Rafael Nadal has filed his defamation lawsuit today in Paris against Roselyne Bachelot.

First topic message reminder :

https://twitter.com/BenRothenberg/status/724617054440054784

Don't know how to post the copy of the lawsuit shown on this link?

laverfan wrote:Unless Operacion Puerta is allowed to publicly put documents in public and Fuentes writes the details of all the blood bags, this lawsuit does nothing except put up a circus.

Cant agree with the circus comment at all.
We have no idea what was in Fuentes...but NO evidence has come to light of a player either being on the list, and then of actual drug cheating.
But this case is about Nadal sending a clear signal that people cannot publicly accuse without evidence.
Armstrong has always had PED issues, Nadal/others not...Nadal's career has already been far longer than Armstrong's too and all year long, not just peaking for 1 big event annually.

However, the main issue is that players arent tested enough.
I don't believe the sport is clean for a second...but we have no evidence. I don't see why every player cannot be tested for every event...its just 1 simple injection.
A small price to pay if people are innocent and removes the questions...

Otherwise, all we armchair fans can do is observe performances and results to spot clear signs of literal performance enhancement.

Sorry HN, I pushed your comment to the end of the last page...I didn't see yours but making a similar point in disagreeing with LF.
LF, I don't see why you make the circus comment?

Don't apologise Lydian
I am outraged that such a comment would come from a mod of all people
There is enough negative on here .. and for those of us who are in support of Rafa and what he is attempting to do not just for himself but all athletes to stop the media and others making unsubstantiated accusations. I think it is not only offensive, but inappropriate from a moderator

Well I guess LF is entitled to her opinion as a poster but I don't see how him suing an obviously libellous/defamatory remark from a publicly significant figure is creating a circus.

This isn't really to do with doping though, it's to do with him serving a silent ban.

You can call him out for doping and he can't really sue, but if he didn't serve a silent ban, then it's a fair lawsuit.

lydian wrote:Well I guess LF is entitled to her opinion as a poster but I don't see how him suing an obviously libellous/defamatory remark from a publicly significant figure is creating a circus.  

Ok I concede then let us dot the I's and cross the t's . its a mods responsibility to make it clear that it is their own personal view... but as a moderator you have to be a little more circumspect in making such a comment in my view

Lydian is a mod?

laverfan wrote:

Haddie-nuff wrote:Lets hope this will also silence   the anti-Nadal posters, here and every other tennis forum.. where ever they may be.  Good  Luck Rafa about time

Unless Operacion Puerta is allowed to publicly put documents in public and Fuentes writes the details of all the blood bags, this lawsuit does nothing except put up a circus.

But circuses are great - wouldn't you agree Laverfan?  Weren't you ever taken to a circus by your parents when you were knee high to a grasshopper.  The high wire trapeze act, the clowns with their large feet, red noses and noisy horns, the elephants, the horses, the tigers, the jugglers, toffee apples and candy floss.  Good times surely?

Now if this lawsuit rather than putting up a circus was putting up a cross or a hangman's gallows as some would maybe like - then I would be worried.

With regard to "Operacion Puerta" that is a separate issue for the Spanish authorities or whatever authority that was dealing with it. All there is at the moment are empty insinuations.

Nore Staat wrote:Just because someone is popular doesn't mean he is not clean.

Just because there is smoke doesn't mean there is a fire.

Just because someone has muscles doesn't mean there on steroids.  People can naturally be big boned and muscly.  The Vikings that developed the art of rampaging and pillaging were big boned and muscly.  Genghis Khan and his band of marauding horsemen were big and strong.  Look at young Alexander the Great conquering his way up to India before lunchtime - he too was naturally big and strong.

I don't disagree. But the greater issue for me is not the popularity, smoke, muscle, Vikings etc per se, but the fact that there will always be people wanting to investigate independently, asking pesky questions, casting annoying doubts, going against the grain, what have you. Why? Because we don't live in utopia. There'll always be another perspective contradicting yours, like it or not, that's all. If Nadal is innocent, the truth WILL prevail someday.  

(Btw, I'm a big fan of Alexander the Great. He brought the Greek toga to India with his military campaign, which was subsequently adopted by the locals, turning in into what we know today as the sari!)

