The Bee's Knees

Interesting article on Rafa's recuperation
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/tennis/article-2449179/Rafael-Nadal-How-broken-star-rebuilt.html

It is worth reading and discussing, but given some of the information in the article, please post responsibly. The owners of this site can be held legally responsible for the comments of the posters.

I was going to post this article first thing this morning but decided against it  because I feared the reaction it might receive from some posters

Yes, I thought about it for a while. Posters are free to air their views, but anything that might get the site into trouble will be removed, so apologies in advance, since I can only use my judgement.
The site owners have previously had legal trouble/calls from the police because of some posts on some other sections of the forum - I don't want to add to their stress/costs.

Its a legal process and there is nothing wrong with Rafa utilising it. It sounds remarkable.

If it does actually boost HGH though wouldn't there be a risk of an athlete failing a test because of it? Conversely, if elevated HGH levels are explained by the use of PRP then might it be used to mask actual use of banned substances? I don't know enough about how it would work to know.

I don't know too much about it either, but I think it could be used as a masking agent and to explain a (illegally obtained) high reading. However, it seems that PRP only increases HGH for a short time, so it's unlikely they'd be tested at that time anyway, given the infrequency of testing in tennis.
As it stands, it's legal and so I have no problem with anyone using it in the correct manner. I have my doubts as to whether it should be legal, given it could potentially be abused.
By 'legal', I mean for pro sportsmen - it sounds great for the amateur.

I think its a bit of a joke that this is allowed, then again WADA are a big joke, but what can you do?
It's generally a good indication how the rules aren't keeping pace with developments in the field. PRP "supposedly", and i mean supposedly as this is far from certain, enhances tissue recovery, so does that mean that rafa was injured after all? Who knows.

Also what is dodgy about this is that potentially you can include steroids or hgh in this process and get away with it possibly. I could be wrong but a toronto medicine guy called galea used this and consequently many baseball players were implicated as dopers under his service.
A very tenebrous area to say the least.

Not so sure about Dr Galea - there appears to be no real implication that he was involved in illegal PEDs

Do you know that or are you just dismissing it out of hand.
I came across him before and he has been implicated with doping scandals, google it if ya dont believe me.

Well, you'll have to define 'implicated' - if you mean legally, then no, if you mean the press, then maybe, but can you trust the press?

The baseball athletes were, galea wasn't.
I did some research on this a while back and found his name in a journal linked to doping, I will try and find it.

Julius. I think you are being mischievous! From the title you've put to your link to the DM article and the request to post responsibly (why would anyone do anything else?). You then admit to knowing nothing but that doesn't stop you thinking you know enough to throw a little mud around.

Nadal was asked about this article in Shanhai

Q.  In one of today's English newspapers, there's a big piece about you, saying how you got fit again and everything.  It talks a lot about the use of PRP therapy.  It says your team are very comfortable talking about it.  Can you just tell us what you think about it and also about these two very special machines that helped you to get fit again.
RAFAEL NADAL:  Well, first of all, nothing what I really used worked great for me.

Q.  The machines, you mean?
RAFAEL NADAL:  Machines.  PRP worked unbelievable on my knee before, in 2010, 2009.  2009 I had to pull out of Wimbledon, then I came back, but still I have pain.  Just after Monte Carlo I did for the first time in my life the PRP treatment for me knee, but it was on the top of the knee, not down.  Worked unbelievable.  That injury I had was recovered 100% in very short period of time during the PRP treatment.
With the injury I have now, I did.  I tried lot of times, and it really didn't help me a lot.  The machines I have at home, the only thing that help me is to put me a little bit more fit without have to run or something like this, to make an aggression on the tendon.
But seriously we didn't find the key of the recover because I need to keep working hard on finding things that will help me more.

Q.  So you say you didn't find the key to it.  How did you recover?  Was it just a combination of many things that you did?
RAFAEL NADAL:  Well, at the end I did a lot of things.  We tried to find solutions in every moment.  The feeling   I say it since I came back   the felling on the knee is not 100% perfect.  But the feeling on the knee is very good for me because even if I have pain a lot of days, the pain is not limiting my movements.  That's the most important thing.  I am playing with no limitations.  I am free when I am playing.
Even if I have pain, I am able to control that pain   something in the past I was not able to control that pain, so I couldn't play.
But the feeling is I would like to improve a little bit more.  But for the moment, I am happy because I am able to play.  Since I came back after the injury, I was able to play all the tournaments I want and with a very good feelings.

http://en.shanghairolexmasters.com/transcripts/transcript-8-oct-2013-rafa-nadal-pre-event-116.aspx

It's sad that such a talented player is plagued by injury. Quite rightly his team are doing their best to search for solutions but from the sounds of things there is no miracle cure. Of course all the treatments that he has used can be used by any pro athlete that may benefit.

