Tennis to step up drug fight in light of Lance Armstrong scandal

First topic message reminder :

Lance Armstrong's admission that he took drugs to help him win all seven of his Tour de France titles has put performance enhancing substances in the spotlight.
Now tennis has been brought into the debate with former world number four Guy Forget claiming he was beaten by rivals who took drugs.
Three players - Ryan Newport from the United States, Bulgarian Dimitar Kutrovsky and Italian Filippo Calorosi - are currently suspended from playing for taking drugs and Forget believes they are not the only men on the circuit guilty of doping.
BBC Sport speaks to current and ex players, coaches and officials in charge of testing to try and discover if tennis has a drug problem.

Drugs in tennis

The Men's Tennis Council began drug testing in the late 1980s with the focus mainly on recreational drugs. The testing was extended to include performance-enhancing drugs when the ATP Tour was formed in 1990.

Guy Forget claims he played against rivals who had taken drugs
But Guy Forget, who was ranked the fourth best player in the world in 1991, is convinced he played against players who were doping.
He says: "I have lost matches against guys who beat me with an unfair advantage because they were taking drugs.
"For sure, it has happened. I can look at myself in the mirror knowing I have never taken anything.
"When I played there were no controls at all so why wouldn't you cheat the system."

The situation now

The International Tennis Federation (ITF) now leads a unified Tennis Anti-Doping Programme applying across all tennis events.
The ITF carried out 131 blood tests both in and out of competition in 2011, the last year for which figures are available. That was alongside 2,019 urine tests.
Now the ITF are planning to introduce an athlete biological passport (ABP) which allows officials to collect and compare biological data and spot variances that suggest doping.
“
I feel tennis is clean, I do very much. For the amount of times that we get tested throughout the year and as random as they are, definitely
”
Maria Sharapova
It is an improvement many in the game believe is needed.
Forget added: "I don't feel our sport is clean. I am sure now as we speak there are some guys that are cheating. You cannot say tennis is not touched by this poisonous thing.
"I think it is a minority probably, but that is why Roger Federer and the other guys says we should put more money into blood test and controls because we should fight this any way we can."
Australian coach Darren Cahill, who has coached Lleyton Hewitt and Andre Agassi in the past, says on Twitter: "Our testing program is inadequate. That's why no-one can stand up and speak out. It's gone backwards in recent years."
Current world number one Novak Djokovic recently complained the number of blood tests he has undergone has dropped in the last year.
He said: "I wasn't tested with blood for last six, seven months. It was more regularly in last two, three years ago. I don't know the reason why they stopped it."

Fighting back

Dr. Stuart Miller, who oversees the ITF's anti-doping programme, claims education as much as detection is the best way to cure the problems of drugs in sport.
But he is an advocate of plans to bring in an ABP to make it easier to find the drug cheats.
Miller says: "We think we can improve by introducing what is known as the athlete biological passport, which is a blood-based testing programme which allows you to establish individual baseline parameters.
"That is not in operation at the moment. But we're looking very, very closely at it and I think that there's a reasonably good chance that that will be operational probably towards the end of 2013.
"It takes a long time to set up. There's a number of constraints and conditions that you have to satisfy, you can't just turn a switch."
What is a athlete biological passport
An ABP is an electronic document about the athlete that contains certain biomarkers from through his career.

If these markers change dramatically from the historic levels it alerts officials that the athlete might be doping.

Miller went on to answer Forget's complaints.
"I think we need to put a couple of things into context," he said. "Firstly I think Forget answered his own question when he said back at the time when he was playing, anti-doping was very different.
"There was no such thing as the World Anti-Doping Agency, there was no list of prohibited substances that all the sports signed up to and actually tennis was one of the pioneering sports in introducing anti-doping testing back in Forget's time.
"Granted, it was for a different list of prohibited substances - it was mainly recreational substances - and he's right, there wasn't as much testing, but tennis was pioneering at that particular time. And it's come a long way since that time, when he was playing."

Is tennis clean?

The leading players have thrown their support behind initiatives to weed out rivals who use drugs to enhance their performance but many are content that the sport is not on a par with the level of doping that has been uncovered in cycling.
World number three Andy Murray says: "I think all sports are trying to improve their doping controls.
"If that's more blood testing or the biological passports, that's something we need to do and improve in tennis, as well.

