Nadal out of Australian Open with stomach virus

First topic message reminder :

Just seen it on BBC Sport.

Shame, but something doesn't seem right with Nadal's absence.

LuvSports! wrote:no i dont think it should ban that after banning the egg chamber

Much as i would like all these "healing" tools to be banned, every single player is taking something to maintain their work rate.

Josiah, can we have another cat please?

Training at high altitude is absolutely fine. There's no way in a million years it should be banned. Before long we'd have a minimum and maximum sea level for training blocks and tournaments.

Anyone exlploring perfectly legal and natural ways to get a physical advantage is fine by me.

I don't believe Rafa has done anything wrong and has nothing to defend. But the suggestion that Roger's training is in some way unethical or unfair is equally off the mark in my view.

It Must Be Love wrote:Yes, egg chamber should be banned too.

TSJ, yes you're correct, it's 'natural' but is it fair?

Yes it is fair. It is an option open to everyone if they want.

It Must Be Love wrote:Yes, egg chamber should be banned too.

TSJ, yes you're correct, it's 'natural' but is it fair?

That's just stupid though. With EPO, you can raise you hematocrit up from say 40 to 50-60 or even higher. It's dangerous. You can die.

Altitude training is not dangerous. Your hematocrit generally only rises by a couple of points and you settle into a natural equilibrium relative to the altitude you are at. I know you're being facetious, but are you suggesting people that are born and live at altitude should be disallowed from competing?

The effect is the the same, but the magnitude of the effect is very different.

The point is that training at altitude and taking EPO is actually counterproductive, because you can get all the effects of altitude from the EPO without the disadvantage of having to train in the thin air. You can do your usual sea-level training load but still profit from the higher hematocrit.

Some of these conspiracy theories are just wild. Back to the disappointing fact that Nadal won't be competing at Aus 13', the tournament will definitely miss that extra competitive edge. Can't see past a Novak v Murray final now (draw permitting)

Yes, Danny on second thoughts you are right.

IMBL -

It must be tough to hear these OTT criticisms about your favourite player and not respond with petty ones of your own about other posters favourite player(s)...

But it is possible not to bite. I've read umpteen HE Murray threads and not retorted with a single Rafa wind up yet!

It Must Be Love wrote:Rumours that Christophe Rochus spoke out against Federer, and revealed how his team flush EPO bags down the toilet:
http://federerisdoping.blogspot.co.uk/2011/01/doping-cheat-roger-federer-gets-further.html?m=1

That has to be the most ridiculous thing I've ever seen. The author just made up a bunch of stories. There isn't even a link to the supposed interview or indeed any quotes from Rochus. Most of the comments are also blatantly from the author disguised as 'anonymous' dissapointed Fed fans. LOL. really clutching at straws with that one.

It reads as a joke article to me. I actually thought it was quite funny - "Selling Federbears to pay for doping." Haha.

Takes an interesting character to put it forward as evidence against him though.

Danny_1982 wrote:IMBL -

It must be tough to hear these OTT criticisms about your favourite player and not respond with petty ones of your own about other posters favourite player(s)...

But it is possible not to bite. I've read umpteen HE Murray threads and not retorted with a single Rafa wind up yet!

I really don't think Fed is doping, and as I said I have no proof.
I don't think tennis has a big problem with doping.
I was wondering whether high altitude training is fair, ad you made a good point on that matter.

ALPanorak wrote:Some of these conspiracy theories are just wild. Back to the disappointing fact that Nadal won't be competing at Aus 13', the tournament will definitely miss that extra competitive edge. Can't see past a Novak v Murray final now (draw permitting)

Really? You think Murray's gonna just stroll past Fed if they were to meet in the semi final? I think Fed starts at favourite in that match up for now.

As for the winner, then it's hard to see past Screech, unless Murray takes him out in the semi.

My favourites:

Screech
Federer
Murray
Del Po
Berdych
Tsonga
Ferrer

Obviously 5-7 have virtually zero chance.



emancipator

DJlovesyou, it's hardly evidence.
First my the site seems very biased against Federer, secondly I don't think Rochus would be a reliable source.

As I said I don't think Federer is doping.
But I can't rule it out, same with Rafa.

For Australia I'd say Novak is clear favourite, with Roger and Andy joint second favourites. That mat change though depending on which of the top 2 draw Murray.

