Tennis Frontier

Tag: doping

  • Drug Testing: Would You Postpone a Breath Test?

    Drug Testing: Would You Postpone a Breath Test?

    With the high profile drug related bans this year from Viktor Troicki and Marin Cilic among others the whole concept of drug use, testing, and the issue of cheating in tennis is back in the spotlight.

    I don’t know about you but the more I learn about the area of cheating, particularly in the context of drugs, the more I realise how complex the issue really is. In particular my eyes were opened while studying sport science where I learnt that all the banned drugs have very serious side effects. By serious I mean life threatening. There are also known performance-enhancing drugs that are not banned, like creatine, because they do not pose a risk to health in the quantities the drugs are used.

    [divider]

    Discuss this article in the Tennis Frontier Forum

    [divider]

    This changed my view from drugs being a performance-enhancement issue to a health and safety one because their ability to enhance performance was irrelevant. Only their ability to cause harm was relevant. Banning them puts them off limits to protect the health and safety of athletes taking part in sport, just like banning or limiting the use of alcohol while driving to make roads safer.

    Obviously this is a huge statement but I wanted to expand on this in a later post. For now I just wanted to introduce drug regulation as a health and safety challenge where boundaries are set and penalties are imposed for crossing the boundaries, and making the sport unsafe or even dangerous for those involved. The aim is to encourage safe competition. The level playing field being that only safe acceptable risks should be taken. The health of athletes should be paramount.

    So I started to think along lines we all understand. First I considered work and the workplace. What would be expected of us in a similar situation?

    Tennis players at the top level are workers like the rest of us, and the ATP, the tournaments, and everything related is either an employer or a market for services. So in any market or employment contract there become legally binding contracts and levels of service that should be maintained by both parties. Boring but key. My point is that all of us turn up for work, often when we really don’t want to, because if we don’t we could be fired. In the same way we also expect to be treated equally in our work. If someone else is doing something dangerous to get the job done, then they should be stopped. As workers, contractors, or suppliers there should be a system that ensures high standards but not at a human cost. Pushing boundaries and getting more from ourselves on a daily basis is what we should all be doing, but not when there is strong evidence it will harm us or others.

    That is how I am viewing all these cases. Once I see them as part of a market like any other I can then start to think of what is fair and right on a much more general and real scale, and one I can understand with real experience and insight. All of us work, have worked, or will work. So what is fair to expect of us? How many things at work would you reschedule if you were ill? A meeting or presentation? Maybe. But an interview or product release or court date? Probably not. Definitely not a hearing where you obtain your license to practice your profession. I don’t think I would let anything intervene. What do you think?

    Then I started thinking about whether I accept Troicki’s explanation that he wasn’t well which led me to the idea that failing a drugs test is like failing a breathalyser test when you are driving. This is another thing that we are all subject to. Driving is a privilege and not a right. In the UK I understand that refusing a breath test could be grounds for an instant driving ban. However, if you submit to the test but the test is inconclusive or even positive you have a right to appeal and should ask to be tested with a more accurate device at the station.

    My point is that a breath test is to prevent dangerous driving and save lives so the rules and regulations are strictly enforced. A drug test in tennis is to prevent the dangers of the substances being tested for both on the individual and his peers. The reasons for the tests are similar. Shouldn’t their enforcement be similar, too?

    Should you be able to postpone a breath test or at least tell the officer that you’re ill and agree to take the test later? Not something that I believe is allowed by law. You must submit to the test there and then regardless. The point being that ignorance of the law is not a defence and neither is illness. There is a big difference between refusing a test and not being able to produce a sample.

    You can see that I consider this a criminal issue because the side effects of banned drugs are so serious. I don’t consider it as simple as cheating. I consider it as important as life and death because of that. Remember, if adult athletes are taking such dangerous substances, then what are child athletes taking and who is protecting them? See it in that light and you might change your view on drugs. I certainly have.