Belovedluckyboy wrote:Of course Nadal is popular, look at his endorsement income and his appearance fees!

MP missed the point again.  I said 'perceived', meaning how the public perceived him and not whether he actually is or is not doping.

Sorry, the "perceived" bit doesn't ring a bell. No idea what point you're talking about that I missed.

I think the problem with Nadal is not only the Puerto thing, which doesn't necessarily implicate him, but the fact that when his career was getting going strong, it seemed that just about all Spanish sportsmen seemed to be using at the time, I mean, parents were giving their kids EPO just to get them to school quicker or so I was told.

Spanish cycling is in the doldrums, Spanish distance running is now not even a factor, so they cleaned up their act a little. I don't think Nadal is doping now, but the chances that he did earlier in his career are pretty high.

If you had one choice, and one meant life and the other death regarding the question has Nadal ever doped, there is only one sensible answer.

The Spanish Judiciary willingly, and knowingly, allowed evidence to become unusable. The accusations have nothing to do with one player. This is dated before Nadal, from 1992 Olympics.

There have been several attempts to let Fuentes talk, but hindered very often. Nadal is just one athlete, in the bigger picture.

Let the names be made public. If Nadal is not on such a list, even better.

The comparison with Armstrong is not very useful, because it is in team sport.

Information from Odesnik was suppressed and never made public. ITF blood tests are a joke, once every slam.

Armstrong case has shown that doping can be successfully hidden for years. Cycling had Armstrong's samples, but never analyzed them as others did.

ITF may also have samples which have not been analysed for many players.

This is my opinion and owners of 606v2 are not responsible for these.

Matchpoint wrote:

Nore Staat wrote:Just because someone is popular doesn't mean he is not clean.

Just because there is smoke doesn't mean there is a fire.

Just because someone has muscles doesn't mean there on steroids.  People can naturally be big boned and muscly.  The Vikings that developed the art of rampaging and pillaging were big boned and muscly.  Genghis Khan and his band of marauding horsemen were big and strong.  Look at young Alexander the Great conquering his way up to India before lunchtime - he too was naturally big and strong.

I don't disagree. But the greater issue for me is not the popularity, smoke, muscle, Vikings etc per se, but the fact that there will always be people wanting to investigate independently, asking pesky questions, casting annoying doubts, going against the grain, what have you. Why? Because we don't live in utopia. There'll always be another perspective contradicting yours, like it or not, that's all. If Nadal is innocent, the truth WILL prevail someday.  

(Btw, I'm a big fan of Alexander the Great. He brought the Greek toga to India with his military campaign, which was subsequently adopted by the locals, turning in into what we know today as the sari!)

Is it me losing the plot here or is this "person" from another planet???
Pardon me while I go pour myself anoter G and T hic !!!!!

laverfan wrote:The Spanish Judiciary willingly, and knowingly, allowed evidence to become unusable. The accusations have nothing to do with one player. This is dated before Nadal, from 1992 Olympics.

There have been several attempts to let Fuentes talk, but hindered very often. Nadal is just one athlete, in the bigger picture.

Let the names be made public. If Nadal is not on such a list, even better.  

The comparison with Armstrong is not very useful, because it is in team sport.

Information from Odesnik was suppressed and never made public. ITF blood tests are a joke, once every slam.

Armstrong case has shown that doping can be successfully hidden for years. Cycling had Armstrong's samples, but never analyzed them as others did.

ITF may also have samples which have not been analysed for many players.

This is my opinion and owners of 606v2 are not responsible for these.

Nice dodge LF but it wont wash with me ... this has nothing to do with the topic of Rafa suing for defamation.
What it does prove, as Ive always suspected is your bias..He is only asking for his own information to be made public in order to try and clear his own name not that of every player on tour,
Quote
Nadal is just one athlete, in the bigger picture.

This is not what this thread is about

Okay I think there are probably three separate issues here.  There is the here and now issue of this lawsuit (the subject of the OP).  And I have to give Nadal kudos for his response and for his willingness to allow the ITF to open up his record so we all get to see how often someone like him is tested, the type of tests, and where and when he was tested.  The fact that he is also willing to have his biological passport published is also highly significant.  Maybe the biological passport isn't as detailed as what the cyclists have, but without seeing it, it is difficult to comment.  