The three men currently banned for drug taking
Filippo Calorosi (Ita)
Dimitar Kutrovsky (Bul)
Ryan Newport (USA)

Four time grand slam winner Maria Sharapova is confident she is competing on a level playing field.
The Russian says: "I feel tennis is clean, I do very much. For the amount of times that we get tested throughout the year and as random as they are, definitely."
Tennis great Martina Navratilova, who won 18 Grand Slam titles, accepts doping has taken place in tennis but not a large degree.
She says: "There is very stringent drug testing going on and it has to be done, because there obviously has been some cheating going on as a few people have been caught.
"But overall, I think we have a pretty clean sport. You know that Roger Federer or Rafael Nadal or any of those guys wouldn't do anything like what Lance Armstrong was doing.
"I think tennis is doing a pretty good job, at least from what I see."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/tennis/21139622

not sure about this one. thoughts?

I do not think it is very realistic to expect players to make a strong push to clean up the sport. I think the push has to come from outside somehow - and it has to involve revenue considerations. Maybe if somehow we get to the point that unless a sport is really going hard after cheats, it is viewed as likely corrupt, and therefore uninteresting to most people. As long as we are at the point where most people judge the integrity of sports by the number of positive tests (the fewer, the better), the sports will have little interest to catch anyone.

LuvSports! wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:Not sure what you mean by that last sentence LuvSports as it is purely down to the tennis authorities to make all the moves to bring in anti-doping measures. If they are a strong enough governing body they will find ways to fund it (can't really be that impossible) and push it through with a strong message that it will happen and if players don't like it then they remove themselves from the tennis circuit.

If the players put more pressure on the authorities then change could happen no? Not a gd example, but 1 anyway - petitions? strikes? (obvs bit much) but players can make a bigger impact.
In cycling they have teams coming together such as aigcp, mpcc and the cpa to make change happen, some have had a bigger impact than others.
I don't see them pushing that change through, they are too reactive (if at all) and not proactive enough.

Yes there is that. However, without a shadow of a doubt, it is the job of the governing body to make this happen and it surely is their duty in the current climate. As for the players, well if you knew you were clean would you be pressing to have needles stuck in you here, there and everywhere. It really is up to the powers that be to force it through.

ok so if im a coward then you are a snitch.

Fair enough, i admit that was tactless of me so i shall apologise, i got carried away.
why not call me on it over there then? i think i will take some time out to go to the naughty step and get some fresh air

It Must Be Love wrote:

hawkeye wrote:Luvsports. If you want to call people names and talk about people behind there back can you please do it over there. On606v2 we are a little more high minded (cough). Because of you I've just wasted my time posting a comment that will not be seen...

Well if it's any comfort HE you were also mentioned and insulted... but still the 'least annoying' poster out of the group they don't like.

Anyway, which comment did you write that could not be seen? Sorry, I did not see it

Ha ha! Well at least that's something. But am very disappointed that I am the "least annoying". I said this:

hawkeye wrote:

djlovesyou wrote:Federer gets a well done and a pat on the head for being first and Murray gets just a well done for being second.

Nadal comes in a distant third and he gets a roll of the eyes from the officials because they've had to man the finish line for a year or so longer than they should have.

Why should any of them get a "well done". They are all just saying what they have to say. Did you really expect one of them to say "Back off with the drug testing I don't want to get caught!" ?

Anyway not liking the test procedure doesn't mean your guilty. I can understand why it must be unpleasant. Also asking for more tests or even offering to fund them out of your own pocket doesn't mean your not guilty. It could just mean you are confident that what your doing won't show up.

If suspicion is going to be thrown around it should be thrown around a bit more evenly. Federer aged 31 and a half going strong and never injured? Djokovic the player who used to swoon if it got a bit hot or the match was a bit long has been transformed by using an egg and a special diet? Murray who's body shape has completely changed and often disappears for a few weeks to put on pounds of lean muscle? Personally I'm surprised that Rafa "Spanish" with bad knees gets the lot (of suspicion).