    In summary, by participating in competition all athletes must accept they will be tested. Regulating health and safety must be part of any sport. To compete safely must be a given, not a hope. Regulation is part of all industries for the exact same reason that CEOs of companies must take medical tests, on-call surgeons and doctors must respond when they are needed, and we all must make a court date if we have one. We don’t get to reschedule these things for our own reasons.

    Regulating drugs is such a complex issue that sport should not try to find its own solution. There are plenty of known, tried and trust approaches devised by experts in other industries. Learn from these instead. Hence my example of a breathalyser test. My point simply being that anyone at any point could be stopped while driving to be tested. It happens to us all. Should we be able to postpone it or should we be deemed guilty for refusing? I personally cannot see a reason I would not take the test. We are all subject to this so you form your own opinion.

    You may start to understand why I would suggest they introduce a license to play tennis on tour — something that could be revoked for not passing a test, and something you must achieve in order to be on tour. The licence is your privilege, and your right to practice. Much like becoming a doctor, barrister, or accountant, your fitness to practice is continually assessed and rigorously enforced.

  • Murray Questions Anti-Doping Transparency

    Murray Questions Anti-Doping Transparency

    World No. 3 Andy Murray has called for greater transparency from the ITF anti-doping unit as Maran Cilic appears in London to face his hearing on a failed test earlier in the year.

    Cilic tested positive at the BMW Munich Open, later withdrawing from Wimbledon citing a knee injury when he was advised of the test results. The positive test was not made public as ITF protocols state that the hearings take place three months later to allow both parties to present a case. In Cilic’s case, the positive test was leaked by local Croatian media outlets.

    “I think it’s about time everyone knew what was going on,” said Murray, who leads the British charge in the UK/Croatia Davis Cup clash. “Once it’s out in the open, then whether the hearing took two months or three or fourth months, so long as he isn’t playing in that period. I think it’s too long for no one to say he has failed a drugs test.”

    Cilic’s camp has attributed the failed test down to purchasing an “over the counter” glucose supplement. If the ITF do enforce a ban then it will be backdated to Cilic’s last match and Wimbledon and depending on the sanction should be enforced for 6 to 24 months.

  • Johan Kriek’s “Drugs in Sports” — A Masterclass Perspective

    Johan Kriek’s “Drugs in Sports” — A Masterclass Perspective

    Mr. Kriek wrote a wonderful article on this site in his Johan Kriek Drugs in Sport blog entry. He is to be commended for having the courage to write it.  It goes a long way in demonstrating why one should not accept performance enhancing drug (PED) use or doping as part of any sport, and how the penalties should be severe to discourage the doper.

    However, as much as I admire the article, I believe more needs to be said.  One cannot only place blame on the athletes, though they of course make their own decisions on whether to dope or not.  But let’s get real, the risk right now of doing time for doping is minuscule compared to the potential reward.  Let’s see.  “Hmm, I’m a good athlete, but I could be much better, even the best, and make millions, have fame, and with my smart doping program and the current testing regime, I won’t get caught. In fact, if I’m near the top who will want to catch me and destroy the sport?”  Well, perhaps players with high moral standards will refuse such a temptation. But how many will not?

    [divider]

    Discuss this blog post and the subject in the discussion forums.

    [divider]

    The management of the sport and management of anti-doping controls share in the responsibility with the players in keeping the sport clean.  But I firmly believe that no sport’s organization should be responsible for anti-doping control within their own sport.   There is an obvious conflict of interest with those who manage it, market it, and promote the players, also being given the responsibility of controlling management and testing of anti-doping in their own sport. The trouble is that no sport wants to give up this control.  Why would they? They are the proverbial fox managing the chicken coop.  If some independent international authority were given control over managing anti-doping, who knows what would happen? Some top athlete or many might actually get caught and publicly be outed.  What would that do to the sport?  A sport may claim to be diligent in their management and may produce examples of such, but the inherent conflict of interest is too great.

