At least 10% of professional athletes dope....

...according to WADA's chief.

An interesting number as a few of us had tried to guess the percentage of dopers in the past. This is a very wild guess from WADA but a clear admission that their mission has failed so far to catch the dopers.

My guess, btw, was that the number of dopers was closer to 80/90% than 10...but that is a detail.


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/olympics/article-2027814/WADA-chief-executive-At-10-cent-athletes-using-banned-drugs.html#ixzz1VuR79Ijw

What can be misleading in such an article is the term 'banned' and how it get's lost in 'performance' enhancing drugs. I can think of the tragic case that was Alan Baxter at the Winter Olympics at Salt Lake in 2002 when he tested positive for banned substance found in nose inhaler. How much of this would be applicable to the world of tennis apart from the recent case involving Robert Kendrick would be what substance he tested positive for. 10% is higher than I expected, though is it 'confirmed' statistics that the report confirms?

Dont think such things happen that often in tennis.

Apart from Gasquet recently who was a victim of an innocent kiss! there isn't much else to go on.

Over to you Tenez.......................

Sam Stosur is built like a wrestler (Luna Vachon).... just saying

legendkillar wrote:What can be misleading in such an article is the term 'banned' and how it get's lost in 'performance' enhancing drugs. I can think of the tragic case that was Alan Baxter at the Winter Olympics at Salt Lake in 2002 when he tested positive for banned substance found in nose inhaler. How much of this would be applicable to the world of tennis apart from the recent case involving Robert Kendrick would be what substance he tested positive for. 10% is higher than I expected, though is it 'confirmed' statistics that the report confirms?

Alan Baxter was a heartbreaker - I remember watching his run, it was such a big deal to have a British medallist in skiing and I just felt so sorry for him. Ok perhaps he was careless by not going to a team doctor, but he only wanted something to prevent his nose dripping as he did his run and who would have believed that a nose inhaler he bought in the Olympic village (ok it wasn't a shop designed solely for athletes, but even so) would contain banned substances. The amount he tested for was minimal, as you would expect, but it made no difference.

I suppose the only way to do this is zero tolerance, but the above case is one where a bit of common sense might have made for a fairer judgement.

I have to say though that I do believe that there are PEDs in many sports, to say not is like saying there are drug free schools - trust me, there aren't many only ones that are on top of problems and deal with them. The sole reason I strongly believe that WADA must improve its testing procedures and remain vigilant is the danger of abuse of the young - we have seen the tragic effects on health of East European athletes in the past, and WADA must remain committed to improving testing and preventing terrible abuse like that ever happening in any country, in any sport, ever again.

sportslover wrote:Dont think such things happen that often in tennis.

Apart from Gasquet recently who was a victim of an innocent kiss! there isn't much else to go on.

Over to you Tenez.......................

We all hope not BOO - but we ensure it doesn't by asking for transparency from the ATP on the Odenisk saga. There is also the case of Kendrick recently, so actually Gasquet and his soupcon of cocaine is old news.

My guess, btw, was that the number of dopers was closer to 80/90% than 10

They obviously don't want the customer to think that all sports are a shambles and ridden with cheats.. i sincerely doubt the number of cheats is only 10% of all athletes, they have given that low percentage so that the sheep continue paying to watch these "competitions."

time please wrote:

sportslover wrote:Dont think such things happen that often in tennis.

Apart from Gasquet recently who was a victim of an innocent kiss! there isn't much else to go on.

Over to you Tenez.......................

We all hope not BOO - but we ensure it doesn't by asking for transparency from the ATP on the Odenisk saga. There is also the case of Kendrick recently, so actually Gasquet and his soupcon of cocaine is old news.

Agree with you there TP. There are some interesting cases, I know alot of people may not be familiar with the player involved, but none the less is interesting the name of the sport.

I further agree to points you made earlier about the individual athlete should consult a doctor or even pharmacist to ensure that the ingredients in drugs are not banned.

Also WADA needs to be more supportive and more proactive to ensure there is no loophole or ways for their standards to be manipulated or abused.