My own view is that I would rather have a systematic transparency involving all players as well as individual tournaments - I just think it a little unfair and ad hoc that it should only be Rafael Nadal.  This has to occur through the ITF (presumably the body responsible for checking its athletes are clean) rather than ad hoc through individual players or through individual players "PR team" (which is what they will be accused of anyway).

With regard to general procedures and approach to drug testing etc by the ITF raised by Laverfan - I cannot comment - but would certainly support greater transparency and assessment of the ITF as the sporting body running international tennis.  I assume the ITF  doesn't have the same power over tennis as FIFA has over football because of the role of the ATP & WTA - but I assume it still has significant power.

With regard to Operacion Puerto and djloves comment that there may have been a culture of doping in Spain - like perhaps what has been accepted as happening in Russia and claimed maybe happening in Kenya etc - then I think pressure has to be maintained in seeking the "truth" and transparency - or if all the evidence has been destroyed - then pressure maintained in seeking the truth and transparency on the "cover up".  But I think we have to not insinuate an individual sportsperson whenever Operacian Puerto is raised.

To Matchpoint - thanks for your comment regarding the Sari - very interesting.

Nore Staat wrote:Okay I think there are probably three separate issues here.  There is the here and now issue of this lawsuit (the subject of the OP).  And I have to give Nadal kudos for his response and for his willingness to allow the ITF to open up his record so we all get to see how often someone like him is tested, the type of tests, and where and when he was tested.  The fact that he is also willing to have his biological passport published is also highly significant.  Maybe the biological passport isn't as detailed as what the cyclists have, but without seeing it, it is difficult to comment.  

My own view is that I would rather have a systematic transparency involving all players as well as individual tournaments - I just think it a little unfair and ad hoc that it should only be Rafael Nadal.  This has to occur through the ITF (presumably the body responsible for checking its athletes are clean) rather than ad hoc through individual players or through individual players "PR team" (which is what they will be accused of anyway).

With regard to general procedures and approach to drug testing etc by the ITF raised by Laverfan - I cannot comment - but would certainly support greater transparency and assessment of the ITF as the sporting body running international tennis.  I assume the ITF  doesn't have the same power over tennis as FIFA has over football because of the role of the ATP & WTA - but I assume it still has significant power.

With regard to Operacion Puerto and djloves comment that there may have been a culture of doping in Spain - like perhaps what has been accepted as happening in Russia and claimed maybe happening in Kenya etc - then I think pressure has to be maintained in seeking the "truth" and transparency - or if all the evidence has been destroyed - then pressure maintained in seeking the truth and transparency on the "cover up".  But I think we have to not insinuate an individual sportsperson whenever Operacian Puerto is raised.

To Matchpoint - thanks for your comment regarding the Sari - very interesting.

Thanks NS for clarifying your position. I am also in agreement that this is two separate issues and whilst there is room for discussion regarding ITF procedures to drug testing this is not the place to do so. It has been discussed at length in the past and not necessarily in connection with Nadal. This is where my grievance lies.

djlovesyou wrote: I don't think Nadal is doping now, but the chances that he did earlier in his career are pretty high.

Can I ask what time frame is "now" vs "earlier" and what led you to this conclusion, i.e., he's clean now but probably not so before?

laverfan wrote:

Information from Odesnik was suppressed and never made public. ITF blood tests are a joke, once every slam.

ITF may also have samples which have not been analysed for many players.  

What do you make of the latest news that the ITF has declined to release Nadal's test results and said Nadal himself can do so?

I think Nadal winning Monte Carlo and Barca have left some people angry!

It Must Be Love wrote:I think Nadal winning Monte Carlo and Barca have left some people angry!

Spot on .. they who thought he was finished...what a disappointment

temporary21 wrote:Lydian is a mod?

No thanks!

Haddie-nuff wrote:Nice dodge LF but it wont wash with me ... this has nothing to do with the topic of Rafa suing for defamation. What it does prove, as Ive always suspected is your bias..He is only asking for his own information to be made public in order to try and clear his own name not that of every player on tour,

Nadal is just one athlete, in the bigger picture.

