Doping Again !

Coup Droit · Tennis legend

Doping Again !

indiana · Tennis legend

Yes it is very sad and I have an element of sympathy for the young stars involved / taken in ... whatever. And of course rightfully suspended.

dodrade · Futures qualifying

After Tara's experience I would not like to make snap judgements on her guilt or innocence, due process must take its course

Coup Droit · Tennis legend

Completely different drug and different profile

But it'll be more likely her father's (team's) guilt (or innocence) - although she'll feel the consequences

wimbledont · Lower Club Player

I think that presumption of innocence is perhaps the most important legal principle.

Also, that as a precision game, tennis is much less vulnerable to corruption through doping than purely athletic sports such as swimming or track and field athletics. Even if this Czech girl has deliberately taken this angina medication, it was probably making her tennis worse, if you look at the side effects of the drug.

Dan Evans is clearly an idiot, as he admits himself - but any temporary tiny advantage he may have gained from split second reaction time improvement with a schnozzle fulla charlie will have been completely obliterated by some completely bizarre shot selection decisions.

Tara's case also highlights that avoiding contaminated products can be difficult, particularly when you set off to travel internationally every week. People should not be punished because they dont know how to ask "Is this dish 100% certified organic?" in fluent Korean/Japanese/Thai/Spanish/Italian etc.

IMHO tennis is much more vulnerable to financial corruption due to the under-rewarding of players on the lower tiers than it is to corruption from drug cheats; and that there are few drugs available that would be genuinely performance enhancing anyway. Anybody bulking up muscle on steroids is just going to rip their own limbs apart at the joints as the sinews fail to cope with the increased strain.

Coup Droit · Tennis legend

The presumption of innocence is of fundamental importance (although this is not a court trial)

But it doesn't prevent people from sensibly discussing the situation

the drug has clear benefits for the heart, increasing blood flow, and increasing endurane (side effects can be bad, as with any drug, doping or not, but they're rare, that's why they're only side effects, not main effect)

It's the same drug that other Russian athletes have been caught taking

It was in her A and B samples on two separate occasions

Nikola has no medical exemption for it

And - importantly - she hasn't come out and said, yes, I have a medical condition, the doctor gave it to me, I should have got the certificate but I forgot.

So it either got in inadvertently, on two out of two occasions, or it was deliberately put there

Which doesn't mean she knew - she might well have been taking what she thought were vitamin supplements and her dad/team hadnt told her - in fact, if I were the 'bad' parent, that's what I would do - I wouldn't tell the child because that would only stress them, I'd keep it a secret

wimbledont · Lower Club Player

Hope this works... copying this from a user called StephenUK on tennisforum...

QUOTE

www.verywellhealth.com/olympics-banned-drug-5218884

What a stupid drug for a teen to take, see below, from article above:

But it might actually not have much of an effect on young and healthy adults or athletes.

This is unlikely to improve performance in young athletes like [Valieva], Joyner said. The heart of a person like this is working at peak efficiency and their muscles can burn all the glucose you need, its really unlikely to have many performance-enhancing benefits at all.

Some doctors even suggest the drug could hurt her.5 While trimetazidine can optimize the hearts metabolic function under stress, there are also risks to taking the drug.

Side effects of trimetazidine include gastrointestinal distress, tremors, and weakness, according to Johnson-Arbor. There could also be severe adverse symptoms after long-term use of the drug, including Parkinsonian symptoms (a disorder that causes muscle stiffness, involuntary muscle movements, and difficulty walking).6

Johns Hopkins Medicine. Atypical parkisonian disorders.

Less severe side effects include headache, rashes, nausea, dizziness, and vomiting.