PRP does stimulate damages tissues healing if done properly. I dont see why it cannot be recognised as fact. It just comes down to a higher concentration of blood platelets which will mean higher concentration of hormones and other proteins needed for cellular growth.
I have no problem with that if it's done in the purpose of healing something...
The so called side effects on the other hand have yet to be proven such as wether it has a performance enhancing impact of some sort on the long run or that it could be used to hide the use of PEDs.

LuvSports! wrote:I think its a bit of a joke that this is allowed, then again WADA are a big joke, but what can you do?
It's generally a good indication how the rules aren't keeping pace with developments in the field. PRP "supposedly", and i mean supposedly as this is far from certain, enhances tissue recovery, so does that mean that rafa was injured after all? Who knows.

Also what is dodgy about this is that potentially you can include steroids or hgh in this process and get away with it possibly. I could be wrong but a toronto medicine guy called galea used this and consequently many baseball players were implicated as dopers under his service.
A very tenebrous area to say the least.

But it is allowed! Treating injuries or even illness could always be viewed as performance enhancing because it is. So where do you draw the line? You could be draconian and not allow painkillers, surgery or broken bones to be splinted. Or you could just allow anything. But both of these approaches are unsatisfactory. The third way is to get a sporting body to make the rules. But if you do that you have to accept these rules and also accept that sports people need to find ways to recover from injury within these rules.

My knowledge of this subject matter isn't way up there, however, this quote from the article caught my eye ...

It was banned by WADA in 2010 due to fears it may have performance-enhancing effects similar to those involving larger transfusions. It was then made legal again at the start of 2011 as those fears receded due to the relatively small amount of blood involved.

... because it is tosh.  It was well publicised that Nadal began using PRP in 2010.  It wasn't banned and it wasn't made legal in 2011.  And as I say, that's from my limited knowledge.  Equally, we are to believe that The Daily Mail has spoken to Nadal's camp and several medical experts.  Right, course they have.

Hey, I just enjoy watching this game, and this thread will develop in what it develops into, so I'll sit back and see if there is actually anything new brought to the discussion.  I doubt it.  Call me a cynic but this article came out on the day Nadal regained the No. 1 position, Nadal and PRP is actually old news, and no amount of PRP stopped him from breaking down again in 2012 - and HE has provided what Nadal said about the article in her post.  It is not a miraculous cure because what worked for him 2010 didn't in a different area of the knee for him 2012.  Thanks for the link HE, to bring out what Nadal said about the article.

I have a soft spot for the guy.  He's the reason my young son carried on picking up that racquet and loves the sport.  13 finals out of 14 tournaments and he gets the No. 1 back and an article gets published such as this and we're not supposed to pick up on the innuendo?  I know plenty of you have your views, but I think his achievements this year are phenomenal and articles laced with innuendo bore me.  Medical science moves on and benefits sportsmen such as Woods, Blake, Verdasco as well as Nadal, with this particular treatment.  I remember the days when a damaged cruciate knee ligament ended a career in football.  Not now.  

Anyhow, I'm sticking to his tennis.

hawkeye wrote:Julius. I think you are being mischievous! From the title you've put to your link to the DM article and the request to post responsibly (why would anyone do anything else?). You then admit to knowing nothing but that doesn't stop you thinking you know enough to throw a little mud around.

What mud? The same mud that Haddie was close to throwing? A link to an article in a national newspaper? I realise it's not up to your standard of journalism, but what mud?

Let's cut to the chase. There are people that think Nadal is a doper, there are people that think he isn't a doper, and there are people that are undecided.

I hazard a guess that Haddie was more concerned about opening up that particular can of worms again rather than any mud slinging because let's face it, I think most people have made up their mind by now about him and probably aren't going to be swayed either way, regardless of facts/evidence/passed tests/legal treatments etc. etc.

That doesn't mean that the subject should not be discussed - it's just that by posting this really rather lame Daily Mail article, there is the potential for the thread to descend into the kinds of anarchy seen previously. But that's not the case so far, so let's see what happens. But you know Julius, that you run the risk of doing so by being the one that has done it. However, I shall be truly gobsmacked if anyone posts anything "new" on this subject, rather than the steadfast views they already hold.

