Nadal's last interview.....

First topic message reminder :

http://www.lequipe.fr/Tennis/Actualites/Nadal-pas-de-sportif-dope/266557


Nadal: "No Athlete dope".
In an interview with Spanish state television RTVE, Rafael Nadal explained why he believed there was no doping in elite sport. "I think that there is no top athlete doping, because the regime of drug testing is inhumane, he says. I must say where I am every day of the year. I have to give an hour a day of my time teams doping. I am the first to want a clean sport, controls, but I can not agree with the form. That seems unfair. "

Thanks Nadal for clarifying the situation. I was not too sure.

(PS..please note it si Nadal talking about it and not me). I am just translating what I find amusing comments.

There is so much at stake that of course everything is thought through to get extra power/stamina. Nothing is left to chance, let's be sure of that.

What I woudl like is to follow the top 5 players day and night, at least test them blood and urine every day for the whole season so see whether their perf / results change from the previous season.

That is the only way in my view to be completely sure. Just paying someone to travel with the player like a player travels with the physio, stringer, coach, etc...being part of teh team, for al top 5 players....and random testing for those ranked lower.

But I am pretty sure the sport organisations do not want it.

Tenez wrote:There is so much at stake that of course everything is thought through to get extra power/stamina. Nothing is left to chance, let's be sure of that.

What I woudl like is to follow the top 5 players day and night, at least test them blood and urine every day for the whole season so see whether their perf / results change from the previous season.

That is the only way in my view to be completely sure. Just paying someone to travel with the player like a player travels with the physio, stringer, coach, etc...being part of teh team, for al top 5 players....and random testing for those ranked lower.

But I am pretty sure the sport organisations do not want it.

I see your point Tenez - but every day? They'd look like pin cushions or heroin addicts by the end of that. I doubt that any Courts would allow a sporting body to exercise such interference in a player's life.

I do like the blood passport of the cyclists, and I don't see why the top 5-10 should not have to submit to random tests at least monthly as well as whatever regime there is of in-tournament testing.

barrystar wrote:I do like the blood passport of the cyclists, and I don't see why the top 5-10 should not have to submit to random tests at least monthly as well as whatever regime there is of in-tournament testing.

The other suggestion to freeze samples for long-term analysis, including future analysis, is also worth considering.

hawkeye wrote:
Ha ha exactly. It's not as if he's an old married man with a couple of kids (twins... ) to keep him tied down.

Do you know something that 606v2 does not? (Need to check with Xisca on Twitter )

Tenez wrote:There is so much at stake that of course everything is thought through to get extra power/stamina. Nothing is left to chance, let's be sure of that.

What I woudl like is to follow the top 5 players day and night, at least test them blood and urine every day for the whole season so see whether their perf / results change from the previous season.

That is the only way in my view to be completely sure. Just paying someone to travel with the player like a player travels with the physio, stringer, coach, etc...being part of teh team, for al top 5 players....and random testing for those ranked lower.

But I am pretty sure the sport organisations do not want it.

wouldn't blood-testing every day seriously weaken the players though?

laverfan wrote:

barrystar wrote:I do like the blood passport of the cyclists, and I don't see why the top 5-10 should not have to submit to random tests at least monthly as well as whatever regime there is of in-tournament testing.

The other suggestion to freeze samples for long-term analysis, including future analysis, is also worth considering.

I think that Fed has said that he'd like that to be done. No doubt in 10 years time tests will exist to catch what people are doing now. The trouble with that is how to deal with a sanction - perhaps the reality that reputations would be totally trashed will do.

Mad for Chelsea wrote:

wouldn't blood-testing every day seriously weaken the players though?

Not really. They would just need to take a drop.

The risk however is having so many samples, the athlete coudl always suggest about samples pollution.

I think they should take 1 litre of blood from the top 5 every day just to be sure.

I'm sure they would prefer to get blood tested rather than to have some weirdo inspect their genitals every week. It would probably end up being one of those Sun reporters.