    The best response from a sport’s organization would be that they shouldn’t have the responsibility for managing anti-doping in their own sport in the first place and hand it over to an independent authority.  But which sport would have the courage to do that?  As long as each individual sport has control over anti-doping nobody will know what is actually happening. Transparency is kept at a minimum, ostensibly to protect players’ rights, but in the eyes of the sport’s management, it obviously protects the sport if the sport can control what kind of testing is done, how often, at what times both in and out of competition, who gets tested, and how much of what is known is released to the public.

    WADA (World Anti-Doping Agency) should do all they can to separate the interests. I don’t know if they have the power to do this. Maybe they need to get individual governments where the sport is being played to mandate the separation of interests.  See their most recent report on the lack of effectiveness in testing programs. Please pay particular attention to Appendix A and #2. International Sports Organizations.

    [divider]

    Obviously, the sport of tennis is not immune.  Drugs won’t make a major champion out of someone who has little ability in the sport, but among the top 500 players, there is not a great deal of difference in the abilities of players that play the sport.  The differences are small, especially within each tier – Top 10, 20, 30, etc.  Use of drugs for extra power, for endurance, recovery, and growth can obviously give the edge to that player within his tier level,  or perhaps even a few levels difference.  And not only in the actual physical effect like strength and endurance, but moreover in confidence and therefore mental strength, which, as any top player will tell you, is what mostly differentiates the players at a certain level.

    Additionally, when one combines the drug effects with the conditions present in the sport, the effects can be augmented or diminished.  Ask yourself, “Are playing conditions generally slower today, or faster?  Will they favor those with artificially increased endurance, recovery ability, power, etc., or those that play with better tactics and aggressive shotmaking skills?”

    Someone who is making superior shots should be able to win points without having to hit three or more winning shots, only to see them come back back again and again, point after point.  Superior shotmaking and tactics over the match should be able to tire the other player sufficiently to win the match.

    As an example, I am disturbed when I observe a match like yesterday’s men’s semifinal at the 2013 US Open between Stanislas Wawrinka and Novak Djokovic.  Here are some relevant quotes from the players in their post-match interviews or press conferences that also disturbed me.

    Stan Wawrinka [about Novak]:  “He was f*****g strong.”

    Novak Djokovic:  “Wawrinka was a better player for most of the better part of the match because he was aggressive and played better tennis. Other hand, me, I just tried to hang on and fight and be mentally tough and believe all the way through I can actually win.  And I sincerely believed that as the match progresses and longer it goes, I felt I have maybe that physical edge over him…”

    Sadly for many tennis purists, strong endurance and almost endless retrieval ability on these slowed hard courts of the US Open triumphed over tactics and aggressive shotmaking yet again.  It’s generally accepted that a clay court should have these attributes, but the US Open? Traditionally one of the faster hard courts?  Not only does the slowing of hard courts or grass (by causing a higher bounce) diminish a player’s superior shot making results, it also can produce more injuries.  The hard courts are not as forgiving on the joints as the natural surfaces.  Long matches on hard courts are not conducive to a player’s well being in the short term, and the effect is probably cumulative over the long term.

    These days, Arthur Ashe Stadium’s DecoTurf 2 court in Flushing Meadows, New York, plays barely faster than Rod Laver Stadium’s Plexicushion court in Melbourne, Australia.  When they repaint the court before the event, they use enough grit in the top layer of paint to slow it down from its standard medium-fast pace.  There is also a lack of transparency in advertising the conditions.  In my opinion, the adjusted court pace rating  should be displayed prominently, say on the court’s scoreboard,  at every ITF/ATP/WTA event.  There are standard machines that calculate the pace and bounce characteristics, as well as a formula to adjust the calculation based on weather conditions (temperature and humidity).  It should not be a guessing game for the fans and players.

    But those in power (ITF, ATP, WTA) realized there is more money in having marathon matches, so what else can one expect?  Tournaments and sponsors are also culpable in this regard.

    In slower conditions, if a player has sufficient skills to hit the ball back in the court decently, and possesses an extraordinary ability to run balls down for as long as it takes, then he can be a winner.  He doesn’t have to play better tennis.  He just has to run more and outlast his opponent.  When two such similar players play against each other, it’s anyone’s guess who will be the last one standing — the winner.