This is not what this thread is about

I am not dodging anything. I am using a larger context to justify the suspicion (and NS sees the context). Your accusation of a personal bias is unfounded (should I sue you, too? ).

I have no bias vis-a-vis Nadal. He is a wonderful athlete, as are many others. Remember Rochus, Santoro, Noah, and many others before Murray have made similar accusations, and have been disallowed to make any further statements.

I had much rather see this pall of PEDs be removed from Tennis. Let the guilty be banned. If Nadal is guilty, let him be punished, if he is not, he should be exonerated. I can understand players with ATP and gossip, but an ex-Sports Minister would not need to say anything, unless there is an enquiry specifically on this subject.

“There is a couple of times I heard comments like this. This is going to be the last one, because I’m going to sue her. I am tired about these things. I let it go a few times in the past. Not more. A minister of France should be serious. This time is the time to go against her.”

Either you kill a fly the first time, or let it buzz and ignore it.

If the ATP/ITF wants the sport to be the clean, they should publish the top 100 athletes' results voluntarily, every year, without Nadal or anyone else asking for them. Tennis is a public sport, and earns money from ticket sales and sponsorships. The public has a right to know.

I live in a country, where every second athlete is a potential drug cheat, killer or has a felony record a mile long, etc.

I'll be brutally honest here. This thread is essentially trying to implicate that nadal is doping using EVERY possible wording except directly stating it. That's still defamation and this is crossing the line a bit in all probability

Clear example. Nadal does not need to be "exonerated". He hasn't been shown to have done anything . Other Spanish sports doing well at similar times also does not make it nearly certain he doped when he was young either. There certainly isn't just one right answer to that either.

I truly appreciate opinions on this, but there's seemingly too much of paintng him as "very likely" guilty based on no Hard evidence,

Murray IS NOT making accusations about Nadal!

temporary21 wrote:... there's seemingly too much of paintng him as "very likely" guilty based on no Hard evidence

BIB: I think you are being too restrained. I don't think there is any specific evidence - soft or hard. It is more based on
1) Analogy as to what has happened in other sports.
2) Changes in intensity, power and fitness of modern tennis compared to tennis in the past.
3) Knowledge of existence and effectiveness of performance enhancing drugs and "processes" (blood transfusions etc).
4) Lack of information & transparency in the drug testing programme.
...
But as far as I can tell there is absolutely zero evidence (hard or soft) of drug taking by most tennis players including Nadal. There is evidence of increased fitness and power etc but the cause of that can be explained in terms of increased professionalism, nutrition, training etc.

The 'exonerate' is specific to the lawsuit, any evidence, which may be used to 'accuse' Nadal and defend.

The reason this is different is due to a court of law being involved, rather than CAS, which is an arbitration body.

To quote you again LF
Nadal is only one athlete in the bigger picture.


Thus I ask why is it that Nadal is the centre of any controversy regarding doping. .. he who has agreed to have his biological passport and his test results made public.. when no other top athlete has requested to do the same

he has also said this

“From now on I ask you to communicate when I am tested and the results as soon as they are ready from your labs,” he added. “I also encourage you to start filing lawsuits if there is any misinformation spread by anyone

Whilst it is still the resounding opinion that even with all this he will still be the centre, of any debate regarding doping without a shred of evidence to the contrary he will be found guilty. Now we can see what he is up against.
And should his run of good fortune continue, and he makes his comeback... the alarm bells will ring again !!

Your the moderator create a sticky and discuss this topic without naming names.. whilst it is on this thread there is always the insinuation and perceived "bias"  Sue if you like but you have no evidence

I tend to agree that whenever this topic comes up Nadal is subtlely and creepingly always insinuated to be a cheater despite zero evidence whatsoever. There arent even any clear points in his career where you look at his results and say "theres a potential signal".

Nadals tennis has been pretty much the same level at 27 yo as it was at 17 yo when he audaciously beat prime #1 ranked Federer at Miami 2004. But surely no-one believes a 16/17 yo would be taking PEDs? Does anyone feel the family oriented Nadal clan would ever allow their boy to do that...or any decent parents for that matter. Even as an 18 yo Nadal was pushing a peak conditioned Federer at Miami 2005 until he ran out of gas which is not surprising given his tender years. After that a natural curve of improved conditioning with age was observed but his results were all that we expected given what we had observed as a precociously talented 16-18 year old. His mesomorph frame and sporting genetics certainly helped him as a youngster but I see no clear flag where we say "hang on, his results have suddenly jumped up a level for no clear reason".

