• The Cycling News forum is still looking to add volunteer moderators with. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to @SHaines here on the forum, or use the Contact Us form to message the Community Team.

    In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.

    Thanks!

Tennis

Page 159 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Move along nothing (clostebol) to see here:
Italian sport is a good litmus test. They attempted a clean up about 25 years ago (apart from in soccer) but now everyone is back on the bolognese sauce. Why bother to clean up when nobody else does?
 
Clearly our Red Fox doesn't dope.;)
I wish the media (BBC in this case, but typical of many others) could be sophisticated and honest enough to stop using the phrase “cleared of all wrongdoing.” As opposed to “doping ban dismissed due to possible contamination.” And in this case what a ridiculous excuse.
In addition, how do they know what other “wrongdoing”—whether doping or jaywalking—he might be doing ;)
 
Sinner missing the olympics seemed sketchy to me. I'm aware that he's supposed to have had a whole lot of injuries and rehab. But also, he's been ranked #1 for a while so it seemed like quite a coincidence to happen to miss such major event.
 
  • Like
Reactions: magliaroz
Even if it was an honest mistake (twice) you would think he’d be suspended until he was cleared of any wrongdoing.

Simona Halep was suspended for 17 months until she was cleared.

He was popped for anabolic steroids. Cross country skier Therese Johaug was caught using the same out of competition and was suspended for 2 years.

Another Italian was caught using clostebol years ago and was given a 4 year ban. Clearly Sinner has good protection.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ManicJack
So now Errati-style meme excuse with the meds falling in the pasta of the Tortellini?
His father is even a cook, so it would have been plausible (probably not good for his restaurant).

b97c3efb-4a4b-4dc8-858c-e5c73850a2c2_text.gif

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M2Aqpk-avec
 
Even if it was an honest mistake (twice) you would think he’d be suspended until he was cleared of any wrongdoing.

Simona Halep was suspended for 17 months until she was cleared.

He was popped for anabolic steroids. Cross country skier Therese Johaug was caught using the same out of competition and was suspended for 2 years.

Another Italian was caught using clostebol years ago and was given a 4 year ban. Clearly Sinner has good protection.
Tbf, Johaug had a concentration of 13 ng/ml, while both of Sinner's samples had 86 and 76 pg/mg. 1ng equals 1,000 pg, so Sinner actually only had small traces of it, making the contamination story clearly more plausible than Johaug, who would have had to ingest a pound or two of lip balsam to make her story actually realistic.
 
  • Like
Reactions: El_ojo_del_Tigre
Tbf, Johaug had a concentration of 13 ng/ml, while both of Sinner's samples had 86 and 76 pg/mg. 1ng equals 1,000 pg, so Sinner actually only had small traces of it, making the contamination story clearly more plausible than Johaug, who would have had to ingest a pound or two of lip balsam to make her story actually realistic.understanding something
Maybe I’m not understanding something—all chemicals have half lives, with the amount in one’s system decreasing over time, right? So as long as the amount is over the limit, the excuse of “it’s barely over the limit” could just as easily mean they actually had a much larger amount in their system and has been decreasing since they stopped. No matter how much of a drug someone takes, there is a day (or time) when a test would show an amount “barely over the limit.” Please set me straight if I’m not getting something here.

My point being is that finding a minuscule amount of a PED leads to a conclusion (by some) that it must be contamination. But an equally valid (and probably more likely) conclusion is that a doping product had not quite quite finished clearing their system.
 
Maybe I’m not understanding something—all chemicals have half lives, with the amount in one’s system decreasing over time, right? So as long as the amount is over the limit, the excuse of “it’s barely over the limit” could just as easily mean they actually had a much larger amount in their system and has been decreasing since they stopped. No matter how much of a drug someone takes, there is a day (or time) when a test would show an amount “barely over the limit.” Please set me straight if I’m not getting something here.

My point being is that finding a minuscule amount of a PED leads to a conclusion (by some) that it must be contamination. But an equally valid (and probably more likely) conclusion is that a doping product had not quite quite finished clearing their system.
Oh no, you're right. It's just that really small amounts make contamination stories a lot more believable.