Peter Bodo's thoughts on doping...accusing Nadal? [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

Peter Bodo's thoughts on doping...accusing Nadal?

nobama
01-13-2006, 06:05 PM
http://www.tennis.com/Tennis_World_Blog/entry.asp?ENTRY_ID=730

<snip>At the end of last year, when the WTA and ATP championships were plagued by no-shows and pullouts, everyone blamed the usual source—the calendar. But how do you explain the continuation of this trend at the Australian Open? Well, Reuters found a way to blame the lack of an off season and the Australian Open dates and organizers. That’s hooey.

I’ve made the case in detail before, so I’m just going with the short version here: The players are not forced to play insane schedules. Fulfilling their basic commitments leaves them plenty of room to rest, recuperate, and travel. The insanity kicks in when they are unable to resist huge appearance fees or offers to play exhibitions—or when other factors come into play. I’ve now officially joined the crowd that suspects there’s more going on here than scheduling troubles, and it ain’t good.

The most recent blow to the Australian Open was the withdrawal of Rafael Nadal. How about this, as the money quote from the ATP’s official news release:


Nadal has been undergoing several biomechanical studies in Barcelona. He has been working with a new shoe insole to release pressure on the area, which he suffered a left-foot fracture on over a year ago, and the inflammation provoked in the surrounding joints.

"We can fortunately say that we don't have an injured player but a player in a re-adaptation process. I have seen his foot today and it looks well," says Dr. Ruiz-Cotorro, who is in charge of the treatment." He had an injury on his foot that has heeled {sic} although the recovery process is very slow.

Great. Nadal’s foot is OK now, his doctor says, so he’s pulling out of the Australian Open!

I can understand Andre Agassi’s withdrawal and Marat Safin’s continuing hiatus a little more easily than Nadal’s decision. Safin had knee surgery and hasn't played at all in half a year. Agassi is 35, with a lot more going on in his life than when he was 19 or 20. For a player of his stature, a Grand Slam is, financially speaking, a loss leader. The million bucks he can make for winning the whole shooting match requires an investment of at least a month—and keep in mind that if he were “merely” the runner-up, earning just a little more than half what the champ gets, he takes a big financial hit.

But this isn’t really about money. This is about the integrity of the game, at various levels, and in various areas. Oh sure, the ongoing disarray—it borders on chaos, if you think about it; no result is without an asterisk anymore—could all be one big, unfortunate coincidence—just a patch of bad luck for the Australian Open and tennis fans worldwide.

My fear is that it’s something much, much worse than that.<snip>

Deboogle!.
01-13-2006, 06:06 PM
He's not the first to do so, and he probably won't be the last :shrug:

nobama
01-13-2006, 06:07 PM
http://www.tennis.com/Tennis_World_Blog/entry.asp?ENTRY_ID=732

It’s theoretically a day off for me as I gear up to cover the Australian Open (I’ll be blogging live from Melbourne during Week Two of the season’s first Grand Slam). But the strikingly thoughtful responses and comments to my last post, along with some of the critical, entirely legitimate questions they raise, call for some clarifications and further comments.

First of all, keep in mind that the doper's best friend is the benumbing complexity and unavoidable ambiguity of the anti-doping effort. A few months ago, I linked to this Outside magazine story that makes painfully clear how difficult it is for the dope police to keep up with the bent doctors and juicers; in fact, the effort to police the use of performance enhancing drugs is borderline futile.

But what are you going to do? Allow doping? Talk the talk, but look the other way as soon as there’s even a hint of a problem (as I believe the ATP and WTA have done for years)?

Some of you would like me to delve into the science of doping, and/or present more facts and concrete evidence instead of speculating and trafficking in innuendo. Here’s a question for you: When was the last time a newspaper or magazine broke a major doping story? The recent spate of exclusives from the French sports daily, L’Equipe, don’t count—all they did was jump the gun on announcing positive test results for some athletes thanks to a friendly leaker somewhere in the anti-doping establishment.

Many major, resource-rich newspapers and magazines in this country and abroad employ full-time, highly trained investigative reporters—something I am not. Yet even they have broken precious few primary-level doping stories— that is, I don’t know of any that actually discovered that someone was doping, and proved it. What stories we have all seem to be driven by either announced test results or individuals stepping forward to confess—or fire the first salvos of accusation. This tells you how tough it is to catch a doper red-handed, or to make specific, supportable accusations.

In fact—and this is a constant theme of mine—doping is such an ambiguous subject that the real danger lies in falling into a train of thought that runs something like this: We know doping exists. We haven’t caught anyone doping. Therefore, everyone must be doping. That’s the allure of conspiracy theories—the very lack of evidence becomes a form of evidence.

Why have I wandered into this morass, then? The answer has two related parts:

First of all, at this site I am a blogger—an opinion journalist and commentator. I have neither the mandate nor the responsibility to deal strictly and exclusively with facts and/or the thoughts or opinions of others about those facts. At the same time, though, my opinion cannot ignore or fly in the face of what facts exist. The moment that the facts and my opinion are in demonstrable conflict, my opinions is invalidated. Two plus two equals four, we’ve all agreed; if I insist it adds up to five, that’s my problem, not the number four’s.

Secondly, I am supposed to be a kind of interface between tennis fans and the pro game. Someone higher up in the food chain has decided that it’s worth paying me to comment on the pro game for the benefit of the folks who troll TENNIS.com and/or read TENNIS Magazine, which makes it incumbent on me to report what people in the game are thinking and saying. Trust me: Doping is a burning, omnipresent topic on the pro tour these days. I owe it to you to tackle it, and I am proud that as a blogger I can do that in a way that a newspaper reporter cannot.

Now, for some specific issues. I fear the worst about doping because it appears that the floodgates of bad news have been opened by the change in the anti-drug testing protocols. The player organizations (ATP and WTA) are no longer in charge of testing; when they were, all was quiet on the doping front. It's a different landscape now. You can read why and how this came about at this page of the ITF’s anti-doping website.

Is it mere coincidence that we’ve had a sudden explosion of positive tests? Why have the increasingly puzzling scheduling habits of so many players suddenly become front-burner issues? Draw back and look at this in perspective; it seems to me that we’re in the midst of an undeclared, unannounced shake-up.

The ITF anti-doping website will give you access to lots of valuable information on doping, if you’re interested in details on banned substances, penalties, procedures, etc. This just isn’t an area in which it makes much sense for me to play the expert. Read that article I linked to in Outside; it’s a great primer on the nature of the doping problem.

When it comes to the players, nobody, but nobody, is above suspicion; this doesn’t mean that I suspect everyone—or, for that matter, anyone. It just means that I don’t believe anyone is immune to the temptation of dabbling in performance-enhancing drugs. Top pro athletes, like fabulously wealthy venture capitalists, exist in a different world. They are playing for much higher stakes, with much deeper pockets, which opens up possibilities unimaginable to many of us. I’ll never forget Boris Becker, a close friend, telling me about the transfusions of calf blood he took as part of his drive to remain “fresh” for the game (it was not illegal) when he was making a big push for the No. 1 ranking. Boris was very matter-of-fact and blasé about it; he had to do what he had to do. But it struck me as pure science fiction.

So, as far as I’m concerned, everyone from Roger Federer on down to the most desperate journeyman is a potential doper. It just wouldn’t be fair to look at it any other way. In this regard, some readers accused me of “protecting” Andre Agassi while planting suspicions about Rafael Nadal when I analyzed their withdrawals from the Australian Open yesterday.

The fact is that up-and-coming champs and aging ones are vastly different, and driven by vastly different priorities. I’m not going to rehash the details, but I’ll say that in ways related strictly to his career and family life, it makes a lot of sense, in lots of different ways, for Agassi to skip the Australian Open and start his year a full two months after his younger rivals.

By contrast, the upcoming Grand Slam event offers Nadal his best shot at winning a major on a surface other than clay, and moving one step closer to challenging Federer’s ascendancy—something Agassi is unlikely to do in the foreseeable future.

Given the amount of time he’s had off and the fact that Nadal’s own doctor said in an official ATP press release that his foot is healed, I find his withdrawal from an event that will be without the defending champ, Safin, or Agassi, baffling.

Whether or not there's anything more to this story, I can't say. But I'm going to make a point in Australia to pin down some folks on some of the more compelling issues—like whether or not it's possible to duck out-of-competition testing by simply not answering the door when the testers come around.

nobama
01-13-2006, 06:13 PM
Just curious what evidence Peter has to presume that the likes of Roddick, Nadal and Federer are possible dopers? Just because he likes a good conspiracy theory, or if one gets busted surely many others are doing it too (but being protected by the ATP/ITF)? And why single out Nadal? It would be stupid of him to play (even a grand slam) when he's not 100% healthy and has had very little match practice. What good is it to fly all the way to Melbourne just to exit early or possibly make an injury worse? :shrug:

Deboogle!.
01-13-2006, 06:17 PM
There have been people who have suggested/accused/pondered out loud about Nadal before, hence my previous post. I'm not saying I personally subscribe to such beliefs, merely that I've seen/heard them. It's his blog, he's just speaking his mind. I, for one, like his blog because of that, because I know when I go there that he'll be saying what he's really thinking, not what might be the more popular or PC thing to say.