Again, I cant see why Nadal would be doping ay 17yo...thats a ridiculous concept...and yet his level of play at that age was already near slam level. Some people have just never liked the guy, never liked what he did in the game, what he did to Federer and his on court persona.

Federer went toe to toe with Nadal at Rome 2006 for 5 hours in the heat/sun...he did not wilt...so where are the threads and pages of insinuations against him? None...because Federer is so talented, cool and sophisticated that he would never dope. And yet 17yo Nadal beat him on hard court...but doesnt get afforded similar free passage.

There are surely other clearer signals of enhanced performance and results in tennis yet the spotlight is always firmly and singularly over time centred on Nadal. Why? Seemingly because he had the audacity of winning big from the outset...beating established players and ushering in a new power and spin game...and people always fear and snipe at that which they dont understand.

lydian wrote:I tend to agree that whenever this topic comes up Nadal is subtlely and creepingly always insinuated to be a cheater despite zero evidence whatsoever. There arent even any clear points in his career where you look at his results and say "theres a potential signal".

Nadals tennis has been pretty much the same level at 27 yo as it was at 17 yo when he audaciously beat prime #1 ranked Federer at Miami 2004. But surely no-one believes a 16/17 yo would be taking PEDs? Does anyone feel the family oriented Nadal clan would ever allow their boy to do that...or any decent parents for that matter. Even as an 18 yo Nadal was pushing a peak conditioned Federer at Miami 2005 until he ran out of gas which is not surprising given his tender years. After that a natural curve of improved conditioning with age was observed but his results were all that we expected given what we had observed as a precociously talented 16-18 year old. His mesomorph frame and sporting genetics certainly helped him as a youngster but I see no clear flag where we say "hang on, his results have suddenly jumped up a level for no clear reason".

Again, I cant see why Nadal would be doping ay 17yo...thats a ridiculous concept...and yet his level of play at that age was already near slam level. Some people have just never liked the guy, never liked what he did in the game, what he did to Federer and his on court persona.

Federer went toe to toe with Nadal at Rome 2006 for 5 hours in the heat/sun...he did not wilt...so where are the threads and pages of insinuations against him? None...because Federer is so talented, cool and sophisticated that he would never dope. And yet 17yo Nadal beat him on hard court...but doesnt get afforded similar free passage.

There are surely other clearer signals of enhanced performance and results in tennis yet the spotlight is always firmly and singularly over time centred on Nadal. Why? Seemingly because he had the audacity of winning big from the outset...beating established players and ushering in a new power and spin game...and people always fear and snipe at that which they dont understand.

Nice post Lydian. A lot of good points made there. I don't think there is any doubt that a lot of the insinuations over Nadal are caused simply because he had the audacity to beat Federer more often than that. I've never seen any compelling argument that he is doping.

As you say, Federer's display in Rome 2006 (Friday - near 3 hour QF, Saturday - near 3 hour SF and a 5 hour final) required brutal levels of fitness - particularly on clay! I don't think he has doped but his fitness levels have always been right up there with the rest of the big 4 (obviously dropping off now but still exceptional for a 34 year old). I can't help pointing out though that, when you want to downplay Murray's achievements on the other thread, a 30 year old Fed is suddenly so unable to recover from a 4 hour match (with a day's rest) that he can't even be competitive for one set...

laverfan wrote:

Haddie-nuff wrote:Lets hope this will also silence   the anti-Nadal posters, here and every other tennis forum.. where ever they may be.  Good  Luck Rafa about time

Unless Operacion Puerta is allowed to publicly put documents in public and Fuentes writes the details of all the blood bags, this lawsuit does nothing except put up a circus.

This is a really poor comment. This lawsuit is about a politician being stupid enough to accuse a top athlete of having been banned for doping without any evidence! It isn't about Puerto. She deserves everything she gets and I hope she gets hit hard financially.

I've been warned that my comments on this thread regarding Murray and his allegations about his fellow players were "falsehoods" and if I continued to "spread these falsehoods" I would be banned.