    [divider]

    Worst of all, one can’t be sure if athletes naturally have superior endurance and recovery attributes via genetics and hard training, or are being artificially enhanced.

    Why can’t one be sure? Because those who currently manage anti-doping controls hardly test off-season when the drugs’ benefits can be used to their greatest affect, they rarely use blood testing, sometimes don’t test top players at all, or test using known methods with loopholes. For example, the T/E test used for steroid-testosterone detection won’t catch dopers that use micro-dosing or other methods to fly in under the established limits, or those genetically predisposed to not exhibit a high ratio, instead of using more definitive but more expensive tests like CIR (carbon isotope ratio).   The lack of funding argument to perform better and increased testing doesn’t fly with the millions being earned by the sport.  With the lax or inept management, a doper with knowledge and common sense or with access to a knowledgeable professional will not get caught via the current testing regime.  You don’t have to look further than the USADA report on Lance Armstrong and the US Postal Team for how canny the doper culture can be in avoiding getting caught.  And if a doper makes a mistake (usually those that may not have the best professional advice), there is every chance that they may be able to serve their time quietly (provisional ban) while their case is argued, and under the right circumstances it won’t be publicly revealed.  At worst, an occasional scapegoat not in the top echelon may be exposed to demonstrate the effectiveness of the testing regime and be publicly banned for a time.

    If a doping athlete is accused or suspected of doping based on his appearance or incredible performances, he can simply say that he has never used anything illegal and never tested positive.

    On the other hand, if someone is not doping, but they have the natural strength/endurance attributes and/or excellent training programs, they may still be suspected of doping due to their performance, and it’s difficult for them to prove themselves innocent to a suspicious public, because the anti-doping controls are so suspect for all of the reasons already given.

    Victor Conte, the former BALCO head who served time in prison in 2005 for his part in a conspiracy to distribute steroids and money laundering, but since then has admirably educated people about doping methods and joined the fight against doping in sports, said that PED use in tennis is “likely rampant because testing is inept.” I believe he has used figures of 30% or more when describing rampant.  Thirty percent or more of the top players are doping?  Shocking to us perhaps, but not Victor Conte.  He’s been around and has usually been on target with his assessments.

    There are remedies for all of this, and one doesn’t  pretend to have all the answers, but it will certainly take time and the will to make changes.  The public also has a responsibility.  We have to do our part to convince those in charge that we don’t want doped athletes cheating those who do not dope, even if the former provide great entertainment.  We cannot turn a blind eye to this.  We cannot be conveniently naive or bury our heads in the sand and say it’s not happening.  Athletes that don’t use PEDs are being cheated by those that do.  It discredits all involved in all sports from all eras if we cannot be sure who is doping and who is not.

    Credits: Cover Photo: Russell Bernice (Creative Commons License)

  • Johan Kriek on Drugs in Sport

    Johan Kriek on Drugs in Sport

    Last week, Johan was asked by two different radio hosts about his thoughts on drugs in tennis.

    MY TAKE: and I hope this sparks a serious debate about drugs in tennis before it is TOO LATE!

    Back in 1979 and 1980 there were discussions within the ATP and its leadership on how to keep tennis clean from pros using drugs (my feeling was that there were just too many “rumors” of drug use, specifically “recreational drugs”). Remember Studio 54, Miami Vice, etc….etc? All so glamorous and fun….

    The ATP in the summer of 1980 (if my memory serves me correctly) had a big meeting at the Gloucester Hotel in London the weekend before Wimbledon, and it was unanimous that any player could be randomly picked for a drug test at that time. We were the first pro sports in the history of sports to implement such drug testing rules.

    After my 5 set loss to Bjorn Borg in the 1980 US Open semifinals I was escorted by security to the Marriott Hotel at La Guardia airport to be drug tested which was strictly a urine test. I was told I was the first pro player to be tested randomly under the rules. I was perfectly happy to do so since I had absolutely nothing to hide. I never heard back from anybody which confirmed I was no drug user of any kind. But doesn’t it suck to know you are clean to be “proven innocent”…..but this was the beginning of the ATP’s drug testing path.