LuvSports! wrote:ok so if im a coward then you are a snitch.

No, actually Haddie Nuff knew that you had called her names before I had said so here.

LuvSports! wrote:
Fair enough, i admit that was tactless of me so i shall apologise, i got carried away.

This isn't an isolated incident though. You've aimed quite a bit of strong stuff, especially at me, over the last few weeks. In future if you have a problem talk to them directly, instead of launching hurtful insults on another forum while talking to someone else.

Anyway, moving on...

hawkeye wrote:

Why should any of them get a "well done". They are all just saying what they have to say. Did you really expect one of them to say "Back off with the drug testing I don't want to get caught!" ?

Anyway not liking the test procedure doesn't mean your guilty. I can understand why it must be unpleasant. Also asking for more tests or even offering to fund them out of your own pocket doesn't mean your not guilty. It could just mean you are confident that what your doing won't show up.

Astute point

Ive sent you a IMBL. Dont waste your time on him.. sadly he mixes with the wrong company... "sleep with dogs etc etc etc" At least we try to remain sane on this forum.

Having said that I still am adamant about my position as far as drugs in TENNIS is concerned.. that I know of I have made no mention of SPORT as a whole. and my defence is of the SPORT OF TENNIS not NADAL !!! please take that down and carve it on my tomb stone because according to SL I am VERY OLD.. (we senile old people have bad memories you know ) . however not too old that I have lost my marbles

Haddie-nuff & hawkeye, I don't think Rafa is the only one getting suspicion at all - certainly, while he's been off the tour, there has been plenty of interest in Djokovic's recovery techniques.

I think most reasonable fans and the press are very careful in what they are saying - which is that, without a thorough testing regime, lack of positive tests tells us nothing about doping going on in tennis.

I would agree that, in that context, if you are going to be sceptical about players being clean, that should extend fairly to all players as they all have reasons to potentially dope:
- top 4 as they know what's involved in terms of winning the last couple of matches at slams (like the AO semi & final last year among others)
- rest of top 10 as they seek to compete with top 4 above (and perhaps know how knackered they are feeling at semi stages in slams)
- rest of the "elite", say top 50, who play need to play more tournaments in order to make a living
- rest of the tour at Challengers/Futures level, who pretty much have to play every week to make a living

I thought this article on the subject was interesting:
http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/8904906/daring-ask-ped-question

You can certainly see how any of the top players can match to the bulleted list in there.

I understand why Haddie-Nuff gets upsets about Rafa being mentioned - but if no-one questions anything about the sport, then it could well be like cycling was in Armstong's day and we are all being deceived.

I would also add that it is much better if people don't discuss posts on other forums - if you are reading other forums and wish to comment on what is said, do it there, not here. It is rather off-putting to other posters & distracts from the discussions on here in my opinion.

YvonneT wrote:I would also add that it is much better if people don't discuss posts on other forums - if you are reading other forums and wish to comment on what is said, do it there, not here. It is rather off-putting to other posters & distracts from the discussions on here in my opinion.

Thanks for that Yvonne.. I am not suggesting that the sport should not be questioned NOT ONE IOTA. and If my critics choose to re-read my posts they will see that. But as you point out the finger has to be pointed at ALL OR NOTHING.. dont make one player, ANY PLAYER, the scapegoat. Yes it is bound to raise the question that FUENTES is Spanish.. but Armstrong wasn´t and Fuentes has admitted to treating high profile sportsmen in ALL SPORTS. and probably in whatever currency you choose.. but a separate thread should be opened to discuss just that. The use of such drugs by whatever sportsmen/women in all sports no matter not just Tennis.

Also I agree that to take the issues that are discussed on this forum to another and not leave it here is underhanded and imo unethical.

YvonneT

Good comments! Yes Djokovic has recently had a bit of mud thrown at him too. Did you see this?

https://www.606v2.com/t39894-british-press-now-throw-mud-at-novak

It was just before the AO final. I found the timing and the twitter response from fans interesting. I'm always interested in how the media can spin things. It is possible to paint completely different pictures using the same "evidence".

LuvSports! wrote:
It's ok lydian i dont really bring you up, unless i want to get to the route as to why you and tenez don't get on . You are both knowledgeable posters (obvs both of you will dispute that about the other ) but it's good to learn a lot about tennis from you guys, for which I think i have done .