Jenrios
01-13-2006, 06:25 PM
I've heard this has been speculated on in the Argentine press - Nadal's absence. Now Bodo - hmmm, wonder what Nadal's response will be?

Deboogle!.
01-13-2006, 06:25 PM
I've heard this has been speculated on in the Argentine press - Nadal's absence. Now Bodo - hmmm, wonder what Nadal's response will be?The first time I remember reading about it was his long absence in 2004 when he missed RG and Wimby with his stress fracture

mallorn
01-13-2006, 06:26 PM
Just curious what evidence Peter has to presume that the likes of Roddick, Nadal and Federer are possible dopers? Just because he likes a good conspiracy theory, or if one gets busted surely many others are doing it too (but being protected by the ATP/ITF)? And why single out Nadal? It would be stupid of him to play (even a grand slam) when he's not 100% healthy and has had very little match practice. What good is it to fly all the way to Melbourne just to exit early or possibly make an injury worse? :shrug:
He has not come up with any evidence whatsoever so far. If you read his comments too, he basically laughs at the claim that it is Rafa's injury (effectively) that's keeping him out of the AO but hasn't responded to any of the facts provided by Susan (from vr.com/rn.com) or anyone else. And in his latest post he's trying to retreat and says he wasn't accusing Nadal. :rolleyes:
So Long, Insoles!
It's time to, as they say, "move on."

My final thoughts on firestorm my last two posts created are:

I never accused Nadal of anything except skipping one of the year's four pre-eminent tournaments for reasons that are somewhat baffling (Insoles. Insoles?).

At the same time, I absolutely, 100 per cent insist that nobody in tennis is above suspicion these day when it comes to doping. Not Federer, not Roddick, not Nadal. And reserving the right to harbor suspicions is very different from making an accusation. And this isn't my personal crusade; tennis has brought this upon itself.Check out Kamakshi's post in Court Coverage re. Sesil Karatancheva's "defense" (You have to scroll down to the "websites" header to find it, but stop and sample on the way!).

Here's another thing. I have both a desire and obligation to share with my readers the burning issues of the day in tennis - both in the public arena, and also in the trenches of the game. Trust me. Doping is a hot, hot topic. It is what people are talking about. And you have every right to know that.

On a more personal level, I feel that I owe it to the Doping Argies, on whom I've been relentlessly tough, to make sure that I - or anyone else - doesn't turn them into convenient scapegoats for a sport that may have a far larger and more comprehensive problem.

It's official. Our game is one in which a 16-year girl has been busted for taking PEDs. . . What do you want me to do, make it the Doping Argies and Bulgar and go my merry way?

But let's give it a rest for now, kick back and enjoy the Australian Open. You know I'm going to get some of your noses out of joint in the next few weeks (remember, I'll be blogging live from Melbourne for Week Two of the AO), but don't for a minute think I underestimate how difficult it is for the players - all the players - and how easy it is for the critics, myself included.

So I leave you for now with the quote I like to ponder before the onset of every major event.


It is not the critic who counts, not the one who points out how the strong man stumbled or how the doer of deeds might have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred with sweat and dust and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs and comes short again and again; who knows the great enthusiasms, the great devotions, and spends himself in a worthy cause; who, if he wins, knows the triumph of high achievement; and who, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who know neither victory nor defeat.

- Teddy Rooosevelt
http://www.peterbodostennisworld.com/

prima donna
01-13-2006, 06:26 PM
Not to make accusations or anything, but it is a favorite hobby of mine to feature random photographs of sports figures before they became who and what they are and after they became that. The difference is almost startling, absolutely amazing, merely a coincidence. Move along.

http://im.rediff.com/sports/2003/jun/27nadal.jpg
http://onlineathens.com/images/060105/18523_512.jpg
http://images.auctionhelper.com/images/9680/bondserrorstarbest.jpg

http://www.isbl.com/isbl_2004/gazette/bondsleft1.gif

Socket
01-13-2006, 06:27 PM
His dark -- and completely unsubstantiated -- insinuations are creating free publicity for his blog, and you all are just snatching up the bait. :rolleyes:

Deboogle!.
01-13-2006, 06:31 PM
His dark -- and completely unsubstantiated -- insinuations are creating free publicity for his blog, and you all are just snatching up the bait. :rolleyes:As far as I know, they're no more - or less - unsubstantiated than the insinuations made on this forum about Agassi and other players. He's speaking his mind, that's his right.

mallorn
01-13-2006, 06:33 PM
It's his blog, he's just speaking his mind. I, for one, like his blog because of that, because I know when I go there that he'll be saying what he's really thinking, not what might be the more popular or PC thing to say.
Speaking his mind is fine as long as he doesn't make unfounded accusations that can ruin someone's reputation. How do you like this sentence from his second post "I have neither the mandate nor the responsibility to deal strictly and exclusively with facts and/or the thoughts or opinions of others about those facts."?

Deboogle!.
01-13-2006, 06:35 PM
Speaking his mind is fine as long as he doesn't make unfounded accusations that can ruin someone's reputation. How do you like this sentence from his second post "I have neither the mandate nor the responsibility to deal strictly and exclusively with facts and/or the thoughts or opinions of others about those facts."?I don't have to like it, I don't have to agree with him. He's saying he's allowed to say his opinion, which is all he did. It's not like he said "I know Nadal is a doper!!" He's merely thinking out loud about something that is arguably suspicious on its face. And it's nothing more than what many many people here have done, with Nadal, and several other players. Do I think Nadal has doped? I doubt it. Do I think that he has had some more bizarre injuries that have kept him out of the game for pretty long periods of time that could potentially look suspicious to some people? I do see how that line of thinking could potentially be plausible.

mallorn
01-13-2006, 06:37 PM
Not to make accusations or anything, but it is a favorite hobby of mine to feature random photographs of sports figures before they became who and what they are and after they became that. The difference is almost startling, absolutely amazing, merely a coincidence. Move along.

Just out of curiosity, have you seen pictures of Nadal's father and uncles?
They're all big, powerful men (one a very successful professional footballer). Oh yes, I guess that just proves they're all dopers. :rolleyes:

Merton
01-13-2006, 06:38 PM
So, to summarize Peter's argument,

1. Participating, and potentially winning, A.O. should be a huge incentive for Nadal.
2. Nadal's doctor claimed that his foot was healed.
3. Nadal decided to withdraw from the A.O., therefore,

Nadal avoids the A.O. because he is doping.

The problem of course, as Mirkaland also pointed out is that point #2 does not imply that Nadal is ready to participate, even though he might be (technically) healed.

tangerine_dream
01-13-2006, 06:40 PM
Nadal? I'm still waiting for the Agassi haters to come up with concrete proof that he doped as they so strongly believe.

Guess I'll be waiting another lifetime longer. :)

Socket
01-13-2006, 06:40 PM
I don't have to like it, I don't have to agree with him. He's saying he's allowed to say his opinion, which is all he did. It's not like he said "I know Nadal is a doper!!" He's merely thinking out loud about something that is arguably suspicious on its face. And it's nothing more than what many many people here have done, with Nadal, and several other players. Do I think Nadal has doped? I doubt it. Do I think that he has had some more bizarre injuries that have kept him out of the game for pretty long periods of time that could potentially look suspicious to some people? I do see how that line of thinking could potentially be plausible.
Boy, would you be singing a different song if he had gone after Roddick. :rolleyes:

Merton
01-13-2006, 06:44 PM
By the way, the argument of Peter does not defer in quality to the argument of primadona: Starting from a weak premise, one can "prove" whatever he likes. The scary thing is that Peter Bodo appears influential and "saying his opinion" may divert resources from the real issue of doping. It is much easier to provide conspiracy theories and offer unsubstantiated opinions than to tackle the real issues.

mallorn
01-13-2006, 06:46 PM
I don't have to like it, I don't have to agree with him. He's saying he's allowed to say his opinion, which is all he did. It's not like he said "I know Nadal is a doper!!" He's merely thinking out loud about something that is arguably suspicious on its face. And it's nothing more than what many many people here have done, with Nadal, and several other players. Do I think Nadal has doped? I doubt it. Do I think that he has had some more bizarre injuries that have kept him out of the game for pretty long periods of time that could potentially look suspicious to some people? I do see how that line of thinking could potentially be plausible.
I see a difference between anonymous posters accusing a player they don't like in a public forum, where they can get away with basically everything, and a (supposedly) respected writer doing effectively the same in a column sponsored by a professional tennis magazine. One would expect him to have some solid basis for implying something so serious.
You say he didn't say "I know Nadal is a doper!!" - but he insinuated this much when he singled him out like that and then kept laughing at the reason for Nadal's withdrawal (he found the fact that Nadal needs to get used to new insoles particularly amusing).

mangoes
01-13-2006, 06:47 PM
His assumptions are BULLSHIT............just someone trying to cause a little drama and get some attention for himself at the expense of a person's career. Furthermore, I know a lot of guys when I was in college that had Nadal's body build at 19. My favorite group of guys, that made me drool ;) , were on the swim team.