UNQUOTE

Effects of Parkinsons seems a really dumb price to pay for a small increase in cardio performance.

christ · Futures level

In an adult tennis player, they can - and should - bear responsibility for what their team do: this cannot be the case for a minor.
In all areas of the law, a minor has limited/ no responsibility for their actions. This is quite a tricky area in sports, as the minor is the one that takes home the trophy/ medal, but is still a sound principle. Minors will - and probably should - trust implicitly in their adult teams advice, and will likely take/ eat whatever their team recommends that they take/ eat. It is extraordinarily unlikely that a teenager will decide that their reading of the paperwork that came with a drug is more authoritative than their medical advisor's reading of the same paper; and even if a forthright teen does have qualms, then they are likely to be overruled (especially if the food/ supplement is being deliberately administered by said eminence grise).
For me this is what makes doping of young athletes such a sad area - it is almost certain that the villain of the piece is not the athlete that gets the punishment.

Coup Droit · Tennis legend

wimbledont wrote:
Hope this works... copying this from a user called StephenUK on tennisforum...

QUOTE

www.verywellhealth.com/olympics-banned-drug-5218884

What a stupid drug for a teen to take, see below, from article above:

But it might actually not have much of an effect on young and healthy adults or athletes.

This is unlikely to improve performance in young athletes like [Valieva], Joyner said. The heart of a person like this is working at peak efficiency and their muscles can burn all the glucose you need, its really unlikely to have many performance-enhancing benefits at all.

Some doctors even suggest the drug could hurt her.5 While trimetazidine can optimize the hearts metabolic function under stress, there are also risks to taking the drug.

Side effects of trimetazidine include gastrointestinal distress, tremors, and weakness, according to Johnson-Arbor. There could also be severe adverse symptoms after long-term use of the drug, including Parkinsonian symptoms (a disorder that causes muscle stiffness, involuntary muscle movements, and difficulty walking).6

Johns Hopkins Medicine. Atypical parkisonian disorders.

Less severe side effects include headache, rashes, nausea, dizziness, and vomiting.

UNQUOTE

Effects of Parkinsons seems a really dumb price to pay for a small increase in cardio performance.

Yes, indeed, but - again - the side effects are very rare - look at the pharma page for it, which gives the incidences. So Stephen (who to the best of my knowledge is not a doctor ) is wrong to summarise the article by saying that the 'effects of Parkinsons is a really dumb price to pay' when - in fact - the effects of Parkinsons are extremely unusual as a side effect so you're not paying that price.

The point as to whether it's effective for young healthy people is another matter, of course - that just says it's a sutpid drug to take to dope for these athletes

But the very fact that there have been several cases of East European athletes taking it for that intended end result shows that different countries/people have different opinions as to effectiveness. Which can be historical. Or just based on their experience. Or availability. Or whatever.

Coup Droit · Tennis legend

christ wrote:
In an adult tennis player, they can - and should - bear responsibility for what their team do: this cannot be the case for a minor.
In all areas of the law, a minor has limited/ no responsibility for their actions. This is quite a tricky area in sports, as the minor is the one that takes home the trophy/ medal, but is still a sound principle. Minors will - and probably should - trust implicitly in their adult teams advice, and will likely take/ eat whatever their team recommends that they take/ eat. It is extraordinarily unlikely that a teenager will decide that their reading of the paperwork that came with a drug is more authoritative than their medical advisor's reading of the same paper; and even if a forthright teen does have qualms, then they are likely to be overruled (especially if the food/ supplement is being deliberately administered by said eminence grise).
For me this is what makes doping of young athletes such a sad area - it is almost certain that the villain of the piece is not the athlete that gets the punishment.

Yes, but what responsibility is the team going to take (if it's proven)? If it's mainly her dad in charge (which was what I was told at Roehampton) it makes no difference if you suspend him. Suspend him from what? If it's a coach, that's different, of course, but it's hardly relevant to a dad.