Actually, maybe I'd put Roger just ahead of Andy. No player for 30 odd years has won their first two slams consecutively. Not Roger, not Rafa. So I'd maybe demote Murray to third favourite.

It Must Be Love wrote:DJlovesyou, it's hardly evidence.
First my the site seems very biased against Federer, secondly I don't think Rochus would be a reliable source.

As I said I don't think Federer is doping.
But I can't rule it out, same with Rafa.

You make it sound like Rochus was actually a source, just not a very reliable one, when in fact he didn't make any such claims against Federer. Indeed Fed is friends with his brother. The author just made it all up and you thought you'd use it as evidence

I just said its hardly evidence

Do you read my posts Eman?
Also as I said the author is biased against Federer, so may not be very trustworthy.

It Must Be Love wrote:Yes, egg chamber should be banned too.

TSJ, yes you're correct, it's 'natural' but is it fair?

So...... he dopes because he does things which mean he doesn't have to dope? Is that the idea?

It Must Be Love wrote:I just said its hardly evidence

Do you read my posts Eman?
Also as I said the author is biased against Federer, so may not be very trustworthy.

Sorry Amrit, but what you e one here is quite insulting to barrystar. Basically, you've trawled the web for cranks and put that up as equal to Barry's concerns.

You can do better than this.

BB at which point did I say it was a response to Barrystar.
That source is clearly unreliable, as many have pointed out.

I myself don't think Fed is doping.
From my side I presented 9 points, and have responded to Barry's 4 points.
Either way no one has any real evidence.

That link was not part of my 9 points.
I don't think that is very trustworthy, because he hasn't backed it up with sources or proof.

Are you on a wind up? That article is not a genuine accusation of doping against Federer, but just a joke.

Rafa's withdrawal, especially if combined with Djokovic or Murray suffering an early loss, really opens up the opportunities for the others like Berdych and Tsonga to have a genuine crack at reaching the final.

We also have the possibility of a Djokovic-Murray semi or half, and a weaker other half. Although with the semis played on Thursday and Friday and the final on Sunday, a tough semi doesn't have as much effect as at the other slams, hopefully if Djokovic and Murray are in the same half they will play on day 1 and the Thursday semi rather than Friday night.

Not sure if people agree (probably), but I would see Djokovic and Murray as the 2 favourites at this event given history and likely conditions.

Federer is the third favourite probably.

As I said HB, I don't think that link is very trustworthy. The appearance of lots of Federer fans 'turning' against him also seemed to be a bit suspicious.

However this link was not included in my 9 points, lets not get it twisted.


I think Roggie is favourite for AO.

novak has feds number at aus no doubt!

No way can a fast court player win in Australia now.

Funny how the topic started and how its blown out of proportion with all these drug scandals , lets be very practical had Nadal made AO and lost in 2nd round again [another rise of underdog] it might have dented his confidence real bad.

Haddie , Me and few others discussed this several times that very unlikely Rafa will start with AO, its better and wiser from Rafa's part to start from clay season build his confidence back and take the challanges of grass court and hard courts to follow.

Stomach bug might be the excuse but I don't think its anything to do with Drugs.

I don't believe somebody can play 5-6 hour marathon at high level just taking drugs, the amount of drugs required to play such a level would be one too many and might even result in sudden death if practiced for few years let alone for close to 10 years, I don't think so Rafa or for that reason any top level player be stupid enough to kill themselves for a bit of pride.

Ic the answer is as you have explained.. but there are those who do not want to see the plain and simple truth. There has to be something more "sinister" to Rafa´s decision to withdraw.. he may have a stomach bug there is a lot of it in Spain at the moment.. however even if he has I WILL REPEAT he was never going to play the AO ..you all seem to know Rafa better than he knows himself yet you cannot see his reasoning behind the decision. The length of delay was the mere fact it was that or surgery. NOW if he had had the surgery would you believe him them ????? AND ONCE MORE I will repeat that I am having the same problem getting answers to my questions at the hospital where my husband is.
After asking a question you are left asking "did he answer what I asked" They will tell you enough but not all
It is the SPANISH people all over they tell you WHAT THEY THINK YOU WANT TO HEAR... its a fact believe me