It is not nice that this guys is saying this nonsense.

mangoes
01-13-2006, 06:50 PM
I see a difference between anonymous posters accusing a player they don't like in a public forum, where they can get away with basically everything, and a (supposedly) respected writer doing effectively the same in a column sponsored by a professional tennis magazine. One would expect him to have some solid basis for implying something so serious.
You say he didn't say "I know Nadal is a doper!!" - but he insinuated this much when he singled him out like that and then kept laughing at the reason for Nadal's withdrawal (he found the fact that Nadal needs to get used to new insoles particularly amusing).


Totally Agree................

mer
01-13-2006, 06:50 PM
I see a difference between anonymous posters accusing a player they don't like in a public forum, where they can get away with basically everything, and a (supposedly) respected writer doing effectively the same in a column sponsored by a professional tennis magazine. One would expect him to have some solid basis for implying something so serious.


:yeah:

zimzim
01-13-2006, 06:50 PM
The problem is not Nadals build, but the short time in which it was achieved.

NicoFan
01-13-2006, 06:52 PM
His dark -- and completely unsubstantiated -- insinuations are creating free publicity for his blog, and you all are just snatching up the bait. :rolleyes:

Yes indeed. :rolleyes:

I saw Bodo on The Tennis Channel - he's all hot air. Everything he said was overturned by another guy on the panel (can't rememer the guys name) who actually did know something about the game.

And I have no respect for a man that would use a good kid like Rafa to promote himself.

I'm really tired of these doping issues.

Move on to another topic.

Other sports have REAL doping issues. These pretend ones in the tennis world border on the ridiculous. :lol:

sweetiepiedoll
01-13-2006, 06:52 PM
I find it kinda of funny that people are talking about Rafa and he isn't even playing the AO. I guess it is hard for folks to digest his reasons for withdrawal. But seriously, if Rafa withdraws from the RG (I know it is too soon to discuss the RG) then I will be worried.

NicoFan
01-13-2006, 06:54 PM
The problem is not Nadals build, but the short time in which it was achieved.

Its called hard work.

Deal.

mangoes
01-13-2006, 06:56 PM
I don't have to like it, I don't have to agree with him. He's saying he's allowed to say his opinion, which is all he did. It's not like he said "I know Nadal is a doper!!" He's merely thinking out loud about something that is arguably suspicious on its face. And it's nothing more than what many many people here have done, with Nadal, and several other players. Do I think Nadal has doped? I doubt it. Do I think that he has had some more bizarre injuries that have kept him out of the game for pretty long periods of time that could potentially look suspicious to some people? I do see how that line of thinking could potentially be plausible.


Deb, I'm actually shocked that you are defending this guy to this extent. We got into a heated "boardgument" some time back when I accused Blake of milking his "life's story :rolleyes: " for all the cheese in France. Others agreed with me and you were very annoyed. Imagine how you would feel if this same guy wrote an article implying those same things. Would you be saying:And it's nothing more than what many many people here have done, I doubt that................and this suggestion he is making about Nadal is a lot more serious than Blake's publicity stunt. What if this catches on and takes on a life of its own? Is that fair to Nadal? This type of accusation can follow a person. This man is a hateful individual............................. just my two cents :D

mangoes
01-13-2006, 06:58 PM
The problem is not Nadals build, but the short time in which it was achieved.

It's called hard work and discipline.

NicoFan
01-13-2006, 07:02 PM
This man is a hateful individual.

Deb has a right to her opinion, but I totally agree with your views on Bodo and what he wrote. And Bobo is a hateful individual. :mad: And as I said, after watching him, he's pure hot air. The only way he can make a living in writing is to bash people and tear them down. He does nothing to serve or promote the game.

mallorn
01-13-2006, 07:04 PM
Its called hard work.

Deal.
:yeah:

mangoes
01-13-2006, 07:05 PM
Deb has a right to her opinion, but I totally agree with your views on Bodo and what he wrote. And Bobo is a hateful individual. :mad: And as I said, after watching him, he's pure hot air. The only way he can make a living in writing is to bash people and tear them down. He does nothing to serve or promote the game.

I'm not saying Deb does not have a right to her opinion. Her opinion shocked me and I'm merely sharing my two cents in reaction to her opinion :) Otherwise, definitely, I also feel he is full of hot air. But these type of accusations can do damage.

DJ dropshot
01-13-2006, 07:13 PM
I've been a reader of Pete's Blog for a long time. He picks on everyone. He is often berated by his readers for singling a player out for one thing or another. These recent posts fall into that normal pattern to me and should be taken as just one of those posts to make you go hmmm.

In the end, I value the right to free speech, whether you're a poster, or a long-time tennis journalist in a blog format, over a player's reputation anyday. Take away that right, and it affects me. People looking at Nadal funny does not affect me. You won't see his thoughts on this on the newsstand - it's a blog.

Tangy, you 'spose he runs with scissors too? ;)

Deboogle!.
01-13-2006, 07:21 PM
Boy, would you be singing a different song if he had gone after Roddick. :rolleyes:Don't presume to tell me what I would or would not say.I see a difference between anonymous posters accusing a player they don't like in a public forum, where they can get away with basically everything, and a (supposedly) respected writer doing effectively the same in a column sponsored by a professional tennis magazine. One would expect him to have some solid basis for implying something so serious.I don't see much of a difference, so we will just agree to disagree on that since it's purely a matter of opinion :) Deb, I'm actually shocked that you are defending this guy to this extent. I'm not defending him at all, I'm merely defending his right to say his opinions. In fact I said outright earlier in this thread that I disagree with his substantive arguments, even though I do see how one could potentially come to the same line of thought that he presented. I've been a reader of Pete's Blog for a long time. He picks on everyone. He is often berated by his readers for singling a player out for one thing or another. These recent posts fall into that normal pattern to me and should be taken as just one of those posts to make you go hmmm.

In the end, I value the right to free speech, whether you're a poster, or a long-time tennis journalist in a blog format, over a player's reputation anyday. Take away that right, and it affects me. People looking at Nadal funny does not affect me. You won't see his thoughts on this on the newsstand - it's a blog.Exactly. Said it much better than I did :)

cobalt60
01-13-2006, 07:23 PM
Deb- I can see that legal mind at work here :lol:
Listen Bodo just likes to hear himself talk and spouts off without listening to himself or others. Let him and forget about it. :) Slander it is not as he is very careful.

mallorn
01-13-2006, 07:25 PM
In the end, I value the right to free speech, whether you're a poster, or a long-time tennis journalist in a blog format, over a player's reputation anyday. Take away that right, and it affects me.
What about a player's right to good reputation unless found guilty of doping by the official authorities?
To repeat, I don't deny his right to free speech. I just expect a widely-read journalist to be responsible for what they write and be prepared to come up with evidence for accusations like this.
People looking at Nadal funny does not affect me.
But it affects the player in question and his fans.
You won't see his thoughts on this on the newsstand - it's a blog.
Which makes it even worse - people all over the world can read it.

liptea
01-13-2006, 07:26 PM
Deb- I can see that legal mind at work here :lol:

haha, that's what I was thinking.

Deboogle!.
01-13-2006, 07:28 PM
I don't think anyone has a right to a good reputation. He has a right to be considered innocent in the eyes of the law, but not public opinion. Anyone who has half a brain will read what Bodo said and take it at face value, one man's interpretation of some events. No one should really care what the half-wits who actually believe what he says as fact think, and I bet my life Rafa doesn't care about those people either. If it ever got to a point where what this one person said on this one blog was affecting Rafa's reputation to the extent where it was harming his endorsements or whatever, then he would have a libel suit, but until then, it's just one guy spouting off his opinions, however unpopular they may be.

jtipson
01-13-2006, 07:28 PM
So, to summarize Peter's argument,

1. Participating, and potentially winning, A.O. should be a huge incentive for Nadal.
2. Nadal's doctor claimed that his foot was healed.
3. Nadal decided to withdraw from the A.O., therefore,

Nadal avoids the A.O. because he is doping.

The problem of course, as Mirkaland also pointed out is that point #2 does not imply that Nadal is ready to participate, even though he might be (technically) healed.

The other problem with that theory, which Bodo seems to have entirely ignored, is that skipping the AO does not exempt Nadal from drug testing - he may very well be subject to an out of competition test at any time.

If, on the other hand, Bodo is not suggesting that Nadal is skipping the AO to avoid a drug test, but instead has already been caught and is serving an unannounced ban kept quiet by the ATP/ITF, then he should say so. But I bet he dare not.


I find Bodo's blog interesting, and I'm very glad he brings up controversial subjects. However, more often than not when he gets on his horse about a controversial issue, he fails to notice point out one or more facts that are absolutely essential to a balanced understanding on the subject in question. He has lost a fair amount of credibility in my eyes in the last few months, and this lowers it further.

Castafiore
01-13-2006, 07:32 PM
That guy has a right to write this sort of stuff but others have the right to call him up on his opinion and to ask for some facts and a well thought out explanation before he mentions any names.

So, deb: you're right that he's free to do so but what's the problem with others giving their own opinion about this column? Why are you making such a point of this?