Tenez and an awful lot other posters didn't get on too. Thats common knowledge. Its always been that way in the 7-8 years I've seen him posting as his opinions are, shall we say, somewhat colourful. Yes he's knowledgeable, many others are too, but not quite the impartial observer he likes to suggest
Anyway, he has his own private club now where its no holds barred so I hope he and the others are much happier posting there. I suggest live and let live, and keep the squabbles forum specific as others have also stated. I take a casual look in that place from time to time as its always amusing to see my name brought up with such regularity and respect, lol
Oh well, as Oscar Wilde once said "The only thing worse than being talked about is not being talked about at all". Or is it...

In terms of knowledge, etc, yes some of us have observed the game a while. However, that shouldn't stop us learning from each other. That's the beauty of a forum...plus many of us have different drivers why we like tennis in the first place so its good we orientate to different discussions. Creates a good mix. My basic tenant through it all is that there's no best player ever and Nadal isn't the death of tennis I always heard from certain quarters. One irony was that after being AWOL for 7-8 months many Nadal detractors came to recognise the game was all the poorer without him after all.

Anyway, I only believe there is the most successful player ever. This is also Boris Becker's take on tennis history. Trying to prove otherwise, although its the central driver of many a tennis forum, is where most issues tend to start because every era discussion is usually driven by vested interest, e.g.
...2004-7 can't be weak because Federer is the best ever
...Federer can't be best ever when he a significant losing H2H against his closest rival
...no way can Sampras be best ever grass court player if he was beaten by Federer on grass
...current era is weak because an old Federer, and many other old guys, is still winning
...no way can Nadal be best ever clay courter in an era lacking clay court specialists
...etc, etc.
And we wouldn't want it any other way as era discussions create lively debate

I do also believe if some player came along whose records are far and away much more higher than those before, inc. a calendar slam, then we can maybe allude to them being the best the game has seen. But in my opinion no-one has yet come along where the gap between them and all others is very clear cut. Until then my preference is to talk about the most successful players.

hawkeye wrote:

Henman Bill wrote:

hawkeye wrote:

Henman Bill wrote:You know what I'm talking about. He resented having to plan his life around testing and be somewhere an hour a day.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/tennis/7885314.stm
It may not be an explicit contradiction of his current views, but certainly at the very least a shift in tone.

I find it interesting that you find what you see as a "shift in tone" from Nadal interesting but apparently have no interest in Murray's shift in tone. Mmm. Interesting!

Murray's was longer ago, as someone else said. I am reacting to more recent news. But yes, Murray did a very similar shift in tone. So I would say the same things about him:

1. Well done to Murray to Murray for what he said.
2. Should have said it sooner.

However at least Murray said it earlier than Rafa. Rafa was the last of the top guys to jump on the bandwagon in effect.

Unlike Federer who many years ago said samples should be stored for longer or something like that as I recall.

So Murray gets a "well done" and when Nadal does exactly the same thing you find it "interesting"? Mmm. Interesting!

What are you on about, I stated a few pages back "My first reaction to this is that it's good from Rafa and probably makes him less suspicious." If you really want you can try and split hairs between "good from Rafa" and "well done(Murray)" but if you do it will be nothing more or less than tilting at windmills. You are looking for something that doesn't exist. It's only because of your own inane prejudices that you seek them out or suspect them in others. The way you treat others reflects how you think inside.

Haddie-nuff wrote:Why dont we face the fact that as I have said on many occasions... even if Fuentes came up with a list of names of those who he has treated and Rafa´s name is not on it (and it WONT BE) the Rafa haters (and we know where they all are) will then ask how much did he pay Fuentes to leave his name off the list or who else was bribed not to publish it. Rafa will never be believed whatever he says or doesn´t say and in my view he is best saying nothing.
So imbl... you have proved nothing have you just keep fueling the conspiracy theories.. there are a whole group who will remain nameless that are sucking it up.

True, and conversely if his name is ON the list he could say yes but it was only for legal drugs, and I only visited him once. So, it's very hard to establish an absolute truth on these things unless a player admits it or there is very strong evidence. Which, at the moment, there certainly isn't.