And unfortunately Nikola was 18 when the second sample was taken, I believe. So no longer a minor (if, again, it's proved)

christ · Futures level

Coup Droit wrote:
christ wrote:
In an adult tennis player, they can - and should - bear responsibility for what their team do: this cannot be the case for a minor.
In all areas of the law, a minor has limited/ no responsibility for their actions. This is quite a tricky area in sports, as the minor is the one that takes home the trophy/ medal, but is still a sound principle. Minors will - and probably should - trust implicitly in their adult teams advice, and will likely take/ eat whatever their team recommends that they take/ eat. It is extraordinarily unlikely that a teenager will decide that their reading of the paperwork that came with a drug is more authoritative than their medical advisor's reading of the same paper; and even if a forthright teen does have qualms, then they are likely to be overruled (especially if the food/ supplement is being deliberately administered by said eminence grise).
For me this is what makes doping of young athletes such a sad area - it is almost certain that the villain of the piece is not the athlete that gets the punishment.
Yes, but what responsibility is the team going to take (if it's proven)? If it's mainly her dad in charge (which was what I was told at Roehampton) it makes no difference if you suspend him. Suspend him from what? If it's a coach, that's different, of course, but it's hardly relevant to a dad.
And unfortunately Nikola was 18 when the second sample was taken, I believe. So no longer a minor (if, again, it's proved)

Yup. This is quite a tricky area in sports.

Var · Pro player

christ wrote:
Coup Droit wrote:
christ wrote:
In an adult tennis player, they can - and should - bear responsibility for what their team do: this cannot be the case for a minor.
In all areas of the law, a minor has limited/ no responsibility for their actions. This is quite a tricky area in sports, as the minor is the one that takes home the trophy/ medal, but is still a sound principle. Minors will - and probably should - trust implicitly in their adult teams advice, and will likely take/ eat whatever their team recommends that they take/ eat. It is extraordinarily unlikely that a teenager will decide that their reading of the paperwork that came with a drug is more authoritative than their medical advisor's reading of the same paper; and even if a forthright teen does have qualms, then they are likely to be overruled (especially if the food/ supplement is being deliberately administered by said eminence grise).
For me this is what makes doping of young athletes such a sad area - it is almost certain that the villain of the piece is not the athlete that gets the punishment.
Yes, but what responsibility is the team going to take (if it's proven)? If it's mainly her dad in charge (which was what I was told at Roehampton) it makes no difference if you suspend him. Suspend him from what? If it's a coach, that's different, of course, but it's hardly relevant to a dad.
And unfortunately Nikola was 18 when the second sample was taken, I believe. So no longer a minor (if, again, it's proved)
Yup. This is quite a tricky area in sports.

It is tricky. If the coach or parent are at fault and they take the blame and the player is allowed to carry on with no penalty then surely some disreputable people would just go ahead and use drugs to enhance performance? I always remember Jenny Meadows, the athlete talking about how she was cheated out of a bronze medal. Her late father was in the stadium and missed the chance to see his daughter receive her well earned medal. Its the other players I feel for.

indiana · Tennis legend

I didn't take it that anyone was suggesting young players should not be suspended, just that some of us seem to be to varying degrees fairly sympathetic and point the finger much more at the coach / team.

But penalising the coach / team would surely be additional to, not instead of penalising the player?!

JonH comes home · Tennis legend

There were some posts about Camilla Giorgi recently and I cant find them. But this felt sort of appropriate

www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/tennis/article-13435283/Tennis-star-secretly-quit-lingerie-model-accused-STEALING-valuable-antique-furniture-failing-pay-rent-fleeing-America-escape-Italian-tax-authorities.html

Not good

Lambda · Challenger level

This isn't tennis, but for understanding what athletes go through when failing a drug test it is eye-opening. It is a very long read.

https://lizzybanks.co.uk/

Lizzy Banks has quit cycling after UKAD accepted that she had no fault or negligence, in what is believed to be a first where the athlete didn't prove the exact source of contamination themselves. She details her experience and why she thinks UKAD and WADA are not fit for purpose and how the system is weighted against the athlete. She tested positive for Formoterol which was in her asthma medication and was below normal allowed limits and chlortalidone, a diuretic. Because of the presence of a diuretic, the allowed limits for her asthma medication were voided and automatically caused a second drug violation.

I didn't realise that the athlete, although having a right to have their B sample tested, have to pay for that test themselves at a cost of over £1,200+VAT.