But I guess what cheeses me off most is that here we are again with Nadal successfully making a great achievement and what do we have? Articles laced with performance enhancing innuendo. It bores me. What have the surgeons done to Murray's back? Something good to medically enhance a player through an ailment to see him back playing the game successfully? I hope so. So what makes his treatment more legitimate than any entered into by Nadal?

Yes, people have their views about Nadal ... but maybe he's achieved what he has ... because he really is that good.

Nadal's treatment is legitimate - the DM article makes that perfectly clear.
What athlete wouldn't use it, if necessary, once WADA removed it from the illegal list?

I would also add that if we can't discuss a national newspaper article about tennis on this forum in a reasonable manner, or can't even link to it, then we're not much of a forum.

some of you guys desire nadal to repeat the armstrong scenario

This is tenuous ground.

A TUE is required for the intramuscular injection of Platelet-Derived Preparations (such as Platelet Rich Plasma or PRP, and ‘blood spinning’). The use of platelet–derived preparations by other routes of administration (such as local injection into a joint, tendon, or ligament) must be declared on the Doping Control Form every time a player tested and a Declaration of Use Form should be filed with IDTM.

http://www.wtatennis.com/SEWTATour-Archive/Archive/AboutTheTour/2010TennisAntiDopingMemoENGLISH.pdf

After PRP was initially banned, the primary legalization effort and research was led by none other than  Dr. Angel Ruíz-Cotorro, who also attends to Spanish athletes, specifically Tennis players.

He participated in this conference - http://www.itfcoachesconference.com/2009/node/55

According to papers published in the American Journal of Sports Medicine this summer it may have much wider benefits to performance. Doctors Amy Wasterlain and Jason Dragoo found that Human Growth Hormone ‘increases dramatically within the first 24 hours after PRP infiltration’. They said that their trials had shown its effects can include ‘rocketing both anabolic and catabolic growth factor release’. They concluded that ‘our observation of statistically significant increases in multiple growth factors over multiple days after local PRP treatment points to a real systemic effect that cannot simply be ignored.’

If you do this everyday for x number of months, where do you draw the line?

Pistorious was snubbed, because of a fear of unfair advantage.

@Cav... my son took up Cycling because of LA? Should he give it up now?

naxroy wrote:some of you guys desire nadal to repeat the armstrong scenario

Nax, that is not the outcome we want. If Nadal was found guilty in the future, Tennis as a sport would lose, because the authorities failed to detect/stop it.

Cycling is so badly tainted, that many people do not watch it and have lost faith in it.

2009 - http://www.wada-ama.org/Documents/World_Anti-Doping_Program/WADP-Prohibited-list/WADA_Prohibited_List_2009_EN.pdf

2010 - http://www.wada-ama.org/Documents/World_Anti-Doping_Program/WADP-Prohibited-list/WADA_Prohibited_List_2010_EN.pdf


In 2009, PRP was prohibited...

The status of Platelet-derived preparations (e.g. Platelet Rich Plasma, “blood spinning”), was clarified. They are prohibited and require a TUE if administered intramuscularly and a declaration of use for other routes of administration. Since there is not a unique protocol to obtain these preparations the Committee also encouraged independent research on this method;

http://www.wada-ama.org/Documents/About_WADA/HealthMedicalResearchCommittee_Minutes/WADA_HMR_Committee_Minutes_2009_09.pdf


In 2010, after this meeting, ...

More importantly, because WADA had received a lot of comments from the stakeholders on what was referred to as PRP, platelet-rich plasma, or platelet-derived preparation, even though there was a lack of science, there was currently a very strong feeling among the experts that this technology was not bringing muscle or tendon repair beyond recovery, so there were very limited concerns about the possibility of using this technology to go beyond recovery and into the performance enhancement zone. As such the List Committee, and of course this had been reviewed by the Health, Medical and Research Committee, had approved the removal of PRP.

http://www.wada-ama.org/Documents/About_WADA/ExecutiveCommittee_Minutes/WADA_ExCo_Minutes_18Sept2010_EN.pdf

beyond recovery, strong feeling among experts - words that are not supposed to be used by a Scientific group of people, is beyond questionable.

