping, at the end of the day, he is only 33, and just won over 1000 matches inthe era of Doping but he is clearly superior to all those other players. How could any one in their right mind suspect, if he always says he is agaist doping!!!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Still you have offered up no evidence of your claim. I'm still waiting.

      Delete
    2. You sound like a typical fan. I don't think an anti-doping blog is the right place for you. A typical forum where people insult each other in Fed vs Nadal fights seems to be the place where you'll be just like home.

      Delete
    3. Once again you don't answer the question. You're good at pointing fingers saying the same thing over and over but you have no smoking gun to show us. No big surprise there. I don't take you seriously and I'm sure I'm not alone here.

      Delete
    4. I do not have any evidence, but neither you do. And coming to saying the same thing over and over... that's funny! Look at the comment below from Guido. That is the sort of evidence that we can read in this blog. The evil plans of Nadal and his uncle to take over the world. I can make ridiculous comments, but by no means mine are the most ridiculous here, so I think they should fit in well, just ignore them!

      Delete
    5. apanchuful, "just ignore them [your comments]" is your most meaningful comment here ever, by far! A true insight, a revelation, a satori! If only you could understand the implications of it, and (not) act accordingly!

      Delete
    6. Bah, I didn't know this blog was filled with Fed fans that just gather here to complain about Nadal & Co. I understand now that a serious effort to discuss doping here is merely a foolish and naive hope. Thank you.

      Delete
    7. @apanchuful I and others here have provided plenty of evidence against Nadal, just go back and read some threads why don't you, including this...

      http://tennishasasteroidproblem.blogspot.ca/2011/02/curious-case-of-rafael-nadal.html

      But I've yet to read anything here or elsewhere that has convinced me that Federer is doping. So please, present your argument otherwise stop posting your nonsense.

      Delete
    8. People all over the internet are now not following this site anymore as unknown sys its just fed fans gathering to complain about nadal .the stuff posted here these days is as credible as this site http://federerisdoping.blogspot.com/

      Delete
    9. Lopi this. Was one of your comments when nishikori was having a good run at the us open "LopiSeptember 4, 2014 at 8:53 AM
      Is anyone else suspicious of Kei Nishikori? In the past the guy has had zero stamina and poor fitness. He withdraws from Toronto and Cincy due to a toe injury which requires surgery. Then he immediately makes the QF in Washington and now a historic run at the USO. How does this kid go from retiring and withdrawing from tournaments to beating two top-10 players in B2B 5 setters, playing well over 8 hours in 2 days? Is this all because of Michael Chang in his box? I'm not buying it.".so rising star in their prime doing well is suspicious but a 33 year old isnt

      Delete
    10. Yeah well I also said that Murray's and Delpo's post-injury play is indicative of what injured players look like. So? What? Yeah I do think Kei is a little suspicious. His improved stamina is suspicious. I'm not just a Federer supporter but I've yet to read anything about him that raises a red flag, unlike Nadal and 2011 Djoker. But hey I'm sure Djokovic felt he had no choice. Fight fire with fire. Fight dope with dope. Where's your argument that supports Federer doping?

      ***crickets***


      Just as I thought.

      Delete
    11. "I suspect anyone but Federer just because." And with a straight face to top it off. That is hilarious. It does not surprise me that usual Fed fans fail to comment in publications that are unrelated to your 'hated-ones', like match-fixing, WADA, etc. Or if you do is to include 'Nadal' in your witty comment. Seems you people only care about tennis integrity when your idol or your idol's nemesis is somehow related.

      Delete
  24. According local news from Spain, Uncle Toni announced that Nadal will not play London´s Masters. Any favorite for the AO?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Nadal Says: I'll Play Basel
      Toni Says: Rafa will play Basel, may have surgery before or after Bercy, then will skip the WTF
      PR Manager Says: Rafa will play Basel, consult doctors, then decide on whether to play the WTF.

      Which one is it? Oh let's not forget that last month Nadal pulled out of the Indian Tennis league taking place in December because of health reasons.

      How can someone predict injuries? Fantastic skill.

      Delete
    2. Rafa's PR manager do what PR managers do. Stall if something is not popular. Just like the USO withdrawal/growth factors issue.

      Delete
  25. AP reporting that Italian media have alleged involvement of Italian tennis players Daniel Bracciali and Potito Statace (and potentially other foreign players) in match fixing.........


    http://bigstory.ap.org/article/3dc2e4e80b07448bbbb975128c7dc910/italian-tennis-players-face-corruption-accusations

    ReplyDelete
  26. hi this is from health care department, Narcotic analgesics are those agents which are powerful analgesics which have a relieving effect on severe pain as well as moderate pain. They are basically selective depressants of the central nervous system. Ultram is one such drug designed to reduce pain of various intensities. It simply makes sure that the brain does not recognize the pain anymore. Conditions like neck pain, lower back pain, sciatica and such other related ones can be treated using tramadol. The function of this is based on its ability to change the path of the sensation of pain in any region of the body.


    http://www.fostermeds.com/Product/58-Buy-Ultram-Online
    thanks for sharing information!!!!!!!

    ReplyDelete
  27. for best Online Jobs without any rejection, no time limit required, no investment requires, just spend few minutes and earn upto $35 daily
    www.adsclickearning.com

    ReplyDelete