Talk About Tennis 2.0

FWIW, the drug is being referred by many on social media as EPO and they are saying this isn't kinda sorta suspicious, that it's straight up doping that cyclists are known for using. Those familiar with the drug are saying claiming you took it accidentally isn't a believable with this substance, so the it was in my sinus medication or in the beef I had for dinner doesn't appear to be a good defense for this one.

JazzNU wrote: ↑Fri Oct 21, 2022 6:38 pm ...

And even if she's guilty, I've said it before and I'll say it again, I do not like this guilty til proven innocent system where even those that are proven in the right in these cases suffer harsh consequences as a result of the initial findings. I wish there were at least more urgent timetables to handle these matters so players wouldn't miss so much time when they are able to reduce their bans.

It is one of the terrible consequences from the Court of Public Opinion. I hope you are right, although your following post throws considerable weight for the accusation, as well as the data that it is used for kidney/dialysis patients.

JazzNU wrote: ↑Fri Oct 21, 2022 6:38 pm Yikes! I knew it was a bad sign when I saw Tennis among the topics on the ESPN ticker when it wasn't earlier this morning so it couldn't be about say Coco qualifying for the WTA Finals.

I'm probably easier to persuade that she did this more than others will be because it has crossed my mind in the past how appreciably better she got years after she was on tour. But I was never actively suspicious of her and there are people I find far more suspicious with much more suspect trajectories so I never focused much on it with her.

If she's telling the truth, I hope she's able to get it down to a reasonable ban where she doesn't miss more than several months.

And even if she's guilty, I've said it before and I'll say it again, I do not like this guilty til proven innocent system where even those that are proven in the right in these cases suffer harsh consequences as a result of the initial findings. I wish there were at least more urgent timetables to handle these matters so players wouldn't miss so much time when they are able to reduce their bans.

Wasn't the major turning point in her career development and improved results directly related to her breast reduction surgery? That's how I remember it. I know that was well before she started winning slams. But it was after the breast reduction when she started going deeper into tournaments. Then the Slams came later.

dryrunguy wrote: ↑Fri Oct 21, 2022 8:32 pm

JazzNU wrote: ↑Fri Oct 21, 2022 6:38 pm Yikes! I knew it was a bad sign when I saw Tennis among the topics on the ESPN ticker when it wasn't earlier this morning so it couldn't be about say Coco qualifying for the WTA Finals.

I'm probably easier to persuade that she did this more than others will be because it has crossed my mind in the past how appreciably better she got years after she was on tour. But I was never actively suspicious of her and there are people I find far more suspicious with much more suspect trajectories so I never focused much on it with her.

Wasn't the major turning point in her career development and improved results directly related to her breast reduction surgery? That's how I remember it. I know that was well before she started winning slams. But it was after the breast reduction when she started going deeper into tournaments. Then the Slams came later.

No, it wasn't. Maybe someone else would say yes to that though. But that's certainly what the narrative has been and has been given as the main reason so it's not strange that you or anyone would remember it that way. She had the breast reduction surgery when she was very young, like 16 or 17, so almost the conclusion of her junior career. A couple of years later, I would say around 2010 and 2011, she had made her way up the rankings, but top 100 trending towards top 50. That's what I thought she was going to be, a top 50 player with clay being where she was most valuable for Fantasy Tennis (the reason I remember her at all during this time). Then maybe two years later, almost out of nowhere, she caught like wildfire and didn't look back. I was shocked for sure. It struck me as odd at the time, but it can happen that way, so that's what I chalked it up to and hopefully, that's what it was.

Doesn't meant that her breast reduction surgery wasn't pivotal in an overall sense, she's basically said that it was. But the actual surgery and her reaching the top of women's tennis was not overnight, there's like 5 years between the surgery and when she caught fire.

Yes - in other words, she did not enter the top 10 when she was 18 or 19, but took time to evolve and mature and develop.
Just like 90% of tennis players.

Just to follow up on the subject with an article...

https://www.espn.com/tennis/story/_/id/ ... en-us-open

.

Words from Darren Cahill

From a guy who is under absolutely no obligation to say anything about the subject of Halep's supposed positive test, that is absolutely wonderful.

Everyone should be so fortunate to have a character witness who steps up like Cahill has done here.
Bravo.

JazzNU wrote: ↑Fri Oct 21, 2022 7:07 pm FWIW, the drug is being referred by many on social media as EPO and they are saying this isn't kinda sorta suspicious, that it's straight up doping that cyclists are known for using. Those familiar with the drug are saying claiming you took it accidentally isn't a believable with this substance, so the it was in my sinus medication or in the beef I had for dinner doesn't appear to be a good defense for this one.

I'm not familiar with the specific drug Simona tested positive for, nor am I familiar with this EPO that it is linked to. So if anyone else is in the same boat as me, just thought I would further elaborate since I've seen more info since the announcement.

EPO stands for Erythropoietin and the way I keep seeing it described, it gives the athletes more oxygen to perform. The drug that Halep tested positive for stimulates EPO. Like I mentioned before, cyclists have been dinged for EPO. And not a good association for Halep at all, but underscores the performance advantage that it can give and probably the way it is viewed by anti-doping authorities - it was one of the main drugs used in Lance Armstrong's extensive doping program.

YIKES!

I am sure I will get zero support on this forum but..
Maybe the rules have become so complicated it is time to either scrap them all or become terribly strict ..nothing is allowed or everything is allowed..I would certainly go for the latter...whether all this doping really gives someone an unfair advantage, is unclear to me. If athletes want to pay games with their own bodies, let them..
.ask Djokovic!!

ashkor87 wrote: ↑Tue Oct 25, 2022 8:26 am I am sure I will get zero support on this forum but..
Maybe the rules have become so complicated it is time to either scrap them all or become terribly strict ..nothing is allowed or everything is allowed..I would certainly go for the latter...whether all this doping really gives someone an unfair advantage, is unclear to me. If athletes want to pay games with their own bodies, let them..
.ask Djokovic!!

I kinda like it. The old F-it response. Sometimes I wonder why it matters if you're getting strong from spinach or from a pill... But none of us are 100% natural, and there are plenty of other "unfair advantages" that we easily accept.

Yes. We could go that way (or the athletes could).
But remember the good ol' days of the USSR and Chinese competitors, in which athletes were forced to take or fed PED's without their knowledge. Also, some of these PED's, if not most, come with other dangers to the athletes' health, further down the road in their lives. Last, they are not cheap; another further advantage to the wealthy athletes, or those from countries where such PED's are more easily accessible. For example, I really do not think that Camila or Galan would easily find any PED's here in Colombia, other than coffee or coke.
It is a thin line.
---0---
About Cahill: the man is good people. As expressed above, no need for him to come forward with such a statement. Yet, he did. The decent thing to do.

Djokovic has proven that taking nothing, not even aspirin nor vaccines, is best for the body! Can anyone argue with his success?

No.
But you are looking at one person. Other players have needed some medication. I remember that one time, some data leaked for some top players, Serena included. Well, she needed some medication that was approved by the tour. And arguing about her success is also not possible.
I believe Kvitova takes medication for her asthma?
We all are a bit different. I, for example, need to take a small dose of Propanolol every day, for something called "an essential tremor". (My left hand shakes a bit if I don't). Of course, I am not a pro, and this would not affect my everyday life in a terrible way (my handwriting is already terrible), but taking it makes it better.
If Novak can live without taking anything, great for him. I also believe that Roger is the same. And most players. But some need something.

Does Djokovic still use that hyperbaric chamber-like thing?