Specifically, in Nadal's case, so there were very limited concerns about the possibility of using this technology to go beyond recovery and into the performance enhancement zone, how is this line interpreted?

its easy.
first nadal was simply a clay court grinder
when he won wimbledon it was due to new green clay
when he won australia that was blue clay, but he would never win us open
and he finally won us open, twice
so now doping is the answer

the fact is nadal was never liked by some

Yes i was concerned about opening up a can of worms Cav .. and the mud slinging again. Like you I stick to his tennis. If ever the police need to jump on a tennis forum/site I can point them in the right direction.
True this discussion will rumble on during Rafa´s career and beyond.. all I know is that he has openly reported he still plays with a degree of pain which he is able to manage. I think he also knows he will live with the damage he has done his whole lifetime.

The man has made an enormous contribution to this game, he has pushed himself and the sport beyond what we ever believed to be possible.. I do honestly believe that he has done nothing illegal but simply made use of the incredible knew technology which is becoming increasingly helpful to sportsmen. If it is not illegal then there is surely no problem because its there for all to use not just Nadal.

laverfan wrote:@Cav... my son took up Cycling because of LA? Should he give it up now?

No.  He should continue to do whatever makes him happy.

The problem is though Haddie that when you push yourself and the sport beyond what is thought to be possible then people are going to be suspicious. Personally, I hope Rafa is clean as it would be devastating for the sport if the guy I think will end his career as a strong GOAT contender were found to have cheated.

I'm sure there will be some tennis players who have doped. The question really is how widespread is it and how likely the top guys are involved. Personally, I find most of the doping theorists extremely uncompelling. I don't see it as beyond normal human levels to perform at the type of level the top guys do which usually seems to be the main basis for a belief in doping. After all, they are doing nothing beyond training and playing.

BS  Ive always felt that if Rafa, or indeed any other top tennis player was doping there surely  must be somebody in the sport who knows for sure..especially those in the lower rankings .Locker room gossip .. it would hit the headlines and be universal knowledge. You cant keep that sort of thing covered up forever..There would bound to be someone if not a player certainly among the players coaching teams who would love to bring him down.. or indeed any of the others come to that. He would be thoroughly investigated by the powers that vet the players for drugs.
When Roger Bannister broke the 4 min mile nobody suggested he was on PEDS..and look what has happened since. The human body is evolving due to many things not least of all diet. Tennis players are huge today think back to Laver and Rosewall they were mere midgets.

When someone can show me undeniable proof that Rafa is doping only then will I believe it. Until then I believe yes he is somewhat super human with outstanding physical strength and ability which makes him an amazing athlete. who has the mental stamina to overcome the odds.

Haddie-nuff wrote:BS  Ive always felt that if Rafa, or indeed any other top tennis player was doping there surely  must be somebody in the sport who knows for sure..especially those in the lower rankings .Locker room gossip .. it would hit the headlines and be universal knowledge. You cant keep that sort of thing covered up forever..There would bound to be someone if not a player certainly among the players coaching teams who would love to bring him down.. or indeed any of the others come to that. He would be thoroughly investigated by the powers that vet the players for drugs.
When Roger Bannister broke the 4 min mile nobody suggested he was on PEDS..and look what has happened since. The human body is evolving due to many things not least of all diet. Tennis players are huge today think back to Laver and Rosewall they were mere midgets.

When someone can show me undeniable proof that Rafa is doping only then will I believe it. Until then I believe yes he is somewhat super human with outstanding physical strength and ability which makes him an amazing athlete. who has the mental stamina to overcome the odds.

Great post Hn. Tennis is like everything - it evolves. Equipment evolves and players physicality evolves to suit the conditions they face. That will never change.

ty Craig

I'm not sure if the locker room gossip would come out, given that lower-ranked players might be too afraid of upsetting the corporate apple-cart.
After all, we've only just found out about the Roddick-Djoko incident - a juicy piece of gossip.
But an investigative journalist could make his career by exposing anything that was going on, and it's telling, I think, that that hasn't happened.
Like H-N, I don't think you can condemn any player without concrete proof, not just observation and hearsay, however well-informed it might be (or more likely, claim to be). Part of the problem there is that the testers are always behind the cheaters - I accept that proof can be hard to obtain, but for me, it's still required.

I don't think today's players are more naturally gifted than the likes of Perry, Budge, Hoad or Laver. They simply have better training technigues, fitness regimes, racket and string technology etc - all those things are continually improving and helping all the players play better.