NicoFan
01-13-2006, 07:34 PM
What about a player's right to good reputation unless found guilty of doping by the official authorities?
To repeat, I don't deny his right to free speech. I just expect a widely-read journalist to be responsible for what they write and be prepared to come up with evidence for accusations like this.

But it affects the player in question and his fans.

Which makes it even worse - people all over the world can read it.

:yeah:

Freedom of speech is an awesome right - but it carries with it an awesome burden of responsibility.

This is irresponsible journalism written only to gain Bodo some notariety.

It affects the player, the fans, and ultimately, the game.

Rafa is a good kid, from a good family, and has brought back a lot of interest in the game last year. He doesn't deserve this type of shit. :mad:

Deboogle!.
01-13-2006, 07:35 PM
So, deb: you're right that he's free to do so but what's the problem with others giving their own opinion about this column? Why are you making such a point of this?I have no problem with that. People can say whatever they want about his column, I could care less... i haven't stopped anyone from saying whatever they want :shrug:

Castafiore
01-13-2006, 07:36 PM
I could care less
Great but I don't quite understand why you make such a point of telling others, who are merely giving their opinion, that this guy has a right to write down his opinion, facts or not. :confused:

mallorn
01-13-2006, 07:39 PM
I don't see much of a difference, so we will just agree to disagree on that since it's purely a matter of opinion :)
OK, let me try again. ;)

First, his opinion has much more sway with readers than anything posters like us write. He's supposed to be an expert with inside knowledge. That's what he suggested in his posts. The fact that he works for Tennis World also lends him credibility.

Second, he's not anonymous. He can be easily found and sued for libel if he posts unsubstantiated accusations. Therefore, one would expect him to know exactly what he's saying. Some readers may assume that his accusations are in fact true because otherwise he would not be posting them. However, at this point it seems he has no evidence whatsoever because he hasn't come up with any sensible answer to the many comments posted in his blog. That's why, I think, he only made insinuations in the first place, and now he denies ever accusing Rafa.

Deboogle!.
01-13-2006, 07:40 PM
Great but I don't quite understand why you make such a point of telling others, who are merely giving their opinion, that this guy has a right to write down his opinion, facts or not. :confused:Because he's being demonized and yes, some people WERE questioning his right to say such things. I happen to like the fact that, even though I disagree with him most of the time, he puts himself all the time and, however outlandish they may be, he keep putting his opinion out there and he accepts the fire he gets back in stride. So I will speak my opinion about that, even if it's different from most people here :)

nermo
01-13-2006, 07:40 PM
posted by jtipson
The other problem with that theory, which Bodo seems to have entirely ignored, is that skipping the AO does not exempt Nadal from drug testing - he may very well be subject to an out of competition test at any time.
Good point, i guess skipping the AO is not an evidence for anything like that.
That's exactly what i wanted to ask about in fact , can't players be tested randomly out of competition tourneys??

cobalt60
01-13-2006, 07:42 PM
Because he's being demonized and yes, some people WERE questioning his right to say such things. I happen to like the fact that, even though I disagree with him most of the time, he puts himself all the time and, however outlandish they may be, he keep putting his opinion out there and he accepts the fire he gets back in stride. So I will speak my opinion about that, even if it's different from most people here :)
And that is what freedom of speech is all about in all aspects.

Deboogle!.
01-13-2006, 07:43 PM
OK, let me try again. ;)

First, his opinion has much more sway with readers than anything posters like us write. He's supposed to be an expert with inside knowledge. That's what he suggested in his posts. The fact that he works for Tennis World also lends him credibility.

Second, he's not anonymous. He can be easily found and sued for libel if he posts unsubstantiated accusations. Therefore, one would expect him to know exactly what he's saying. Some readers may assume that his accusations are in fact true because otherwise he would not be posting them. However, at this point it seems he has no evidence whatsoever because he hasn't come up with any sensible answer to the many comments posted in his blog. That's why, I think, he only made insinuations in the first place, and now he denies ever accusing Rafa.Anyone can easily be found out for libel on the internet ;) I stand by what I said, that regardless of who he is and who he works for (which is Tennis Magazine, btw, of which players like Chris Evert and Pete Sampras are investors), anyone who could actually have the potential to seriously hurt Rafa's reputation is smart enough to know that when they read that, it's one man's opinion, regardless of who that man is. Anyone who's not smart enough and just believes it as fact.... who cares? What does it matter if some person in Oregon thinks it's true? I don't think Rafa will lose much sleep over it. I think he'll just go abut his business and keep passing doping tests and this will have no effect on the media or Rafa at all and will just pass over in a few days :)

mallorn
01-13-2006, 07:45 PM
I don't think anyone has a right to a good reputation. He has a right to be considered innocent in the eyes of the law, but not public opinion.
:eek: OMG, are you serious :confused:
P.S. I didn't mean "a right" in the legal sense.

Merton
01-13-2006, 07:45 PM
I'm not defending him at all, I'm merely defending his right to say his opinions. In fact I said outright earlier in this thread that I disagree with his substantive arguments, even though I do see how one could potentially come to the same line of thought that he presented.

You are extremely lenient saying that his arguments carry any substance at all. It is just a bunch of crap. Of course, he is entitled to his own crap, but we are entitled at calling it what it is.

Castafiore
01-13-2006, 07:48 PM
Because he's being demonized
oh come on, he wasn't demonized. :rolleyes: That word is a bit strong, isn't it?

People are questioning the content of his opinion, not the basic right to give it and they are annoyed to see this very public and well known blog without facts but just using the power of suggestion.

Freedom of speech works in two directions:
1. He gets to give his opinion.
2. I get to say that his opinion is :bs: if I don't agree with any of it and he can't back it up.


Again: people are NOT questioning his basic right to give his opinion but they were questioning the validity of the content of that opinion based on the speculation he offers.
That's a subtle difference perhaps but not unimportant to me. :)

DJ dropshot
01-13-2006, 07:49 PM
I guess I don't see his blog being written as a journalist. I picture him wearing his pajamas sipping coffee while he writes the blog, thinking out loud, happy to be free from the constraints of the "respectable journalist" that he wears 90% of the time.

Perhaps he can't carry this off as well as an unknown, and I often disagree with him, but I do enjoy a different perspective that spurs conversation moreso than the usual regurgitated AP stories.

I'm off to shake off the image of Bodo in his pajamas now, where's the shirtless thread again?

PamV
01-13-2006, 07:49 PM
Just curious what evidence Peter has to presume that the likes of Roddick, Nadal and Federer are possible dopers? Just because he likes a good conspiracy theory, or if one gets busted surely many others are doing it too (but being protected by the ATP/ITF)? And why single out Nadal? It would be stupid of him to play (even a grand slam) when he's not 100% healthy and has had very little match practice. What good is it to fly all the way to Melbourne just to exit early or possibly make an injury worse? :shrug:

He's saying that ANYONE could be a possible doper, so all should be scrutinized equally. What's wrong with that? The point is assumptions can't be made.

I didn't see where he said these guys are likely dopers. He said anyone from Federer on down could be. Isn't that true? Any one could be....but that doesn't mean he is.

mangoes
01-13-2006, 07:52 PM
Question................I'm in an out so I'm just catching up on this............. What is the difference between this guy writing this vs the Enquirer saying Tom Cruise is gay. Cruise sued and won. Apart from the volume of audience targeted, what is the difference in one being libel vs the other..................I'm not a lawyer, so I hope this makes sense..........plus I'm in a meeting keeping up with this conversation while I pretend to be writing a document on my labtop.... :lol: :lol: :lol: so try to read through my mistakes please :lol:

smucav
01-13-2006, 07:59 PM
The other problem with that theory, which Bodo seems to have entirely ignored, is that skipping the AO does not exempt Nadal from drug testing - he may very well be subject to an out of competition test at any time.I think this could be an allusion to one of the fallacies with the doping system: some substances that are considered performance-enhancing in-competition are not considered performance-enhancing out-of-competition. (e.g. the Kuznetsova doping non-issue of a year ago). One theory is that some dopers have been playing the system for years by sitting out for a few months with minor injuries allowing the prohibited substances to disappear entirely or decrease to a level that is acceptable for out-of-competition testing (& can be attributed to an OTC). With the increase in the number of prominent players being caught doping in the last year, anyone who was on this cycle would now be prompted to sit out longer than in the past to avoid the more stringent in-competition testing. I don't know enough about the exact science to know if this theory is entirely plausible, but it's been circulated enough (including by one of the commentors to Bodo's blog) that it's the first thing I thought of when I first read Bodo's somewhat cryptic statement. I don't know if that what he was alluding to, but it's not out of the realm of possibility.

sigmagirl91
01-13-2006, 08:00 PM
What is the difference between this guy writing this vs the Enquirer saying Tom Cruise is gay. Cruise sued and won.

It depends on how a player would view this opinion as it regards his overall self-concept. Maybe suing worked for Tom Cruise but may not for Rafa. :shrug:

Socket
01-13-2006, 08:07 PM
And that is what freedom of speech is all about in all aspects.
Not in the sense of a First Amendment right, which is much, much more narrow.

PamV
01-13-2006, 08:07 PM
I disagree when he says that the schedule isn't a problem and that players can simply not play that much. That might work for the lower ranked players but the guys in the top 5 or so are driven to play everything so they can maintain their ranks. Federer wouldn't have needed to play as much as he did if Nadal wasn't also winning just as much.