    With Alex Rodriguez’s situation and the decades long baseball drug suspensions, and Pete Rose’s ridiculously over the top suspension for betting while others still play who use PED’s, the NFL steroid history, and many, many deaths most likely caused by the abuse of steroids (this is all very well documented), plus the pro-cycling tour’s doping scandals, and the fact that the names of pro tennis players are starting to pop up more and more in papers. I am very concerned as a former top ATP player that this kind of publicity is going to “kill the goose that lay the golden egg.” But that is just one concern….

    I know, there are people — many, in fact — who don’t care that there are PED’s (Performance Enhancing Drugs) and openly think it is OK to let athletes use whatever they want, and let it go on like that. But here is my argument: If an athlete then decides the risks are too high, and wants to stay “clean” and compete as such, such athlete will not be competitive! Is that fair? Of course not! What about the results physically long term on a body? We know a lot of it is very bad and some may get away with being OK, but too many will suffer very negatively. I am no scientist but I hope some scientist will comment and tell us what each of these drugs can do to a body, short term and long term.

    The second argument for me is, how do I tell my own flesh and blood kids that if they want to be competitive, you better start using HGH at age 8 so you can become taller. Or that they will have to use PED’s for as long as they want to be competitive on the pro tennis tours! What kinda world will we live in? Sure, those that like to see car and train wrecks will not give a damn and will probably not mind if somebody has a ”roid-rage” episode on court or on TV in front of millions and decapitate a linesman or skewer a fan with the sharp end of a “smithereened” racket since he did not like his “cheering”!

    I don’t pretend to have the answers to this. It is a vexing and very difficult subject since it has so many issues coming with it. I see juniors in tennis and I wonder why is this girl or boy 6 foot 4 and only 14 years old, and the parents are 5’8″? Must be from the grandparents … Yeah, right …

    To what length will some of these crazy parents go to get an “advantage” for their child? And more importantly, should there be drug testing in juniors and if so, at what age should they be randomly tested? It is just mind-boggling to me to even think in these terms but that is where it is heading! What about the issue of a kid who “unknowingly” is being “fed” stuff and maybe knows and doesn’t want to do it — what then? How sickening is that! And it has happened in junior sports!

    Here is a thought for at least the ATP Tour (I cannot speak for the WTA Tour but perhaps they have issues, too):

    Have random drug tests, lots of them, for the top 250 to 500 players. Make it an industry! You drop into any of those rankings for a minute you are “fair game”. Test each person at any time, at any tournament, while on vacation, in Richard Branson’s spaceship…I don’t care. If you cannot do it, immediate suspension for two years. You refuse, lifetime suspension. You fail the test first time, lifetime suspension. Period! Make drug issues a NON-ISSUE this way. I don’t care if you are number 1 in the world or number 500, everybody gets treated the same. In order to safeguard against “influences”, spread these drug testing centers all around the world. Only very few people will know where all of them are. Perhaps switch testing centers constantly so there will not be any chance of “meddling” with results. Maybe have a minimum of 5 drug testing facilities, maybe even more. One gets a result back and it is 3-2? Adios!

    I liken this scourge of drugs in sports to a slow growing cancer. Eventually it will kill, so it is better to ”cut it out” early when noticed and treat it aggressively.

    BTW….I know I will never be asked to head the ATP so being a wishy washy politician is never going to be my philosophy. I tell it the way I see it..

    I am very worried. You may ask me why am I worried…..

    “You are done playing so why inject yourself in this, you old fart!”

    Because my whole life was/still is TENNIS! I was always told that hard work, fair play, and honor are qualities needed to succeed. Now you tell me it is irrelevant??!!

    On top of it, I am coaching future college kids, maybe even future champions! I am changing lives and now I am to feel like if I keep doing this and pros are openly using drugs all I stand for is in FULL ASSAULT and I will be IRRELEVANT in the near future!! That is completely UNACCEPTABLE!!

