The Generic Tennis Thread
- Thread starter belboid
- Start date
Nigel Irritable
Five, Ten, Fifteen Years
Highly unlikely. The likes of Nike, which has deals with athletes who have served suspensions, wouldn't look very credible trying that. They'll just sever ties and quietly walk away. Her career was coming to an end anyway and they'd have been walking away soon anyway.
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
Not sure about that. Didn't Lance Armstrong get sued retrospectively? Although I guess all this test proves is that she was cheating this year, while Armstrong cheated throughout.
But anyway who cares? Nadal has already come out to declare that he's clean. This is the real damage - I couldn't give two fucks about the money between Sharapova and the worthless shower of cunts who sponsor her. The real damage is to sport, the introduction of doubt into great performances, the destruction of trust.
Surely the only sane way forward now has to be full disclosure at all times of all medications you're on and why. The situation as it stands whereby Sharapova must continue lying about the reasons for taking this thing over the last 10 years has to be changed.
Nigel Irritable
Five, Ten, Fifteen Years
Armstrong was sued over bonuses paid for Tour wins while he was doping. Sharapova hasn't won anything since meldonium was banned, so nothing equivalent to that is likely to happen.
skyscraper101
0891 50 50 50
(posting from LA)
Novak Djokovic walked right in front of me yesterday while I was standing in front of a hotel in Beverly Hills. Got into a fly Tesla car and was then driven off. Which was nice.
Novak Djokovic walked right in front of me yesterday while I was standing in front of a hotel in Beverly Hills. Got into a fly Tesla car and was then driven off. Which was nice.
hash tag
Books, not bombs
Full disclosure is admirable but sadly unrealistic. The drugs stuff in The Tour started big time with the Festina thing in '98. Armstrong ( sorry to continue to use him as an example ), continue to LIE, cheat etc. until 2011/2012. I believe Verinque is still in denial despite his team being kicked out of the Tour and all his teammates confessing.
Armstrong had complicated deals going whereby the bonuses would increase according to the wins. Some of those bonuses were paid out by the US Postal Service (government) which meant they could sue to get them back, I think. Also, I believe he sold "shares" in future bonuses and I doubt that he has paid that much back.
Moving forward, David Miller was very apologetic and campaigns big time against doping Whereas Nicole Cooke would have his likes banned from all connections with the sport for life. Bearing in mind the time, the trials and tribulations it took to get cycling where it is now, from which other sports should have watched and learnt, I would ban dopers from having any connection with the sport for life. I would not have dopers turning up as coaches, managers Etc. The downside of this is that dopers will do all they can to cheat, deceive and lie, for life.
It damages sport, but with so much money at stake and new potions being brewed all the time, I doubt doping will go away just yet. So very sad really.
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
It's not just the athletes in whose interests it is to maintain this polite fiction.
How I would see full disclosure going would be something like this:
In something like tennis, the top 100, say, or however many it is that make a big living out of the game, which is about the top 100, must submit details of every prescription drug taken along with an explanation. Every 6 months, say, they must submit a log of the drugs taken. They are then liable not just to random drug tests but to random honesty tests - where a second opinion is sought and hospital records along with blood tests, etc, must be submitted to support the claim of the particular condition. For instance, clearly a rash of heart conditions hasn't broken out among athletes even if each individual has a doctor's note - individual doctors can be bought off.
A big intrusion into privacy? Yes, but the current regime is already that, and you're only expecting it from those to whom you are paying out big amounts of prize money.
Either that, or you have to allow everyone to take anything they like as long as it isn't banned - which is pretty much the status quo - which would be dangerous as it might almost force everyone to take the latest dangerous thing to stay competitive.
Otherwise, you can't get honesty. Would something like that be workable? The default position really should be that if you're not ill, you shouldn't be taking prescription drugs - most ordinary people manage to do that, and so should athletes. If that means you can't train quite as hard, well, that's the whole point.
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
Last edited:
hash tag
Books, not bombs
I am not Andy's greatest fan but he has said some sound things over this affair. He has said he only gets his products from companies he believes to be totally clean for fear that his clean products might be contanimated by non clean products.
He has also expressed his surprise at Head sticking by her.
Fair play to him,
He has also expressed his surprise at Head sticking by her.
Fair play to him,
Lord Camomile
Yipchaa!
Murray's always been pretty forthright and unwavering in his views on doping, often calling for more testing and giving little quarter to those who fail tests.
I've been wondering though, at what point does something performance-enhancing become unacceptable or illegal? I mean, they'll all be on performance-enhancing diets, adding various supplements to drinks and the like, and they'll have their recovery routines.
Not calling anyone out as a hypocrite at all, I'm just always interested in where/how people draw their particular lines.
I've been wondering though, at what point does something performance-enhancing become unacceptable or illegal? I mean, they'll all be on performance-enhancing diets, adding various supplements to drinks and the like, and they'll have their recovery routines.
Not calling anyone out as a hypocrite at all, I'm just always interested in where/how people draw their particular lines.
hash tag
Books, not bombs
Nadal? Rafael Nadal says he will sue ex-French minister over doping allegations
This is reminiscent of Armstrong.
This is reminiscent of Armstrong.
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
I think this is a very good question. It's hard to define, I think, but you normally know it when you see it. So lying about a medical condition to get yourself on a drug for the sole purposes of performance-enhancement is dishonest and cheating. Going to altitude, getting yourself a special diet, doing lots of very expensive things that only certain people can afford isn't quite cheating, even if it isn't quite totally fine. imo the British cycling team push the limits of honesty with their legal activity, so there are definitely grey areas. Sharapova is already over that grey area by lying about a heart condition, though, imo, even when she was doing it to take a non-banned drug.
goldenecitrone
post tenebras lux
Djoko through. Only Grand Slam tournament he hasn't won. Yet. Though I reckon Murray will give him a run for his money in the final if they both get there.
goldenecitrone
post tenebras lux
After almost going two sets down, he's virtually won the third set to love. What's Gasquet got left? I'm sure there'll be a few more twists and turns before the match is done.
belboid
Exasperated, not angry.
or maybe not! Kept getting funny looks at work as I caught up with the score and muttered (not particularly) under my breath
goldenecitrone
post tenebras lux
Yep. Murray suddenly in steamroller mode. Next up, Stan Wawrinka. Murray to win in five sets!!! That's really sticking my neck out.
Lord Camomile
Yipchaa!
Davis Cup in Serbia: 1-1 in matches, GBR just won the first set 6-1 in the doubles.
Lord Camomile
Yipchaa!
Fucking fiddlesticks. GBR lose the 2nd on the tie break having been 0-40 up at 4-4
Lord Camomile
Yipchaa!
To be honest, I did have an inkling Djoko might not make the final. The recent final against Murray aside, he's been oddly out of sorts for a while.
Obvious theory is he lost his focus since winning the French and completing the career slam, but is it that simple?
Let's just hope Murray takes full advantage, then he'd have only the French to chase down too
(Plus two Olympic golds that the likes of Djoko and Fed don't have... 
)
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
Yes and no. Since the French, he's made the final of the US, the World Finals, and beat Murray last week. For anyone else, that would be not bad. I quite fancied Murray to beat him this year at the Aus, but I was expecting Djoko in the final.
Whatever happens, this result cements Murray as world no. 1 for a while now - Djokovic loses nearly 2000 points with this.
Similar threads