The schedule might have always been this full, but I don't think there were ever two players who each won 11 tournaments.

Merton
01-13-2006, 08:12 PM
I think this could be an allusion to one of the fallacies with the doping system: some substances that are considered performance-enhancing in-competition are not considered performance-enhancing out-of-competition. (e.g. the Kuznetsova doping non-issue of a year ago). One theory is that some dopers have been playing the system for years by sitting out for a few months with minor injuries allowing the prohibited substances to disappear entirely or decrease to a level that is acceptable for out-of-competition testing (& can be attributed to an OTC). With the increase in the number of prominent players being caught doping in the last year, anyone who was on this cycle would now be prompted to sit out longer than in the past to avoid the more stringent in-competition testing. I don't know enough about the exact science to know if this theory is entirely plausible, but it's been circulated enough (including by one of the commentors to Bodo's blog) that it's the first thing I thought of when I first read Bodo's somewhat cryptic statement. I don't know if that what he was alluding to, but it's not out of the realm of possibility.

I doubt that Bodo had the possibility you present in mind, he would mention it if that was the case. By the way, claiming that Nadal follows this policy of cleaning his organism by sitting out of competition, falls into a more subtle logical phallacy, which is Occam's Razor: "One should not increase, beyond what is necessary, the number of entities required to explain anything".

Nadal claims that he needs more time to prepare for competition. There is no reason to introduce additional variables without evidence. By the way, is Nadal the only doper that needs this cleaning procedure? Where are others that similarly need cleaning time?

madmanfool
01-13-2006, 08:14 PM
i just want to ask this: is it true the doctor gave him the green light to play? Sounds very strange. I don't know what that doctor said, but if he said something like, you can't make it worse by playing, i would be really disappointed in him for not playing.

Socket
01-13-2006, 08:17 PM
I doubt that Bodo had the possibility you present in mind, he would mention it if that was the case. By the way, claiming that Nadal follows this policy of cleaning his organism by sitting out of competition, falls into a more subtle logical phallacy, which is Occam's Razor: "One should not increase, beyond what is necessary, the number of entities required to explain anything".

Nadal claims that he needs more time to prepare for competition. There is no reason to introduce additional variables without evidence. By the way, is Nadal the only doper that needs this cleaning procedure? Where are others that similarly need cleaning time?
Perhaps we'll read more Bodo articles insinuating that so-and-so is cleansing his system of dope whenever a player does not play a tournament -- unless he's an old guy like Agassi (or somebody else that Bodo likes).

Merton
01-13-2006, 08:20 PM
Perhaps we'll read more Bodo articles insinuating that so-and-so is cleansing his system of dope whenever a player does not play a tournament -- unless he's an old guy like Agassi (or somebody else that Bodo likes).

This is spot on. By that "logic" one can always assume that injuries are fake and the truth is that the supposedly injured player just cleans his system from doping evidence.

mallorn
01-13-2006, 08:22 PM
i just want to ask this: is it true the doctor gave him the green light to play? Sounds very strange. I don't know what that doctor said, but if he said something like, you can't make it worse by playing, i would be really disappointed in him for not playing.
Here's a recent article explaining it (http://www.thinkspain.com/news-spain/10295)
World number two Rafael Nadal explained his reasons for pulling out of the first Grand Slam event of the year yesterday, "As a result of the new insoles, I've lost some mobility on court. I'm slower than normal, especially when I have to move to my right, and it's clear that if I travelled out to Australia, I would not be at my best physically and would be unable to produce my best tennis," he said.

Although the post traumatic arthritis sustained during the Madrid Masters at the end of last year in his right foot has now cleared up, the main problem now is the extra stress on the player's calves produced by the new shock absorber insoles, "although it's also true that my foot sometimes swells up, and I don't think that's normal," continued Nadal, "However, I must say that it does not hurt."

Although last year's Roland Garros champion came through a practice match against Gustavo Kuerten -who he beat easily- at the RCT installations in Barcelona on Monday, his uncle and manager, Toni Nadal, remains cautious, "I'm a pessimist. An hour and a half training session is not the same as a five set Grand Slam match. We're not going to achieve much by going all the way to Australia to get knocked out after a couple of rounds," he said.

Nadal started his season last year with two tournament wins (Costa do Saipe and Acapulco) on the South American clay court circuit, but will probably not be fit until February, when he is due to play in three hard court tournaments (Marseilles, Rotterdam and then Dubai), but may try to fit in a clay court tournament if fit to do so, he said.

madmanfool
01-13-2006, 08:24 PM
thx for the info

jtipson
01-13-2006, 08:28 PM
Isn't Nadal going to play Vina del Mar in the week after the AO?
I'll be interested to see Bodo's theories about that.

vincayou
01-13-2006, 08:52 PM
I fear that doping is a very generalized thing in any sport nowadays anyway. Sadly.

Freeze their sample and come back when you can test them even if it's 10 years later. That's the only way to know. Accuse someone with the risk of being wrong is not the way to do IMO.

soraya
01-13-2006, 08:54 PM
By the way, the argument of Peter does not defer in quality to the argument of primadona: Starting from a weak premise, one can "prove" whatever he likes. The scary thing is that Peter Bodo appears influential and "saying his opinion" may divert resources from the real issue of doping. It is much easier to provide conspiracy theories and offer unsubstantiated opinions than to tackle the real issues.

your argument has some merits regarding Peter influence in the tennis arena. One thing is MTF's posters assumptions about different players doping, another is a known tennis pundit's opinions available to all to read, which in my opinion has more weight.

Lopaka
01-13-2006, 09:17 PM
Inuendo and Speculation!

Reading Mr Bodo's blog I felt like I was standing in the suppermarket check out line.

All I missed was a headline announcing Roger is from Mars and Rafa is from another Galaxy.

The answer I have for Mr Bodo is

**VAMOS RAFAEL**

NicoFan
01-13-2006, 09:36 PM
Inuendo and Speculation!

Reading Mr Bodo's blog I felt like I was standing in the suppermarket check out line.

All I missed was a headline announcing Roger is from Mars and Rafa is from another Galaxy.

The answer I have for Mr Bodo is

**VAMOS RAFAEL**

:lol:

I was just coming on to post the same thing.

There's good investigative reporting...and there's tabloid journalism.

This is tabloid journalism.

And about first amendment rights of freedom of speech - there are limits, and newspapers and magazines are sued all the time for stepping over the line.

I don't think that Boda committed libel or slander - but this article is journalism at its lowest.

Its disrespectful to Rafa and the hard work he's put in over the years.

Sparko1030
01-13-2006, 09:44 PM
Not to make accusations or anything, but it is a favorite hobby of mine to feature random photographs of sports figures before they became who and what they are and after they became that. The difference is almost startling, absolutely amazing, merely a coincidence. Move along.

http://im.rediff.com/sports/2003/jun/27nadal.jpg
http://onlineathens.com/images/060105/18523_512.jpg
http://images.auctionhelper.com/images/9680/bondserrorstarbest.jpg

http://www.isbl.com/isbl_2004/gazette/bondsleft1.gif

Well, couldnt a little thing called puberty account for the differnce in Nadal's case....seems you really can't compare the body of a 10 yr old to a 15 yr old to an adult....show two pics of Nadal after puberty and that would be a better comparison. :) Or start comparing all player's teen age bodies vs their adult bodies. I think there would be a big difference in all cases....

alelysafina
01-13-2006, 09:51 PM
Well, couldnt a little thing called puberty account for the differnce in Nadal's case....seems you really can't compare the body of a 10 yr old to a 15 yr old to an adult....show two pics of Nadal after puberty and that would be a better comparison. :) Or start comparing all player's teen age bodies vs their adult bodies. I think there would be a big difference in all cases....

Also, the sleeves/ no sleeves factor, the fact that one is farther away and the other is closer, and they are at different angles.

Lopaka
01-13-2006, 10:24 PM
Rafa must have got the placebos. :lol:

Don't look like no super body builder here.

http://vamosrafael.smugmug.com/photos/50431694-M.jpg

http://vamosrafael.smugmug.com/photos/46998747-M.jpg

Rafa being measured for Madrid Wax Museum Statue (ca. 12/05)

nobama
01-13-2006, 11:11 PM
Nadal? I'm still waiting for the Agassi haters to come up with concrete proof that he doped as they so strongly believe.

Guess I'll be waiting another lifetime longer. :)Don't you know everybody dopes but the top players get away with it because the ATP/ITF protect them. ;)

nobama
01-13-2006, 11:21 PM
He's saying that ANYONE could be a possible doper, so all should be scrutinized equally. What's wrong with that? The point is assumptions can't be made.

I didn't see where he said these guys are likely dopers. He said anyone from Federer on down could be. Isn't that true? Any one could be....but that doesn't mean he is.Ok that is true, but what's the point of bringing it up? Has Rafa or Roger or Andy (the ones he mentioned by name) done anything that would cause people to wonder if they're doping? Of course not. But some player on the WTA gets caught, so now we're supposed to wonder out loud all players are doping? Of course he didn't outright accuse any one of these guys, but his comments give the impression he wouldn't be shocked in the least if they were, and I don't know on what basis he's coming to that conclusion. I don't agree with this guilt (or possibility of guilt) by association.