    Here is another issue — look what happened to a situation like Southern chef Paula Dean who had used a racial slur. She lost a HUGE amount of MONEY, companies dropped her like a hot potato, and her reputation is tarnished, perhaps for life! For a “word” she used and her life and business are destroyed!

    I sincerely hope the 4 Majors and ALL ”powers that be” in our wonderful sport start dealing with this as the HIGHEST priority in sorting this out ASAP. SPONSORS all around the world should say to the ATP Tour leaders, if this continues to “crop up” we will WALK!

    Maybe it is easier to hit them (players) hard in the “pocketbook” than it is “morally”. But that is what modern man feels the most. Sad but true: we value money more than “values” themselves…

    I hope this sparks a HUGE debate……”

    Reposted from the Johan Kriek Tennis Academy website

    [divider]

    Discuss Johan’s blog post and the subject of doping in sport/tennis on our discussion forums.

  • Marin Cilic Quietly Serving Suspension for Doping, Says Croatian Media

    Marin Cilic Quietly Serving Suspension for Doping, Says Croatian Media

    Marin Cilic, the world No. 15 from Croatia, is quietly serving a suspension for doping, according to Croatian media.

    It is alleged that he tested positive for a banned substance in April at the Munich tournament. It is also alleged that he is already serving a suspension to last three months.

    [divider]

    Click here to discuss the Cilic doping suspension and more with fellow tennis fans in our discussion forum.

    [divider]

  • Viktor Troicki Banned for 18 Months for Doping

    Viktor Troicki Banned for 18 Months for Doping

    Viktor Troicki, the 27-year-old Serb, has been banned for 18 months for violating anti-doping rules, the International Tennis Federation announced today.

    The suspension will be effective immediately, and will end January 24, 2015. The violation is the result of missing a blood test in April during the Monte Carlo Masters.

    [divider]

    Click here to discuss the Viktor Troicki ban with fellow tennis fans in our discussion forum.

    [divider]

  • Murray: Fuentes Doping Ruling “The Biggest cover up in sporting history”

    Murray: Fuentes Doping Ruling “The Biggest cover up in sporting history”

    Britain’s Andy Murray has labelled the court ruling by Madrid judge Julia Santamaria, “Beyond a joke” following the trial of Dr Eufemiano Fuentes. Fuentes was in the dock after a seven year sports doping investigation known as “Operation Puerto”.

    The Spanish sports medicine doctor was handed a suspended one-year jail term and banned from practising sports medicine for four years. The offences relate blood doping athletes for performance enhancement. Doping in sports was not a crime in Spain at the time of the investigation, so Fuentes was arrested and charged for offences relating to public health.

    He will not spend any time behind bars as Spanish law dictates that if the guilty party has no previous convictions then any sentence of less than two years will be commuted. The court also sentenced former cycling team official Ignacio Labarta to four months in jail, and acquitted three others, including Fuentes’s sister Yolanda.

    A controversial element of the case revolved around an initial ruling that Fuentes did not need to name any of his clients outside of the sport of cycling, despite having confirmed that athletes from football, boxing, track and field and tennis were also members of his clientele.  Judge Santamaria resisted pressure throughout the trial to provide the names of non-cycling athletes implicated in the scandal.

    Despite repeated requests from WADA (the world anti-doping body) for access to the blood bags, Santamaria ordered that the bags and any other evidence including all computers used in the investigation be destroyed.

    Murray used Twitter to express his astonishment at the ruling – “The Biggest cover up in sporting history?”, clearly bemused  that all the evidence must be destroyed without further investigation. “Why would the court order blood bags to be destroyed?”

    Andy Parkinson, chief executive of UK Anti-Doping also slammed the decision by the spanish judge: ‘We are disappointed. Dr Fuentes has admitted to having been involved in multiple prohibited doping activities, and linked with multiple unnamed athletes.
    ‘It therefore cannot be right that these names will remain unknown and no immediate action can be taken.’

    It would seem for now that the guilty will escape and the innocent will be tarred with suspicion.

    Click here to discuss this and more with fellow tennis fans on our discussion boards.