The Nadal camp is frustratingly ambiguous but asking them to change is like asking Rafa to change his style of play IT AINT GONNA HAPPEN

The very last pargraph of this article sums it up for me




http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1461235-rafael-nadal-australian-open-pull-out-leads-to-more-unfair-doping-speculations

Also I would like to know why is a pull out of the Australian Open seen as a reason for fresh accusations? After all according to some here dope tests are non-existent in the sport and besides Nadal has played in Melbourne how many times? Seven or eight without any issues. Or if these doubters feel it is some sort of a silent ban then sorry but Rafa would not even have bothered mentioning when he hoped to come back and then make changes to that he would have named a date when the fantasy ban ended. As for those people who claim he is guilty because he said Contador was his hero ....jeez give us a break eh. I was a big fan of Jimmy Saville as a personality and even felt sceptical when first stories broke about his dark past. I now realise how wrong I was but does thst make me a bad person because I believed in him. Of course not.

Craig the more you read the more you listen to peoples arguments on the subject the more surreal it becomes. The image conjured up of Rafa doping and managing to keep ever scrap of evidence totally undiscovered by ANYONE... well frankly if this was a film I turn it off. Fantasy to appease the Rafa detractors
then when its all over and hopefully he starts winning again they will be jumping on the wagon saying "well of course we never really believed it"!!!!

Your boy Andy is very close to Rafa they are good friends do you really believe Andy would not have had his suspicions ???

On that last point all of the players are pretty close. Now I wonder why they are always complimentary of Rafa and all he has acheived. Now if I were a tennis player with suspicions or evidence then I would look to blow the lid on it all and not be complimentary. Another piece of logic that the doubters have no answer to.

Haddie-nuff. Best wishes to you and your family at this difficult time.

Nada looks tiny and a lot less muscle bound than Murray and he can be outlasted on a tennis court by both Murray and Djokovic. Also whilst these two players have bulked up Nadal appears to have lost a little weight from his younger days. Wasn't it something to do with putting less pressure on his knees? He is exactly the same weight and height as Federer. Unlike the other three who miraculously never get injured he is physically weaker. So whatever drugs he is accused of taking are not very effective.

Suspicion is very easy to throw about when you don't need to back it up with evidence. For example. Murray disappeared for a few weeks one Christmas and returned bulked up and believes the secret of success is getting "stronger". Djokovic went from a player that physically wilted in long matches to a sort of Djokovic mark 2 claiming he was helped by an egg chamber and a "special" diet. And Federer is so secretive about his training he could be doing anything but at 31 he can still pick up the odd slam.

Also all top players have to be complementary to each other now. If they can't play like Nadal and Federer they can at least try to act like them. This is a good thing but I'm not sure it will last.

invisiblecoolers wrote:Funny how the topic started and how its blown out of proportion with all these drug scandals , lets be very practical had Nadal made AO and lost in 2nd round again [another rise of underdog] it might have dented his confidence real bad.

Haddie , Me and few others discussed this several times that very unlikely Rafa will start with AO, its better and wiser from Rafa's part to start from clay season build his confidence back and take the challanges of grass court and hard courts to follow.

Stomach bug might be the excuse but I don't think its anything to do with Drugs.

I don't believe somebody can play 5-6 hour marathon at high level just taking drugs, the amount of drugs required to play such a level would be one too many and might even result in sudden death if practiced for few years let alone for close to 10 years, I don't think so Rafa or for that reason any top level player be stupid enough to kill themselves for a bit of pride.

I dont agree with your last paragraph. In road cycling (hardest sport of them all) they are riding for that length of time and if they take drugs and are a gc contender or going for the stage win they may inject some sort of drug intravenously or subcutaneously before hand and that would last them fine, some are even injected before the tournament and it lasts for a week or so! So although i am not accusing nadal i disagree that the amount of drugs needed would be high due to much more sophisticated methods and practices in beating the system.

Yep, LS is spot on with that.

Thank you HE I appreciate your good wishes.

CaledonianCraig wrote:On that last point all of the players are pretty close. Now I wonder why they are always complimentary of Rafa and all he has acheived. Now if I were a tennis player with suspicions or evidence then I would look to blow the lid on it all and not be complimentary. Another piece of logic that the doubters have no answer to.