I don't agree that anything I said was "false" but obviously can't argue with a mod so I will say no more on this thread

hawkeye wrote:I've been warned that my comments on this thread regarding Murray and his allegations about his fellow players were "falsehoods" and if I continued to "spread these falsehoods" I would be banned.

I don't agree that anything I said was "false" but obviously can't argue with a mod so I will say no more on this thread

I'm not a mod but I'm guessing you were warned for the constant (inaccurate) suggestion that Murray had alleged Nadal and Novak were doping. I'm sure the mods would be happy for you to make truthful comments on topic.

Great post Lydian

Thanks guys.

Quite agree re Federer BS, people forget just how conditioned he was back then...and partly linked to getting mono at end of 2007 (for AO 2008) I suspect in that many peak athletes walk the immune system tightrope. I spent a lot of time in yesteryear arguing how that match and others were an anathema to the spite thrown at Nadal. I never got a good answer back...because there are no good answers other than comparable levels of fitness.

Fair enough re Murray point but I would say that scoreline was so unusually one sided (Fed beat him on same court 2 months earlier) that something was amiss. Plus Federer wasnt working on his conditioning to the same level in 2011-2013 vs 2006 so youre not really comparing the same man. You could see around that period he wasnt at the same level as before...we even joked on here that he ws developing a bit of mass around his mid section. Its only since getting Edberg on board that he has rededicated himself to peak fitness.

hawkeye wrote:I've been warned that my comments on this thread regarding Murray and his allegations about his fellow players were "falsehoods" and if I continued to "spread these falsehoods" I would be banned.

I don't agree that anything I said was "false" but obviously can't argue with a mod so I will say no more on this thread

They were quite clearly false - numerous posters picked up on it. Obviously you can continue to post about Nadal on this thread...since it is about Nadal.

Im not sure where this comes from ( it might have even been from here), but theres a trap people can fall under in which they see small links and join the dots to make them seem like strong arguments.
The Spanish success in sports and the blood bag scandal as well as rumblings over Rafa, the thing with Contador... could all be connected to look like very close to hard evidence if you want to see it. However, theres no real guarantee at all theres any connections there.

If we are to talk about Rafa and PED's as though they ALMOST a matter of fact, there needs to be a time (if there is) when theres a real hard evidence directly linking him to it.

So I agree with most here.

P.S Stop lying and twisting what Murray says and Julius wont have to warn you for the 5000'th time...

It Must Be Love wrote:I think Nadal winning Monte Carlo and Barca have left some people angry!

If only.

Born Slippy wrote:

laverfan wrote:

Haddie-nuff wrote:Lets hope this will also silence   the anti-Nadal posters, here and every other tennis forum.. where ever they may be.  Good  Luck Rafa about time

Unless Operacion Puerta is allowed to publicly put documents in public and Fuentes writes the details of all the blood bags, this lawsuit does nothing except put up a circus.

This is a really poor comment. This lawsuit is about a politician being stupid enough to accuse a top athlete of having been banned for doping without any evidence! It isn't about Puerto. She deserves everything she gets and I hope she gets hit hard financially.

Selective history on the subject is amnesia. The comments have a historical basis. If a player has heard similar comments over his/her career, why a lawsuit now? This is why I consider it a media circus.

lydian wrote:

There are surely other clearer signals of enhanced performance and results in tennis yet the spotlight is always firmly and singularly over time centred on Nadal. Why? Seemingly because he had the audacity of winning big from the outset...beating established players and ushering in a new power and spin game...and people always fear and snipe at that which they dont understand.

So according to your logic, Rosalyn Bachelot, the defendant in the lawsuit whose name we know for sure, must be one of such people you alleged to "always fear and snipe at that which they don't understand"? Is Bachelot even a tennis fan? Is she actually jealous of or angry over Nadal tennis success, you think? What does she have to gain by singling out Nadal in doping? I bet to defer. There's a lot more to Nadal's doping accusation than a simple question of fan envy.

Because it's a serious case now when an ex sports minister was involved with such a libelous claim. Nadal himself already explained it. Had this happened earlier on, I believe Nadal would've sued back then.