Socket
01-13-2006, 11:24 PM
Personally, I think that anybody who writes a tennis blog must be smoking crack. Otherwise, they'd be able to get a real job. What other logical explanation is there?

:angel:

mangoes
01-13-2006, 11:28 PM
Personally, I think that anybody who writes a tennis blog must be smoking crack. Otherwise, they'd be able to get a real job. What other logical explanation is there?

:angel:


:lol: :lol: Maybe it's his hobby :confused:

PamV
01-13-2006, 11:39 PM
Ok that is true, but what's the point of bringing it up? Has Rafa or Roger or Andy (the ones he mentioned by name) done anything that would cause people to wonder if they're doping? Of course not. But some player on the WTA gets caught, so now we're supposed to wonder out loud all players are doping? Of course he didn't outright accuse any one of these guys, but his comments give the impression he wouldn't be shocked in the least if they were, and I don't know on what basis he's coming to that conclusion. I don't agree with this guilt (or possibility of guilt) by association.

The article is rather long and convoluted, it's hard to tell what the point is. Could this be the point he is trying to make:

"My gut feeling is that the Argies, while not exactly scapegoats, are merely the dumb losers who got busted while a lot of other dopers are going free. The tip of the iceberg is still part of the iceberg, right?"

alfonsojose
01-13-2006, 11:53 PM
Nobody has proves, but those muscles, runing down everything :scratch:

tennisvideos
01-13-2006, 11:54 PM
It would not surprise me in the slightest if MOST of the tour - men AND women are on something. Same with Olympic (and many other various) athletes.

High powered corporations and various bodies have a history of cover ups - take a look at the East German doping system that took place in the 70s and 80s - and has only been uncovered some 20 years later. And I am sure there are many other countries that have done the same.

Nothing in this world would surprise me in the least. And sports heroes get paid an astronomical amount of money. The temptation must be great.

It doesn't matter in the long run if all are allowed to play on an equal field. But why the Argentinians get caught out and not the others is what surprises me.

Merton
01-13-2006, 11:57 PM
The incentives for doping are not as obvious as, say, in cycling or track and field. The monitoring is not transparent to say the least. It could be the case that the situation is as in the 100m race in the Seoul Olympics and everybody is doping. It could be that tennis is relatively dope-free. However, the Bodo article does not even start getting at the matter. On the contrary, posing unsubstantiated allegations diverts attention away from the true issues.

nobama
01-14-2006, 12:01 AM
It doesn't matter in the long run if all are allowed to play on an equal field. But why the Argentinians get caught out and not the others is what surprises me.Who exactly are you referring to?

nobama
01-14-2006, 12:07 AM
The article is rather long and convoluted, it's hard to tell what the point is. Could this be the point he is trying to make:

"My gut feeling is that the Argies, while not exactly scapegoats, are merely the dumb losers who got busted while a lot of other dopers are going free. The tip of the iceberg is still part of the iceberg, right?"Ok that's my point. Some Argies got busted so that means the tour is full of dopers? What evidence does he have to support the claim that "a lot of other dopers are going free"? Just his gut feeling? I'm sorry but journalists shouldn't be making acusations or insinuating things unless they have the facts to back it up. And there was nothing in the way of facts in his recent blog entires to support his suspicions about Nadal. Like I said, I don't agree with this guilt by association, or if one person is doing it surely everyone else is too. To cop one of Peter's phrases, that's a bunch of hooey.

tennisvideos
01-14-2006, 12:09 AM
Who exactly are you referring to?

I was wondering myself that if doping is rife on the tour, which it wouldn't surprise me, why are the Argentinians caught and not the others? Is it because they have been targetted - surely they aren't the only ones doing it?

I have no answers to any of this, all I am saying is that it wouldn't surprise me if doping is rife on the mens and womens tour, and rife in many other sports as well. Would not surprise me in the slightest. It would be niaive to think it doesn't happen and even more so to think that sporting bodies don't try to cover up things of this nature to protect the image of their sports.

Federerthebest
01-14-2006, 12:27 AM
I already suggested this ages ago. Nadal's spate of withdrawals is very suspicious; the ITF is more than likely covering up his doping, it would be disastarous for the game if they did not.

heya
01-14-2006, 12:37 AM
If that many Argentines doped, then we would have a lot of superman champions on the tour. Maybe Hewitt can sneak steroids in his drink. God knows, he had enough distractions... Baby, wife, Kim, most Federer matches, Americans (except fans), foot faults, umpires, bad line calls, spitting Argentines + violent Spanish players.

Socket
01-14-2006, 12:41 AM
If that many Argentines doped, then we would have a lot of superman champions on the tour. Maybe Hewitt can sneak steroids in his drink. God knows, he had enough distractions... Baby, wife, Kim, most Federer matches, Americans (except fans), foot faults, umpires, bad line calls, spitting Argentines + violent Spanish players.
You're truly obsessed with Lleyton, aren't you? Your rants are just hysterical! :rolls:

amierin
01-14-2006, 12:49 AM
Peter Bodo is trying to deflect attention from the persistent rumors about the American demi-god Saint Andre.

If anyone cares to look at pictures of Rafa from a youngster when he was way taller and heavier than his peers and look at his uncle Miguel Angel who was also nick named the Bull when he came on the football scene at about the same age Rafa has, his father and Uncle Toni he has come by that build IMO strictly through genetics.

If Rafa was suspected of doping that would be front page news. It's just like people saying Serena is fat. She is a big boned woman and while she has gained weight she's not doing Jenny Craig commercials. Rafa is built like a brick sh**-house pure and simple.

There is more visual evidence of St Andre being on the juice than Nadal who almost collapsed from exhaustion after playing DC and Madrid.

Bad Religion
01-14-2006, 12:54 AM
I accuse to Peter Bodo for smoke marijuana while he writes his columns . :D :D

Guilty

Federerthebest
01-14-2006, 12:56 AM
Rafa is built like a brick sh**-house pure and simple.

Lol, people don't come to Nadal's current build through 'genetics'. Get a clue you fool. Nadal has either got the body he has through spending a large amount of time in the gym, or through performance-enhancing drugs.

nobama
01-14-2006, 01:02 AM
I already suggested this ages ago. Nadal's spate of withdrawals is very suspicious; the ITF is more than likely covering up his doping, it would be disastarous for the game if they did not.You're full of shit.

Conita
01-14-2006, 01:04 AM
I accuse to Peter Bodo for smoke marijuana while he writes his columns . :D :D

Guilty

that is the best comment i've read in this thread!!
lol

:D:D:D


ps: I think bodo is just jellous of rafa's pecs... seriously dude get a real job and pleaseeeeeeeeee stop saying every 2 seconds u r a seriously journalist and all that crap that no one really cares about.

ps: if all players are drugies surelly it will make no difference since they r all on drugs they r all on that higher level and yet still nadal and federer got 11 titles when others didnt even get 1 so make us all a favour and SHUT UP!!!

Chloe le Bopper
01-14-2006, 01:45 AM
You're full of shit.
Federethebest is a dogfucker, in case you hadn't noticed ;)

Chloe le Bopper
01-14-2006, 01:52 AM
Not to make accusations or anything, but it is a favorite hobby of mine to feature random photographs of sports figures before they became who and what they are and after they became that. The difference is almost startling, absolutely amazing, merely a coincidence. Move along.

http://im.rediff.com/sports/2003/jun/27nadal.jpg
http://onlineathens.com/images/060105/18523_512.jpg
http://images.auctionhelper.com/images/9680/bondserrorstarbest.jpg

http://www.isbl.com/isbl_2004/gazette/bondsleft1.gif
If you're looking to compare photos of a younger Rafa to the current Rafa (even as a "joke"), you would be wise to use one where he's actually, oh, I don't know... bending his arm in such a way that the camera captures his bicep. Like, I don't know.... this one? Taken before the one that you actually used:

http://a2.cpimg.com/image/3E/A7/19845182-225b-0190014B-.jpg

Moving right along indeed.

Merton
01-14-2006, 02:03 AM
Just out of curiosity, where was the first photo of Nadal taken at? Is that Wimbledon 2003?

amierin
01-14-2006, 02:05 AM
If you're looking to compare photos of a younger Rafa to the current Rafa (even as a "joke"), you would be wise to use one where he's actually, oh, I don't know... bending his arm in such a way that the camera captures his bicep. Like, I don't know.... this one? Taken before the one that you actually used:

http://a2.cpimg.com/image/3E/A7/19845182-225b-0190014B-.jpg

Moving right along indeed.

Just for kicks and giggles someone should show Sampras serving arm as opposed to his non serving arm when he was at his peak.

Hurley
01-14-2006, 02:08 AM
Nobody has proves, but those muscles, runing down everything :scratch:

Um...if you're not planning on acquiring muscles or running a lot, I think there are millions of occupations more suited for you than "professional tennis player."