Shouldn't this article be in the athletics forum? I saw no mention of tennis in the cited article .....

time please wrote: ... the above case is one where a bit of common sense might have made for a fairer judgement. ...

Yes a bit of common sense is often missing - where what is written in the "rulebook" is used as an excuse not to think. This can be extended to the non-sporting arena as well.

Another two factors to consider regarding performance enhancing:
Training in the growing child can lead to structural changes (bone, muscle (fast/slow twitch fibre ratios) etc) that are fixed in the adult. Most tennis players seem to start young which probably helps.

Apparently a female in early pregnancy has a physiology more capable of athletic performance (increased blood volume, cardiac output, energy stores ...). This might be relevant for one off sparse events such as the Olympics.

Nore Staat wrote:
Apparently a female in early pregnancy has a physiology more capable of athletic performance (increased blood volume, cardiac output, energy stores ...). This might be relevant for one off sparse events such as the Olympics.

The lack of movement and speed is perhaps the biggest impediment in such circumstances.

I see since writing this article Tenez has not been seen again.

Lets hope he hasn't been in possesion of an illegal substance and has been arrested

laverfan wrote:

Nore Staat wrote:
Apparently a female in early pregnancy has a physiology more capable of athletic performance (increased blood volume, cardiac output, energy stores ...). This might be relevant for one off sparse events such as the Olympics.

The lack of movement and speed is perhaps the biggest impediment in such circumstances.

Early in the pregnancy the mothers cardiovascular capacity and net energy and mineral resources are built up - perhaps this is during the first ten weeks - after which net resources are taken from the mother. So if the pregnancy is terminated ... there is perhaps a window of improvement. Also I think it takes a little while for the developing embryo to take up a significant weight. It's not pleasant to think about but that is what I have read in an undergraduate level human physiology textbook (allthough it was a little outdated - printed in 1993).

Happy to make you laugh Nore.

The closest one can come to, without actually being pregnant, is by the use of hormone therapy. During pregnancy, natural HGH is produced and a mother's body (hosting a child) has the ability to provide for two (or more?).

The susceptibility to disease at this point is the highest and even flu or colds can cause long-term damage to both mother and child.

The long-term damage to athletes like Kornelia Ender (and some of the Chinese swimmers under the East German coaches) is very well documented where artificial equivalents were abused.

There are legal methods like Oxygen Tents, High-Altitude training, etc., which can help athletes increase cardiovascular capacity and train the body to retain minerals.

Nore and Laver - really interesting posts. I had never given a thought about how HGH actually impacted on the body, but should have remembered increased blood supply in pregnancy.

Never had an insane desire to do a 100 metre dash personally!

Why would a tennis player use oxygen tents or bother with going up to altitude, when they can just use EPO or blood transfusions and know there is absolutely zero chance of getting caught? It works quicker, it works better and it lasts longer.

The tennis authorities all but encourage this sort of behaviour with their laughable testing regimes.

You've got players laughing in everyones faces who are unashamedly knocking around with well known doping doctors, and they know they are never going to get into any trouble.

djlovesyou wrote:Why would a tennis player use oxygen tents or bother with going up to altitude, when they can just use EPO or blood transfusions and know there is absolutely zero chance of getting caught? It works quicker, it works better and it lasts longer.

DJ, first of all, great to see you on 606v2. Second, I sense a dash of sarcasm with a sprinkling of irony.

djlovesyou wrote:The tennis authorities all but encourage this sort of behaviour with their laughable testing regimes.

Are you implying that commercial interests override cleanliness of our fair sport of Tennis?

djlovesyou wrote:You've got players laughing in everyones faces who are unashamedly knocking around with well known doping doctors, and they know they are never going to get into any trouble.

Are you talking about Odesnik?

Actually the first couple of lines aree completely straight up. Why would you bother slogging your guts off at 7000ft for 3 weeks, when one bag of packed cells do the exact same job?

The only thing that would stop a player is the fact that doing this is wrong and against the rules. This would stop a number of players, but obviously not all.

The rest of the post was a little bit facetious, I'll give you that.