It's not a circus when Nadal can prove that he's not under any silent ban which that French ex minister claimed that he was. Nadal is making the right decision to sue and clear his own name. This will stop others from making similar libelous claims against him.

lydian wrote:Federer went toe to toe with Nadal at Rome 2006 for 5 hours in the heat/sun...he did not wilt...so where are the threads and pages of insinuations against him? None...because Federer is so talented, cool and sophisticated that he would never dope. And yet 17yo Nadal beat him on hard court...but doesnt get afforded similar free passage.

There have been long matches. Such matches do not necessarily reflect artificial performance enhancement. Think of the AO final. Federer, Nadal, Djokovic, Murray,... all have had long matches. Federer's five set record is one of the poorest, IIRC (22/17 when I last checked).

lydian wrote:There are surely other clearer signals of enhanced performance and results in tennis yet the spotlight is always firmly and singularly over time centred on Nadal. Why? Seemingly because he had the audacity of winning big from the outset...beating established players and ushering in a new power and spin game...and people always fear and snipe at that which they dont understand.

Where are the clearer signs, Lydian? This one...

Del Potro loses 63 60 60 to Federer at AO 2009, but has two five-setters v Federer at RG and USO and wins one of them. Is that considered suspicious?

Surely the reason he's sued is because of WHO said it, and how blatantly it was said. everyone before has implied it in some way, but you cannot just sit there and swallow someone stupid enough to DIRECTLY say you are a cheat with no hard proof

Ill be honest, I've lost where everyone stands in this, what's the contention here?

Bachelot wants some cheap fame, assuming Nadal won't sue or do anything. She thought Nadal would let it pass like he did in the past, when some French ex player passed some doping accusations (about Nadal).

Strange isnt it, it's always the French, be they players or ministers who are the ones making such libelous claims!

temporary21 wrote:Surely the reason he's sued is because of WHO said it, and how blatantly it was said. everyone before has implied it in some way, but you cannot just sit there and swallow someone stupid enough to DIRECTLY say you are a cheat with no hard proof

Ill be honest, I've lost where everyone stands in this, what's the contention here?

It's the silent ban comment that's the problem.

Saying that you think Nadal is a doper is not a problem. He couldn't sue you for that.

laverfan wrote:

Del Potro loses 63 60 60 to Federer at AO 2009, but has two five-setters v Federer at RG and USO and wins one of them. Is that considered suspicious?

No because Del Potro didn't lose to Federer in AO 2009 because he got tired, he just wasn't good enough in early 2009 but as a very young player improved quickly in a short space of time (as can happen).
Honesty Laverfan, as a moderator I think you have the responsibility to keep the debate fair, not incite by randomly pointing fingers in a suggestive manner.

Matchpoint wrote:

It Must Be Love wrote:I think Nadal winning Monte Carlo and Barca have left some people angry!

If only.

Can you post some more dictionary definitions for us, like you did for the word scandal, that was really funny.

temporary21 wrote:Surely the reason he's sued is because of WHO said it, and how blatantly it was said. everyone before has implied it in some way, but you cannot just sit there and swallow someone stupid enough to DIRECTLY say you are a cheat with no hard proof

Ill be honest, I've lost where everyone stands in this, what's the contention here?

Do you really need it pointed out to you temp when you read comments such as this

quote//


What does she have to gain by singling out Nadal in doping? I bet to defer. There's a lot more to Nadal's doping accusation than a simple question of fan envy.

.
Matchpoint

It Must Be Love wrote:

laverfan wrote:

Del Potro loses 63 60 60 to Federer at AO 2009, but has two five-setters v Federer at RG and USO and wins one of them. Is that considered suspicious?

No because Del Potro didn't lose to Federer in AO 2009 because he got tired, he just wasn't good enough in early 2009 but as a very young player improved quickly in a short space of time (as can happen).
Honesty Laverfan, as a moderator I think you have the responsibility to keep the debate fair, not incite by randomly pointing fingers in a suggestive manner.

 

Even if you say the word "think" you need evidence. You cannot say you think someone is probably doing something without some real evidence or its defamation. She's no leg to stand on.

I could in theory say I probably think some of you abuse your partners, but with no evidence im obviously trying to defame you

It's like the old phrase "I don't wanna make excuses but..." That's not an open invitation to discuss all the excuses without good reason