Not wild wild speculation. Very respected ‘Le Jornal du Dimanche’ named him. Cyclists got banned for two years for exact same offence! No ‘evidence’ other than paper evidence but enough to find them guilty (and rightly so imo).
Perhaps there isn’t a big doping problem but personally I reckon fair amount of doping goes in.
Of course there was no doping problem in cycling until Festina scandal. Like of Kimmage in cycling and Courier in tennis are just trouble makers.
I think you’re being very generous to Nadal Clarkey. And to the sport in general which is reasonably famous in anti-doping circles for refusing to acknowledge the potential problem.
Some select quotes:
Nadal on random testing:
“I think it shows a lack of respect for privacy. I think it’s a disgrace. These are things that completely have to change, and there is a unanimous voice on that in the locker room. It is an intolerable hunt.”
Federer on tennis:
“I’d like a sport without doping, but it’s an illusion. There’s so much money involved, this pushes people to take drugs.”
Andrei Medvedev on Agassi’s positive test (that was covered-up):
"Agassi was probably not the only one who tested positive. I think Becker has also used and was forgiven for positive tests several times. In a 5 set match against me at Wimbledon, Becker took a ten minute break. He disappeared with his doctor to the toilet and the supervisor did nothing.
To those who suggest drugs would be of little benefit in tennis:
Good article here on the problems in tennis from Slate:
I’m being generous in assuming Nadal is innocent until proven guilty? Fair enough, we’ve divergent views in this regard. What are anti-doping circles?
My understanding, which may be wrong, is that tennis players have to check in (location wise) regularly with drug testers and be on hand for testing. It is invasive imo and impinges on personal lives. Testing should be done during tournaments.
As for Federer’s quote, I’ve already said on the thread that there probably is a certain amount of doping but prima facie it’s not a big problem.
And I didn’t suggest that strength and endurance are not important in tennis, merely that technical ability is more important, and that strenght and endurance would be more important in other sports like cycling, athletics and swimming.
Are you suggesting that Monfils takes drugs or that he’s strong?
As matter of interest do you think Rusedski was innocent too?
Prohibiting tests outside of events would allow for absolute free for all. Is it for all sports you believe testing should be prohibited out of competition? Also do you think Basso, Ullrich etc should have been suspended for exact same offence as Nadal? They got done for paper trail. Same as Nadal.
I found Nadal’s quotes in Sunday Times couple of weeks ago particularly interesting must say. Certainly talks like a doper anyway.
I don’t really remember the details of the Rusedski case I have to confess.
These lads are on the tour for 11 months of the year, more or less, so I dispute that it would allow an absolute free for all. Don’t think it should be for all sports though e.g. this probably wouldn’t work for boxing.
I don’t believe Nadal has committed any offence.
Game, set and match to Duff/Rock here, I think. Head in the sand stuff from CC.
What’s the story with Niland??? There’s no matches listed on the website now…?
http://www.wimbledon.com/en_GB/scores/schedule/index.html
Still rain delayed.
At a high level, I think the argument between me and the Duffo brothers can be summarised as follows. They can correct me if they think what I’m saying is wrong.
- They think Nadal is doping. I don’t think there is evidence that he is.
- They think doping is rife in the sport. I don’t think there is evidence that it is.
- They think anti-doping procedures are inadequate. It’s obviously debatable but where do you draw the line? They have to check-in and can basically be tested any time. How often they actually are or should be is a little up in the air.
Did you read that Slate article?
A full 9 years after Jim Courier opined that EPO might be widespread in tennis, the ITF conducted 20 tests in 2008, mostly at 3 tournaments. Given that it is detectable in the system for a little over a week that’s not testing for EPO at all - it’s just pretending to cover it off so you can tick the boxes.
The failure to impose the recommended sanction on those caught and the poor comparisons with other sports tell you all you need to know about the governing body’s attitude to drug testing. They’d rather not know about the problem and they’re going the right way about it.
The pictures were to counter your suggestion that doping would have a limited benefit in tennis. I posted up here ages ago about the number of young golfers caught in France when they stepped up their testing - a sport almost exclusively about technique. The one argument that nobody should be making is that doping would be less useful in a particular sport. That’s what perpetutates the problem. It delayed baseball tackling the problem, the NBA are only now having a conversation about certain players’ views that it’s a huge problem. And football and rugby continue to lag behind in terms of transparency. But tennis is further back still.
- It’s absurdly naive to ignore the evidence from Operacion Puerto. It was good enough for the ASO in France but so many others are more concerned without avoiding embarrassment. At best, being most generous, there is a huge cloud of suspicion over Nadal.
- It follows from point 3 really but the lack of positive tests is indicative of the tests, not the sport.
- Nothing is a “little up in the air.” It’s widely acknowledged to be insufficient and compares very poorly with other sports.
- Show me the evidence against Nadal per Operacion Puerta please.
- You don’t think it’s plausible that a lack of positive tests could mean that the tests were correctly negative?
- Acknowledged by whom? Define insufficient. What would be sufficient? What would be the point of more testing given that you don’t believe in the integrity of the testing in the first place? Is the only way to be sure of the integrity of the testing to find more people guilty?
1 named in a newspaper article who leaked the names. The fact tennis players were on the list isn’t up for debate anyway and even at the time before he was named in the paper Nadal was widely spoken of.
2. They simply aren’t testing in enough numbers at the right time.
3. It’s not the integrity of the tests themselves, it’s the process that is less than adequate. Tests are not frequent enough and the punishments handed out have been ridiculous.
I don’t really know what your point is to be honest. You don’t seem to have read any of the evidence or comparisons with other sports. You continue to fall back on the lack of doping offences caught when that’s the exact point being made.
If tennis was as clean a sport as you’d like to believe then they should impose proper out of competition testing, apply punishments in line with WADA policy and cooperate with other sports and anti doping agencies. Until they do that I think it’s very naive to believe the sport is clean so doesn’t need regimental testing.
Will respond to this in detail when I am not mobile.
I don’t think I can make my point any clearer though. There’s no evidence to support your theory that tennis is riddled with drugs. A lack of evidence doesn’t make someone guilty.
Limerick win the first set 6-3
1-1 in the second at the moment.
Play suspended AGAIN. Limerick 4-3 up in the second but facing the serve in the next game.
Clarkey’s argument is like something Jimmy Magee might have come up with circa 1992
Limerick always tennis best in the rain.
H’on ta fuck.
This land is your land
This land is Niland
From the grass of Eastbourne
To hard courts in Thailand
Though he plays the tennis
He hits the ball like Richie Bennis
This land is made for you and me
Sid pulls a good one out every now and again.
I know this is a cheap pop because we are not exactly pals mate but it does serve to reinforce the point that in the case you refer to there was a marked increase in the performance of the person in question. Nadal has been class from the start. It is fair to say that strength and endurance are big parts of his game but his topspin, his forehand and his mental strength are a lot bigger in my opinion.
We’re back on. Limerick 5-4 up. Hoping for a break now.