Liverpool4ever
01-14-2006, 02:33 AM
Though Nadal is far from my favourite player I don't believe he took has ever taken drugs. As said before he comes from very big family. His uncle was known as the 'Beast of Barcelona' and was regarded by many to be the strongest man in Spanish football. Thus Iam not surprised in the least that his nephew should be as impressive physically.

One thing I disagree with is people, who claim that Nadal's muscles are normal for someone his age. Maybe being English I have a different perspective of the size of a 18 year old sportsmen, but I have not even in rugby encountered many 18 year olds as big as Nadal . His fitness is also vastly superior to most sportsmen his age. Compare his fitness levels to the like of Berdych, Murray, Gasquet and even Monflis and this will become very apparent.

To conclude I would like to repeat I have no doubt that Nadal is clean. Nadal is just one of the physically best sportsmen in the world for his age or any age.

admiralpye
01-14-2006, 03:26 AM
Not to make accusations or anything, but it is a favorite hobby of mine to feature random photographs of sports figures before they became who and what they are and after they became that. The difference is almost startling, absolutely amazing, merely a coincidence. Move along.

http://im.rediff.com/sports/2003/jun/27nadal.jpg
http://onlineathens.com/images/060105/18523_512.jpg
http://images.auctionhelper.com/images/9680/bondserrorstarbest.jpg

http://www.isbl.com/isbl_2004/gazette/bondsleft1.gif

Nadal is indeed photogenic and looks really "big" in the videos and photos. Imagine my surprise when I saw him in Shanghai. His physique is actually SLIM and his muscles aren't THAT "unreal." He looks like a normal, good looking and fit 19 year old. Kind of different from the photos.

Just telling you what I saw.

Chloe le Bopper
01-14-2006, 03:35 AM
Just out of curiosity, where was the first photo of Nadal taken at? Is that Wimbledon 2003?


Prior to Wimbledon 2003, after he hurt his arm before RG.

mangoes
01-14-2006, 04:11 AM
Lol, people don't come to Nadal's current build through 'genetics'. Get a clue you fool. Nadal has either got the body he has through spending a large amount of time in the gym, or through performance-enhancing drugs.


Very wrong, genetics does play a very big role. If you are predispositioned to have an extremely slim body build, no matter how much you exercise, you won't look like Rafa.

World Beater
01-14-2006, 04:22 AM
Very wrong, maybe you weren't blessed with a great body, but people do get it..............and genetics does play a role. So, when I go to the gym tomorrow, I should assume that every guy in there with a great body is using performance enhancing drugs...........and it has nothing to do with the fact that they are in the gym almost every day..................friggin idiot.........well the men I know that have great bodies don't take enhancing drugs, they work hard even watching their diet closely.

genetics has more to do with bone structure and body frame rather than muscle mass.

people dont just grow with large muscles as some byproduct, you have to train them Lebron James is a great example of a kid who has such a frame, and through both gym work and sports his body has responded.

mangoes
01-14-2006, 04:25 AM
genetics has more to do with bone structure and body frame rather than muscle mass.

people dont just grow with large muscles as some byproduct, you have to train them Lebron James is a great example of a kid who has such a frame, and through both gym work and sports his body has responded.


I'm not saying that, but if you're predispositioned to have an extremely slim body mass, no amount of exercise will give you a well built body..........but, I do agree with what you are saying, it is something that has to be worked at............. Anyway, I pressed reply to the wrong message.......... :lol:

World Beater
01-14-2006, 04:30 AM
I'm not saying that, but if you're predispositioned to have an extremely slim body mass, no amount of exercise will give you a well built body..........but, I do agree with what you are saying, it is something that has to be worked at............. Anyway, I pressed reply to the wrong message.......... :lol:

but see you are saying it.

if you are predispositioned to have a small body frame, then yes, the body can only build so much muscle.

but i havent heard of anyone predispositioned to having slim body mass irrespective of the frame.

mangoes
01-14-2006, 04:32 AM
but see you are saying it.

if you are predispositioned to have a small body frame, then yes, the body can only build so much muscle.

but i havent heard of anyone predispositioned to having slim body mass irrespective of the frame.


No, no, I'm not saying that........ :lol: ............. frame has everything to do with it........Rafa has a great frame which comes from genetics. I'm saying you can't have that type of muscle build without genetics, meaning getting the frame.............being specific now........ :lol:

Federerthebest
01-14-2006, 04:35 AM
Very wrong, genetics does play a very big role. If you are predispositioned to have an extremely slim body build, no matter how much you exercise, you won't look like Rafa.

what are you talking about buddy? the person to whom i replied was saying that nadal's muscles are not abnormal because they may be explained by genetics. that is incorrect. if bodo were insinuating nada is doping because he has a broad frame, then he would have to similarly insinuate that almost every other tennis-player is a doper.

Federerthebest
01-14-2006, 04:36 AM
Federethebest is a dogfucker, in case you hadn't noticed

lol, 'dogfucker'. very clever. ;) good to see what you regard as your rapier-wit is still as razor-sharp as ever. :worship:

World Beater
01-14-2006, 04:38 AM
No, no, I'm not saying that........ :lol: ............. frame has everything to do with it........Rafa has a great frame.

ok. but you werent so clear. :)

rafa has a very stocky build, one that is conducive to muscle growth.

his ass is almost as large as serena's. thick calves.

taller players usually have a harder time building as much muscle.

safin is very powerful but doesnt have muscles that are as defined.

there are freaks though : basketball players.

mangoes
01-14-2006, 04:40 AM
ok. but you werent so clear. :)

rafa has a very stocky build, one that is conducive to muscle growth.

his ass is almost as large as serena's. thick calves.

taller players usually have a harder time building as much muscle.

safin is very powerful but doesnt have muscles that are as defined.

there are freaks though : basketball players.


He has a great, fantastic butt.......... :lol: .. anyway, goodnight and have a great weekend.

Clara Bow
01-14-2006, 06:00 AM
Peter Bodo's opinion piece is rather sloppy. He insinuates something, but never clearly says what it is. He questions why Nadal withdrew- but does not even bother to post the Nadal camp's explantion- which I thought was quite valid and made good sense.

And I've said it before and I'll say it again- Nadal has muscles, but he is not the freak of nature that some people try to imply that he is.
1) He has been growing in physique for the past 2 or 3 years, which ....gasp...can happen to a male between the ages of 16 - 19
2) He comes from a family that tends to have more muscular physiques - for example - his uncle
3) He is actually not that big! People who have seen him in person say this, and if you see pictures of him shirtless it shows it as well.
4) There are other 19 year old athletes and non-athletes out there with bigger physiques. (Except I guess in the UK. ;))

ExpectedWinner
01-14-2006, 07:11 AM
I'm too lazy to read the whole thread. So, what am I supposed to think when someone (not badly injured) withdraws from the tournament? :confused:

1. They are doped and afraid to be caught

2. They are not doped enough to compete at the moment but they'll be fully loaded by the next tournament, lol

3. They are "cooking" (searching/trying a new drug that can not be recognized in modern labaratories)

4. They were cought in the past. ATP covered them but forced to serve a "silent" ban.

MariaV
01-14-2006, 07:35 AM
OK, I'm not gonna read the whole thread now too, just I wanted to say - yeah, he has the right to say what's on his mind but he definitely has no right to make accusations of doping without any proof. I think it's called libel. I would sue if I were a top athlete and accused of doping without any proof.

And yeah, according to him an athlete should start competing again as soon as his injury's healed, completely unprepaired and risking sustaining another injury. :rolleyes: Great logic Peter! :rolleyes:

propi
01-14-2006, 08:31 AM
I've heard this has been speculated on in the Argentine press - Nadal's absence. Now Bodo - hmmm, wonder what Nadal's response will be?
Do you really believe Rafa will give importance and answer this pile of crap????
He has better things to do, like ironing his socks or playing to tea time with her little sister.

Phunkadelicious
01-14-2006, 09:05 AM
All this speculation about Nadal doping has me wondering abotu this hypothetical:

Say both Puerta and Rafa were caught for doping after the final was played. Obviously Rafa would be stripped of his crown, but since Puerta would also in turn be banned, who would the winner be?

Phunkadelicious
01-14-2006, 09:06 AM
Oh and for the record, this guy does have the RIGHT to say what he said. But that doesn't mean he should have, and its irresponsible to make such a claim, without at least a little evidence. And I highly doubt that Rafa is a doper.

Now Federer, there's a different story....


I KID I KID!

Dirk
01-14-2006, 10:29 AM
They test you at all times, Nadal knows he could be tested while resting at home. I don't think there is anything going on here.

Phunkadelicious
01-14-2006, 10:39 AM
I'm too lazy to read the whole thread. So, what am I supposed to think when someone (not badly injured) withdraws from the tournament? :confused:

1. They are doped and afraid to be caught

2. They are not doped enough to compete at the moment but they'll be fully loaded by the next tournament, lol

3. They are "cooking" (searching/trying a new drug that can not be recognized in modern labaratories)

4. They were cought in the past. ATP covered them but forced to serve a "silent" ban.
You forgot planning on being abducted by aliens, but returned safely in time for their next commitment.

nobama
01-14-2006, 01:22 PM
Oh and for the record, this guy does have the RIGHT to say what he said. But that doesn't mean he should have, and its irresponsible to make such a claim, without at least a little evidence. And I highly doubt that Rafa is a doper.