That includes the science to help players recover more quickly from injury - that's got to be a good thing for the player and the sport. PRP, when used as intended, is a great benefit. I understand LF's concerns over mis-use, but there's no hard, verifiable evidence that any player has mis-used it. Without that, anything else is just opinion, often fuelled by personal prejudices.

One of the commentators on Sky said this morning after Nishikori appeared to have a back problem, playing against Tsonga who as we know has just returned from injury, plus Montfils Rafa etc etc .. it was his opinion that players OVER train adding to the pressure they already put on their bodies.. he may have a point there but its a chicken and egg situation I feel.

I really don't think I'd expect the locker room to know as such. Its hardly like someone who was doping would be doing so openly. In any event, I know of at least two professionals who have made accusations naming specific players but they seem to have been without evidence.

Obviously a player's inner circle would know but they would be just as tainted if they did reveal something after their employment had ended and we saw with Armstrong the dangers of making allegations without concrete evidence. He destroyed reputations when people tried to come forwards.

It's a fine balance H-N. I remember back in the days of Coe and Ovett, when one or the other would miss a potential clash with injury/illness - even back then it was said that they push their bodies to the limit, which makes them more susceptible to things that wouldn't really affect non-athletes - especially as they need to be at 100% for the big races/tournaments/matches. 99% and they'll lose.

Born Slippy wrote:I really don't think I'd expect the locker room to know as such. Its hardly like someone who was doping would be doing so openly. In any event, I know of at least two professionals who have made accusations naming specific players but they seem to have been without evidence.

Obviously a player's inner circle would know but they would be just as tainted if they did reveal something after their employment had ended and we saw with Armstrong the dangers of making allegations without concrete evidence. He destroyed reputations when people tried to come forwards.

The APT tour is very close knit they probably see more of each other than their own families.. I cannot believe for one minute that in those circumstances you would (or your team would) get a "sniff" of any wrongdoings in another camp. Some of these players even live with each other on tour.. i.e. Wimbers they share houses, or accommodation. It is inconceivable to me that something so high profile as PEDS would not appear obvious to tennis professionals... they know the signs. And there wouldn´t be a "grass" on the tour .... o come on. and dont tell me I watch too much tv.  People know who can supply this stuff and there is too much money to be made .. photographers earn a fortune for a compromising photo .  And it was me that was called NAIVE the other day.

I see nothing wrong with this article. Or the posting of it.

Rafa will know this kind of thing comes with the territory. I'd suspect it's water of a ducks back. I don't think it is old news. They've only run it because Nadal has got to No.1. Which they couldn't have rightly done before hand.

Alas, I don't know anywhere near enough from a medical point of view to comment.

All I'd say is that the use of any process that has the potential to be used a 'masking agent' - if this can - is always going to arouse suspicion. That, unfortunately, is the nature of the beast. I'm sure Rafa weighed all of this up before hand.

From a tennis perspective. I think we are now entering a new phase with respect to Rafa. He's got to No.1 of course before hand. However, historically, he has never (for me) been all that comfortable with that tag. His best tennis has always been when he was the hunter.

I know it's a very short term example, but take his first match this time around at No.1 (Final at Beijing). Djoko beat him and by the sounds of it beat him comfortably. Again, I know it's only 1 match but there are longer term examples of this. For example, he's never defended a non-clay tournament (happy to be corrected if he has). That just boggles the mind for me.

This next 12 months will be very interesting. I find myself warming to Rafa more in light of RF slow demise. So a little bit of me hopes he can I think.

JuliusHMarx wrote:It's a fine balance H-N. I remember back in the days of Coe and Ovett, when one or the other would miss a potential clash with injury/illness - even back then it was said that they push their bodies to the limit, which makes them more susceptible to things that wouldn't really affect non-athletes - especially as they need to be at 100% for the big races/tournaments/matches. 99% and they'll lose.

Didn't Coe and Ovett always use to have colds? Or something. They'd push their bodies over the limit and their immune systems would be hopeless. If there was anything knocking around it was guaranteed they would get it.

Me personally I think it should be outlawed if it in anyway enhances performances and I take that view after what happened to Alan Baxter. Now this is something that has dogged Nadal through his career because of the rumours of when he was using it. The current status is that he has used it whilst it was legal, though of cynics will think otherwise. I don't think it should be used like I don't think an egg chamber should've been allowed either!

Cav wrote:

laverfan wrote:@Cav... my son took up Cycling because of LA? Should he give it up now?