If i recall cyclists would talk openly about armstrong's success praising him (from the tour de france history dvd) despite the ongoing omerta.

LuvSports! wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:On that last point all of the players are pretty close. Now I wonder why they are always complimentary of Rafa and all he has acheived. Now if I were a tennis player with suspicions or evidence then I would look to blow the lid on it all and not be complimentary. Another piece of logic that the doubters have no answer to.

If i recall cyclists would talk openly about armstrong's success praising him (from the tour de france history dvd) despite the ongoing omerta.

Not too surprising considering they were all doping too

yes but the point is what if an omerta existed in tennis, this would mirror cycling as people are complimenting others according to CC.

So in other words Fed's praise and admiration of Nadal is merely because he is on the same PED's?

obvs not but you said

Now I wonder why they are always complimentary of Rafa and all he has acheived. Now if I were a tennis player with suspicions or evidence then I would look to blow the lid on it all and not be complimentary. Another piece of logic that the doubters have no answer to.

so i provided an example that possibly rebutted that comment.

No but the point is the 'other' cyclists were on PEDs too.

Actually I suppose Roger and co. could be dope as well

yes that is what i meant if everyone was on peds.

OMG.

It Must Be Love wrote:

It gets from bad to worse

TSJ:

Thats brilliant, i love how they both link to ping pong videos as well, maybe thats how they ship all their stuff

I've had a sniff around the various articles and threads mentioned, and one thing I've seen is an email exchange from the THASP site in which the ITF confirms that Dr. Miller was correctly quoted when he said that during 2008-9 EPO tests were carried out on players whose blood screening indicated possible EPO use and at the top of the list of players tested players for EPO with 4 was Fed - Djoko on 3, Nadal on 2. Fed also reputedly missed a test in 2009.

As I say, nobody is completelhy above suspicion.

I've said before, I doubt that there is a silent or provisional ban on Nadal. I surmise that he's not feeling quite right about the knee, not ready for the Australian Open, and the stomach bug is a fair enough reason to advance to avoid having to communicate to his opponents that he's even now feeling edgy about the knee. That on its own is fair enough, however his camp's lack of credibility as a source of information is doing him no favours and he needs to address that. I do appreciate that there may be contractual reasons why he does not want to state that he's pulling out of tournaments before a certain date, but it does feel as though they could do a lot better because credibility is a very elusive and valuable commodity. There may even come a point when it makes more sense not to take the money (for a rich man anyway) because it's not worth as much as credibility.

In the meantime:

(a) I'd like to see a much more open testing system than we have, and a more stringent one, which would go some way to answering quite a lot of the legitimate questions we have (there will always be unfair ones - their impact would be marginalised by a better system).

(b) I want Operacion Puerto to be properly opened up in the Fuentes trial - that is a particularly unhappy cloud hanging over sport, and in particular Spanish sport. If Nadal's name was wrongly cited as cropping up I want to see him 100% clearly vindicated with no lingering doubts, if his name did crop up I want to know the full circumstances and see him, and any other relevant person, closely asked about it. The current situation of the accusation that his name did crop up not having an authoritative answer cannot continue.

At present the position is that nobody is above suspicion, an absence of positives is just one factor, and it is left up to us to ascertain and weigh up such other factors as there are. It's not satisfactory, and I believe in innocence until proven guilty - but when you aren't confident that anyone is truly out to catch the guilty you've got to keep an eye on the other evidence, including circumstantial, to avoid being duped by the dopers and the inadequate system they hide behind as well as making sure that somebody is asking the right questions. For the record, I don't 'believe' that any of the top tennis players are dopers, I don't know for certain about any of them and without more evidence I give them all the benefit of my doubts, but I am more wary about some (including Nadal) than I am about others.

At the moment the best thing that tennis has going for it in terms of doping credibility is that most of the other popular sports aren't any better.

While I agree that we should try to stay clear of accusations of individual players where we have no real evidence, I find it even more frustrating to see comments of the nature "until there is proof of wrongdoing, let's assume the sport is clean".

The sport is largely self-policing, so if we adopt the attitude of trusting until a proof shows up, we will only reduce incentives (already not so great ones) for the policing to be done right.

These days there is a lot of money in many sports. Where there is a lot of money, there is temptation to cheat. It strikes me as very naive to assume that sports are clean just because they do not catch many culprits.