HB I fear that this will always be an unending story. Whoever is on that list and I daresay that we would all be shocked if we knew.. not just tennis but other sports also. it will NOT be revealed in its entirety in my view. The only thing it may do is that because of said list those offenders may cease to offend .. and then because of the level of performance .. it may become more obvious.
However,again, without proof who will ever REALLY know.

There is a little too much focus on Rafa at the moment. Probably Djokovic is no less suspicious, or Murray either. Although I would still give them all the benefit of the doubt, but who know.

Even Federer can't be 100% guaranteed clean.

HB. Thank the Lord for that someone else who agrees with me.. say such things and you are immediately "In Love" with Rafa. You have uttered the same thoughts as me. There is not ONE single player that can not have the finger of suspicion pointed at them. He is no more a suspect than anyone else.

I think there have been quite a few posters here that have expressed the same view as HB in the past.

Haddie-nuff wrote:HB I fear that this will always be an unending story. Whoever is on that list and I daresay that we would all be shocked if we knew.. not just tennis but other sports also. it will NOT be revealed in its entirety in my view. The only thing it may do is that because of said list those offenders may cease to offend .. and then because of the level of performance .. it may become more obvious.
However,again, without proof who will ever REALLY know.

Why would they stop doping? If you can cheat and then your sport makes sure you're not named and shamed in a case as high profile as this, why would you ever stop cheating?

You don't want dopers to be revealed because you're not a fan of tennis as a sport, but as a reality TV show. I can sympathise with your viewpoint up to a point, but when you've been involved with sports like cycling and athletics, you get to be a little more cynical and a lot less tolerant of dirty dopers.

It's easy for fans of tennis players (not the sport, just the players) to just ignore the issue, but it becomes a problem when they start wailing about it on forums and try to discuss it, because they're either too involved with the players on a 'personal' level or just not clued up enough about sport in general.

Henman Bill wrote:There is a little too much focus on Rafa at the moment. Probably Djokovic is no less suspicious, or Murray either. Although I would still give them all the benefit of the doubt, but who know.

Even Federer can't be 100% guaranteed clean.

Maybe I've misjudged what you were implying before about Nadal's comments. Because from this you more or less are saying what I think. But I remain interested in why suspicion is bandied about apparently so freely. Or deliberately as the case may be

.... but please stop with that moralistic mumbo jumbo about others (me) having inane prejudices and implying that it is a reflection of how they are somehow bad inside. Good grief! Yes I know they were not your exact words but it's certainly how I read them.

djlovesyou wrote:

Haddie-nuff wrote:HB I fear that this will always be an unending story. Whoever is on that list and I daresay that we would all be shocked if we knew.. not just tennis but other sports also. it will NOT be revealed in its entirety in my view. The only thing it may do is that because of said list those offenders may cease to offend .. and then because of the level of performance .. it may become more obvious.
However,again, without proof who will ever REALLY know.

Why would they stop doping? If you can cheat and then your sport makes sure you're not named and shamed in a case as high profile as this, why would you ever stop cheating?

Every tennis player could probably cheat and get away with it. But some will have reasons for not doing it. Risk to health, moral values etc. Some players won't cheat simply because they think it is wrong to do so, just as some people would return a wallet they found on the street and some wouldn't.

It all comes down to evidence, and validity of that evidence. Even if Nadal's name was on the list there are many possibilities and eventualities thereafter.

Players have been suspected on forums for years now, inc. Agassi's run to #1 in 2003 and Federer's stamina and physique boost around the same period. You'll always get people leering at other's success without a shred of evidence. I agree doping testing should be mandatory for every event entered to make it more rigorous...temporary official medical vans, etc, could easily be set up. However, maybe ATP don't like the inference of widespread use this step may confer?

Do you think tennis players have higher moral values and better grasp of right and wrong than participants of other sports?

We're getting on to the whole 'reality TV' thing again.

djlovesyou wrote:Do you think tennis players have higher moral values and better grasp of right and wrong than participants of other sports?

We're getting on to the whole 'reality TV' thing again.