No.  He should continue to do whatever makes him happy.

Thanks, Cav.

Haddie-nuff wrote: Tennis players are huge today think back to Laver and Rosewall they were mere midgets.

That is not true H-n. Pancho was 6'3". Budge was 6'1". Tilden was over 6". For every small player (aka Ferrer) there is a tall big guy. Berrer is almost a Rugby player.

Haddie-nuff wrote: When someone can show me undeniable proof that Rafa is doping only then will I believe it. Until then I believe yes he is somewhat super human with outstanding physical strength and ability which makes him an amazing athlete. who has the mental stamina to overcome the odds.

Are you certain such undeniable proof will ever be made public? Much-maligned LA is a case in point, but lesser lights in Cycling like Landis, Hamilton and many others were hidden for a long time. Cycling reminds me of Cosa Nostra and someone like a Joe Valachi (aka Tyler Hamilton) was needed.

I agree there is public proof needed, but what is in public domain is being destroyed (Operacion Puerto + Fuentes). Why?

I think in general HN meant players are bigger now, which is true.

Excellent second point there though. We usually disagree on this stuff, so it's nice to agree on something for once, especially when it is described so clearly as that

@LS/@H-n...

Roche - 5'10' (b. 1945) - Connors 5" 10' (b. 1952) - Agassi 5'11" (b. 1970).

Borg - 5'11" (b. 1956) - Lendl 6'2" (b. 1960).

My favourite Laver can be compared to Ferrer.

I can understand 'fitter', but not 'bigger', over the years.

Ye LS you are right when in those days did we have anything over that height today we have 6ft/6"/8"/10" 6ft is normal today.
Rafa/Fed/Djoko would all have been considered small.

Players as a whole are bigger. That's not to say individual players aren't the same height as Laver!

Haddie - my view is that tennis is a more individual environment than cycling and we all know how long that took to come out and the number of people who would have been aware of the problem. Its certainly plausible either that people know and are not saying or are just unaware.

As I mentioned above, both Chris Rochus and Dani Koellerer have made accusations of doping. I personally don't believe them but its noticeable that no investigation has taken place as a result. If they aren't taken seriously then who would need to come forwards?

naxroy wrote:the fact is nadal was never liked by some

The way you use the word some, the same some can be used to accuse some athletes. Every player tries to find ways to win, including what is legally allowed. In some cases what was illegal yesterday, is legal today (aka PRP).

Marijuana in some states is legal in the US, while it is not in some others.

It can easily be extended to other areas of medicine. For example, RU486 comes to mind.

Born Slippy wrote:
As I mentioned above, both Chris Rochus and Dani Koellerer have made accusations of doping. I personally don't believe them but its noticeable that no investigation has taken place as a result. If they aren't taken seriously then who would need to come forwards?

They (Rochus and Kollerer) are considered pariah, as is Noah (since his son was implicated in illegal activities). What about someone like Odesnik?

Where is all the information in public domain for his specific case?

Haddie-nuff wrote:Ye LS you are right when in those days did we have anything over that height today we have 6ft/6"/8"/10" 6ft is normal today.
Rafa/Fed/Djoko would all have been considered small.

There will always be exceptions, like Karlovic, Isner, Safin. TY.

There may always be exceptions LF but there were not those exceptions then were there ? it would have been unheard of then imagine Laver playing someone as huge as Isner ... if you can your memory is better than mine.
Sorry there are bigger people in society as a whole than there were back then.And I think we will keep producing them Tennis now seems to attract the taller players

The average height has gone up, but I don't think the optimum height has changed/will change that much.

They're certainly fitter and more athletic - maybe that makes them all look bigger. Or maybe it's colour TV

laverfan wrote:

Born Slippy wrote:
As I mentioned above, both Chris Rochus and Dani Koellerer have made accusations of doping. I personally don't believe them but its noticeable that no investigation has taken place as a result. If they aren't taken seriously then who would need to come forwards?

They (Rochus and Kollerer) are considered pariah, as is Noah (since his son was implicated in illegal activities). What about someone like Odesnik?

Where is all the information in public domain for his specific case?

Isn't Rochus only a pariah though because of his doping comments? I am unaware of anything else he has done which would discredit him.

JuliusHMarx wrote:The average height has gone up, but I don't think the optimum height has changed/will change that much.

They're certainly fitter and more athletic - maybe that makes them all look bigger. Or maybe it's colour TV

Its the bigger screens