There is a piece of info which is quite stunning:

80% percent of OOC tests in 2008 took place between September and December. After the US Open. No OOC tests were conducted in January, prior to the Australian Open. Only 9 tests (8.2% of the total) were conducted prior to Roland Garros and Wimbledon. The remaining 12.7% percent of tests occurred in July following Wimbledon. Zero OOC tests occurred in August, leading up to the US Open.

For those who were folowing twitter after in Oct Nov...we coudl read again a the players complaining about OOC test. One after the other like we usually don't read the rest of teh year.

SO it;s clear that the test are essentially done when the players are less likely to dope and secondly, it confirms there are very few OOC tests contrary to what Nadal likes to make us believe.

to be fair Tenez, the pattern does roughly follow what corresponds to OOC for most top players (those you'd expect to see tested most), ie:

- most players are active before the AO (very rare they don't play at least one warm-up)
- longest OOC period is post-USO (indeed post-WTF, do you have stats for the percentage post WTF?)
- next longest is post-wimbledon (again, the top players tend to take July off post-wimbers)
- finally you get the post-AO period in February.

The 80% does seem disproportionate still, but maybe not as much as it would first appear.

Why woudl you dope after the USO? it's completely absurd. If you did not want to catch them, that's where all the tests woudl be done. Right?

I would have expected 4 out of 5 tests to actually be done right before the "tennis season" in April, May and June, not In October November when you expect dopers to cycle down.

It's choking. It looks like the ITF has learnt its lessons from the Agassi's case and the lesson is if they can avoid the risky tests in the first place, then more chance to avoid embarassement for players, the sport and its rulers.

laverfan wrote:

hawkeye wrote:
Ha ha exactly. It's not as if he's an old married man with a couple of kids (twins... ) to keep him tied down.

Do you know something that 606v2 does not? (Need to check with Xisca on Twitter )

Ha ha! I doubt that Xisca would know... I'm not for a minute suggesting he's doing anything wrong. But I can still understand the intrusion that having to always give your wherabouts would be. I'm sure all athletes must dislike it even if they comply. The thing is maybe those that know they don't cheat would resent it all the more. They must wish there was a way to prove it without the hassle of being tested like this. Thats even before they worry about the prospect of being stalked by Tenez...

hawkeye wrote:The thing is maybe those that know they don't cheat would resent it all the more. They must wish there was a way to prove it without the hassle of being tested like this. .

Imagine you were supremely talented and the only thing that coudl prevent you from being number one in the world and making a fortune for the rest of your life woudl be a bunch of cheats who would relegate yuo to number 5 or even less with all your career ruined. Woudl you still mind about telling your whereabouts if it could help you stay at the top?

If I knew that I think I would say something about it.

hawkeye wrote:If I knew that I think I would say something about it.

And what woudl you say?

hawkeye wrote:If I knew that I think I would say something about it.

Be careful, Rochus did, so did Odensik. Is any such information in the public domain at all?

Timeplease, Nadal did not give any indication about what kind of testing/anti-doping control he thinks would be acceptable. But maybe he is OK with in competition testing but not out?

Laverfan, the wherabouts rule is what he is talking about. There is no confusion here as that is part of antidoping.

I can’t believe doping scandals would really destroy tennis as much as people say, I mean the Tour de France has got to the laughable stage and it’s still going.

I think something has to be done when people are urinating to stop the cheaters. If I were a cheater I would keep an old sample in a hidden compartment in the bathroom and wire in an electric hot plate that was permanently on or switched on at the start of the selected whereabouts hour so the sample wouldn’t be cold. Pretty easy to do. I think whatever they needs to stop that which sadly may mean watching. At a tournament event that wouldn’t be necessary perhaps if the player agreed to a thorough body search before going into the bathroom. Of course there may be scientific tests that can be done to prove how long since the urine left the body. If so, that would be better but I assume not.