It's not higher moral values, it's normal moral values - at least it is where I come from. I beleive that some tennis players will have normal moral values and thus will not cheat.

And participants of other (lesser) sports have lower than normal moral values?

Not at all, I haven't mentioned other sports. I'm talking about tennis players.

Maybe lesser sports exert less pressure on their top players...indeed, why are they lesser? Maybe the depth of competition in lesser sports is such that there isnt the same pressure to succeed?
Its no excuse but when driven by blind competitiveness and the will to succeed I wonder how much player's, in "bigger" sports, normal moral values get overridden...when the pressure gets overwhelming to find that extra 1%, and change from zero to hero. I suspect the line between right & wrong for some is blurred under such competitive will. I would think the pressure to succeed at the pinnacle of tennis is also huge...

lydian wrote:Maybe lesser sports exert less pressure on their top players...indeed, why are they lesser? Maybe the depth of competition in lesser sports is such that there isnt the same pressure to succeed?
Its no excuse but when driven by blind competitiveness and the will to succeed I wonder how much player's, in "bigger" sports, normal moral values get overridden...when the pressure gets overwhelming to find that extra 1%, and change from zero to hero. I suspect the line between right & wrong for some is blurred under such competitive will. I would think the pressure to succeed at the pinnacle of tennis is also huge...

I said 'lesser' because most reality TV tennis fans see all other sports as 'lesser'.

But apart from that, you're agreeing with me.

JuliusHMarx wrote:Not at all, I haven't mentioned other sports. I'm talking about tennis players.

But lots of people in athletics, cycling, etc have been caught doping. A lot more than in tennis.

Are tennis players simply better people?

I've got to be careful with you, haven't I? You tend to ban people who disagree with your viewpoint.

JuliusHMarx wrote:Some players won't cheat simply because they think it is wrong to do so, just as some people would return a wallet they found on the street and some wouldn't.

Yes, but top pro players are not a random cross-section of population. What you say strikes me as similar to saying that some tennis players will be talentless because some people are talentless.

I would think that, everything else being equal, the more talented ones will rise to the top. Similarly, all else being equal, the harder working ones will do better. But in the same way, I also think that, everything else being equal, the bigger cheats will do better.

So, I would expect that near the top of the tennis pyramid - or indeed near the top of any walk of life - you should expect to find a high concentration of hard-working and talented cheats.

I've never banned anyone for disgreeing with my viewpoint on tennis or doping. They sometimes disagree with my reading of the site rules - probably because I'm the only one who's read them

I agree with you on the p1ss-poor approach the tennis authorities have to doping control and also that some players must be guilty.

But do you think 100% of the players are guilty? If not, then some must have reasons for not doping. And within that group, some will simply refuse to dope because it's wrong. I've no idea how many, nor can I compare it to other sports, but I do believe that some tennis players will not dope because of their moral standards.

JuliusHMarx wrote:I've never banned anyone for disgreeing with my viewpoint on tennis or doping. They sometimes disagree with my reading of the site rules - probably because I'm the only one who's read them

I agree with you on the p1ss-poor approach the tennis authorities have to doping control and also that some players must be guilty.

But do you think 100% of the players are guilty? If not, then some must have reasons for not doping. And within that group, some will simply refuse to dope because it's wrong. I've no idea how many, nor can I compare it to other sports, but I do believe that some tennis players will not dope because of their moral standards.

Well put JM I totally agree

It's a romantic thought but someone somewhere is probably sitting at home right now thinking, "I was the real winner of the Tour De France." Probably finished about 12th and most people never heard of him.

Also, can I add to Hawkeye that I didn't mean to say you were "bad" inside. My point is you seem to look for some bias in me, which could suggest you have your own bias, which is why you look for it in others?

Also, I perhaps shouldn't have said "inane". That was harsh, I am sorry about that.

HenmanBill. No worries and thank-you for the apology. We must have been at cross purposes anyway as I agreed with your previos post.

djlovesyou wrote:
I've got to be careful with you, haven't I? You tend to ban people who disagree with your viewpoint.

What a load of nonsense. The bans of Tenez/NITB etc. took place when Julius was on holiday, he wasn't even on the forum that fortnight.