I agree with Tenez about more regular testing. Every day is excessive, but how about once a week in the off season or in the run up to slams that would be nice. Biological passport sounds like a good idea, provided it’s able to deliver verdicts that are statistically beyond a reasonable doubt.
I also like the idea of keeping samples for 10-20 years.

It seems to be that the doping tests are fairly random, although are focused on business end of major tournaments sometimes, but the out of competition tests are not sensibly “scheduled”.

Henman Bill wrote:Every day is excessive, but how about once a week in the off season or in the run up to slams that would be nice.

2010 (Total Male Urine+Blood) = 1,183
2009 (Total Male Urine+Blood) = 1,203
2008 (Total Male Urine+Blood) = 1,189
2007 (Total Male & Female Urine+Blood) = 2,028
2006 (Total Male & Female Urine+Blood) = 1,733
2005 (Total Male & Female Urine+Blood) = 1,589 + 155
2004 (Total Male & Female Urine+Blood) = 1,509 + 189

For arguments sake, 2028 is the highest number in last seven years.
This is a daily average of 5.55 or 6 tests per day. Even if the Top 4 ATP and Top 2 WTA were tested everyday that is only six players.

Assume a random distribution of these 6 tests for the Top 100 in ATP/WTA to be one of the targets of such a test, 100/6 means ~17 days to complete this group of players. Top 200 players makes this ~34 days.to complete. Mathematically it is never going to catch anyone.

If, instead, there were six simultaneous tourneys in progress with one tester assigned to each, then localised testing becomes feasible, but this is only in-competition (10-11 months generally). A shorter season negates this approach by disallowing the ability to test OoC.

The current method seems to be flawed, IMVHO.

http://www.itftennis.com/antidoping/news/statistics.asp

Note: 2008 does not include Beijing IOC tests.

ITF/WADA need to step into the digital world and make this less intrusive and less labour intensive. Biological passports and non-intrusive testing is the direction this needs to go. I am aware of tests which use light-based technologies and thermal scans and chemical sniffers with some predictable results. Geo-tagging on personal devices can be used, with consent from players, to complement the 'whereabouts' aspect.

My point is to concentrate on the the top 5 players. THat is where the money, the interest (from the fans), and the most likely subtile doping techniques.

This is what they do in cycling....even worse for the top cyclist (Cantador).

Tenez wrote:My point is to concentrate on the the top 5 players. THat is where the money, the interest (from the fans), and the most likely subtile doping techniques.

That implies that the sport is never clean. Also, do you think there is no money in Tennis for #5-#10?

Tenez wrote:This is what they do in cycling....even worse for the top cyclist (Cantador).

My point is to clean the sport, not just the Top 5,

laverfan wrote:

Tenez wrote:My point is to concentrate on the the top 5 players. THat is where the money, the interest (from the fans), and the most likely subtile doping techniques.

That implies that the sport is never clean. Also, do you think there is no money in Tennis for #5-#10?
Much less.

They don;t fill the stadium and look at all top past players, they don't live like kings for ever. Even Pete is trying to sell his house. Courier and Mcenroe have 11 slams between them, yet they have to keep working. SO imagine if your career is top 5 only. Look at Muster too trying to get a comeback despite reaching number 1 and having a couple of slams.

Tenez wrote:This is what they do in cycling....even worse for the top cyclist (Cantador).

laverfan wrote:My point is to clean the sport, not just the Top 5,

Well indeed but teh rest can be tested randomly as they are noadays. However the biggest cheats are usually at teh top, in all sports.

I lean towards the suggestion of Tenez. Like in cycling and athletics the following should occur in addition to the normal testing:

For Grand Slams and Masters tournaments.
losing semi-finalists: blood tested immediately after semi-final.
Finalists: blood tested immediately after final.

I'm not sure how much blood is needed to do the tests that need to be performed.

Blood tests for all Masters finalists too please.

blood tests for all spanish players and head tests for all frenchies please.