The only serious action Julius has taken was when he told me to change the title of my thread, as it was in Spanish.
I mean, what a joke that was, I swear even people who watch Dora The Explorer would know enough Spanish to translate what my title was.

Anyway on the whole you're wrong, if Julius banned people who disagreed with him, I wouldn't be posting here right now

I saw a few references to the forum Tenez is on. Could someone give me a hint?

Henman Bill wrote:I saw a few references to the forum Tenez is on. Could someone give me a hint?

www.nadalisevil.com

It Must Be Love wrote:www.nadalisevil.com

I thought you did not like badmouthing people across fora?

summerblues wrote:

It Must Be Love wrote:www.nadalisevil.com

I thought you did not like badmouthing people across fora?

Who did I bad-mouth?

If you didn't understand, my comment was in jest SB
There are rules that we are not allowed to give a link to any other forum on 606v2

It's a typo - should be www.nadalinseville.com

JuliusHMarx wrote:It's a typo - should be www.nadalinseville.com

That's the one

It Must Be Love wrote:If you didn't understand, my comment was in jest SB
There are rules that we are not allowed to give a link to any other forum on 606v2

I know v2 has rules against giving links to other fora. I understand it was in jest from your perspective but it was still a joke at someone else's expense. I personally do not think it is the end of the world and agree it is somewhat funny but I also think it is somewhat inconsistent with what you were complaining about the other day.

It really really isn't.
Not only was my comment not aimed at anyone in particular, it was a comment in jest at the nature of discussion of a forum; just like if I call 606v2: www.weakera.com/goldenera etc.
Totally different from aiming insulting, hurtful, and nasty comments at a particular poster.
Anyway we can continue this discussion via PM if you like, this isn't the place for it

http://m.bbc.co.uk/sport/tennis/21419330

Federer calling for tougher laws

legendkillarV2 wrote:http://m.bbc.co.uk/sport/tennis/21419330

Federer calling for tougher laws

Well of course he will. That's not news. But have you heard he likes Rafa's shirt...

https://www.606v2.com/t40555-roger-liked-rafa-s-shirt-but-was-dissapointed-that-he-still-isn-t-playing-right-handed

"But there also will be more funding needed to make all the tests possible and the Grand Slam tournaments should help to finance that as it is in their best interest to keep the sport clean and credible."

From LK's link. Perhaps non-slams (like Masters) should make some financial commitment to support this model.

Also Haddie's idea of players contributing to keep the sport they love and play, clean.

Airlines (at least for domestic flights in the US) now charge for checked-in baggage. Perhaps some of the taxes that get paid by all sports or Tennis specifically, should go towards such testing.

I also wonder if the higher echelons of Tennis players can volunteer for such tests, it would put pressure on others, who play the sport, as well. Self-policing may be also a good advertisement for the sport, rather than waiting for Tennis authorities to come up with a plan for randomised testing.

Can the code and laws for such aspects be made universal and consistent, rather than each individual country making their own variants? For example, can countries become signatories to the WADA code, similar to the Geneva Convention?

But Guy Forget, who was ranked the fourth best player in the world in 1991, is convinced he played against players who were doping.
He says: "I have lost matches against guys who beat me with an unfair advantage because they were taking drugs.
"For sure, it has happened. I can look at myself in the mirror knowing I have never taken anything.
"When I played there were no controls at all so why wouldn't you cheat the system."

Using the highlighted statement, and Forget's entire ATP career playing activity ( http://www.atpworldtour.com/Tennis/Players/Fo/G/Guy-Forget.aspx?t=pa&y=0&m=s&e=0# ) and extracting his losses during his entire career, I have come up with a list of 166 names in the time period 1982-1997. I can post the list and set up a poll (or do a similar thing to the v2 GOAT threads) and list 16 players per group (so 11 groups) and ask posters on v2 to pick the most likely players, to see if all of us can collectively narrow it down. Are posters willing to consider this exercise valid? A couple of 'yesses' after this comment will help me decide.

The advantage of such a poll is that most of the players on this list are unlikely to be active, and will generate less emotional overtones in such a poll. Conversely, it assumes that the posters have seen at least parts of the careers of players in this list.

Er, a did this player dope poll? You cannot be serious