Now Federer, there's a different story....


I KID I KID!Well he didn't outright say he thinks Nadal is a doper. But the insinuation is there because he questions Rafa's injury and why he's not playing AO. Basically what he said is wrong/unfair not to think that any one could be a doper - Nadal, Roddick, Federer, whoever. I suppose he thinks your naive if you don't think everyone - even the top players could be dopers. But I don't know why a cloud of suspicion should hang over every player just because a few were caught? Does one rotten apple make the whole bag rotten?

mrpotatoman
01-14-2006, 03:26 PM
Oh boy I should have stayed away from this place. Did you all read the same blog/article I read? You are all reading into it more than it is. He has a right to write his article; take it just for that and go on. The fanatics here are at it again. Defending Rafa? Does he need it? Would he even want it? Could he care less? NO!
And not long ago I asked folks for their favorites so I could make decisions about who to follow. You know what? I will follow those players here who don't have teenyboppers, fanatics or nuts following them. End.

mallorn
01-14-2006, 04:58 PM
Oh boy I should have stayed away from this place. Did you all read the same blog/article I read? You are all reading into it more than it is. He has a right to write his article; take it just for that and go on. The fanatics here are at it again. Defending Rafa? Does he need it? Would he even want it? Could he care less? NO!
What's with the patronising tone? If you think he has the right to speak his mind, why are you attacking others for doing so? And how the hell do you know what Rafa would want? :rolleyes:

And not long ago I asked folks for their favorites so I could make decisions about who to follow. You know what? I will follow those players here who don't have teenyboppers, fanatics or nuts following them. End.
You'll decide who to follow based on other people's opinions? Don’t you know what kind of tennis/which players you like? You will not support a player with fanatic or nutty followers? I guess that excludes not only all the top guys but even Adam Chadaj. :p Good luck finding such a player though. :wavey:

Skyward
01-14-2006, 05:50 PM
Good luck finding such a player though.

Davydenko, Stepanek, Hanescu...

mallorn
01-14-2006, 06:07 PM
Davydenko, Stepanek, Hanescu...
Have you been to Davydenko's forum yet? ;)
There's a poster here called Radeklover. :p
And Hanescu has a thread called VICTOR HANESCU - born to be VICTORious :lol: (I admit it's not a very long or nutty one).
So I'm not sure they meet this guy's criteria.
I'm not saying that there are no such players, though. :wavey:

superpinkone37
01-14-2006, 07:03 PM
His foot may be technically "healed" but that doesn't mean it it ready for the professional tour. Isn't it better than he wait to be sure he is cofortable playing on his foot than coming back too soon?

I understand the question about doping, but I don't buy into. I respect Bodo not being afraid to say anything though lol.

AndyNonomous
09-13-2014, 01:46 AM
All this speculation about Nadal doping has me wondering abotu this hypothetical:

Say both Puerta and Rafa were caught for doping after the final was played. Obviously Rafa would be stripped of his crown, but since Puerta would also in turn be banned, who would the winner be?

I don't know what the answer to this question is. :confused:

Does somebody know ?

castle007
09-13-2014, 02:06 AM
I don't know what the answer to this question is. :confused:

Does somebody know ?

No one would be crowned as the winner for that year. Anyways, why did you bump an 8 years old thread? :confused:

AndyNonomous
09-13-2014, 02:16 AM
No one would be crowned as the winner for that year. Anyways, why did you bump an 8 years old thread? :confused:

To show how some things never change. ;)

theseth1119
09-13-2014, 03:24 AM
This is easy, the 2 SFists would have a match right away to duke it out for the title, so it would be...... Rogie vs. Davydenko for the 2005 FO title.

Kat_YYZ
09-13-2014, 05:23 AM
fascinating thread. I didn't really know that Nadal didn't play AO 2006 (or if I knew it at the time, I soon forgot it after).

Gosh, this forum was so much more polite 8 years ago!

JohnKramer
09-13-2014, 06:04 AM
It’s theoretically a day off for me as I gear up to cover the Australian Open (I’ll be blogging live from Melbourne during Week Two of the season’s first Grand Slam). But the strikingly thoughtful responses and comments to my last post, along with some of the critical, entirely legitimate questions they raise, call for some clarifications and further comments.

First of all, keep in mind that the doper's best friend is the benumbing complexity and unavoidable ambiguity of the anti-doping effort. A few months ago, I linked to this Outside magazine story that makes painfully clear how difficult it is for the dope police to keep up with the bent doctors and juicers; in fact, the effort to police the use of performance enhancing drugs is borderline futile.

But what are you going to do? Allow doping? Talk the talk, but look the other way as soon as there’s even a hint of a problem (as I believe the ATP and WTA have done for years)?

Some of you would like me to delve into the science of doping, and/or present more facts and concrete evidence instead of speculating and trafficking in innuendo. Here’s a question for you: When was the last time a newspaper or magazine broke a major doping story? The recent spate of exclusives from the French sports daily, L’Equipe, don’t count—all they did was jump the gun on announcing positive test results for some athletes thanks to a friendly leaker somewhere in the anti-doping establishment.

Many major, resource-rich newspapers and magazines in this country and abroad employ full-time, highly trained investigative reporters—something I am not. Yet even they have broken precious few primary-level doping stories— that is, I don’t know of any that actually discovered that someone was doping, and proved it. What stories we have all seem to be driven by either announced test results or individuals stepping forward to confess—or fire the first salvos of accusation. This tells you how tough it is to catch a doper red-handed, or to make specific, supportable accusations.

In fact—and this is a constant theme of mine—doping is such an ambiguous subject that the real danger lies in falling into a train of thought that runs something like this: We know doping exists. We haven’t caught anyone doping. Therefore, everyone must be doping. That’s the allure of conspiracy theories—the very lack of evidence becomes a form of evidence.

Why have I wandered into this morass, then? The answer has two related parts:

First of all, at this site I am a blogger—an opinion journalist and commentator. I have neither the mandate nor the responsibility to deal strictly and exclusively with facts and/or the thoughts or opinions of others about those facts. At the same time, though, my opinion cannot ignore or fly in the face of what facts exist. The moment that the facts and my opinion are in demonstrable conflict, my opinions is invalidated. Two plus two equals four, we’ve all agreed; if I insist it adds up to five, that’s my problem, not the number four’s.

Secondly, I am supposed to be a kind of interface between tennis fans and the pro game. Someone higher up in the food chain has decided that it’s worth paying me to comment on the pro game for the benefit of the folks who troll TENNIS.com and/or read TENNIS Magazine, which makes it incumbent on me to report what people in the game are thinking and saying. Trust me: Doping is a burning, omnipresent topic on the pro tour these days. I owe it to you to tackle it, and I am proud that as a blogger I can do that in a way that a newspaper reporter cannot.

Now, for some specific issues. I fear the worst about doping because it appears that the floodgates of bad news have been opened by the change in the anti-drug testing protocols. The player organizations (ATP and WTA) are no longer in charge of testing; when they were, all was quiet on the doping front. It's a different landscape now. You can read why and how this came about at this page of the ITF’s anti-doping website.

Is it mere coincidence that we’ve had a sudden explosion of positive tests? Why have the increasingly puzzling scheduling habits of so many players suddenly become front-burner issues? Draw back and look at this in perspective; it seems to me that we’re in the midst of an undeclared, unannounced shake-up.

The ITF anti-doping website will give you access to lots of valuable information on doping, if you’re interested in details on banned substances, penalties, procedures, etc. This just isn’t an area in which it makes much sense for me to play the expert. Read that article I linked to in Outside; it’s a great primer on the nature of the doping problem.

When it comes to the players, nobody, but nobody, is above suspicion; this doesn’t mean that I suspect everyone—or, for that matter, anyone. It just means that I don’t believe anyone is immune to the temptation of dabbling in performance-enhancing drugs. Top pro athletes, like fabulously wealthy venture capitalists, exist in a different world. They are playing for much higher stakes, with much deeper pockets, which opens up possibilities unimaginable to many of us. I’ll never forget Boris Becker, a close friend, telling me about the transfusions of calf blood he took as part of his drive to remain “fresh” for the game (it was not illegal) when he was making a big push for the No. 1 ranking. Boris was very matter-of-fact and blasé about it; he had to do what he had to do. But it struck me as pure science fiction.

So, as far as I’m concerned, everyone from Roger Federer on down to the most desperate journeyman is a potential doper. It just wouldn’t be fair to look at it any other way. In this regard, some readers accused me of “protecting” Andre Agassi while planting suspicions about Rafael Nadal when I analyzed their withdrawals from the Australian Open yesterday.

The fact is that up-and-coming champs and aging ones are vastly different, and driven by vastly different priorities. I’m not going to rehash the details, but I’ll say that in ways related strictly to his career and family life, it makes a lot of sense, in lots of different ways, for Agassi to skip the Australian Open and start his year a full two months after his younger rivals.

By contrast, the upcoming Grand Slam event offers Nadal his best shot at winning a major on a surface other than clay, and moving one step closer to challenging Federer’s ascendancy—something Agassi is unlikely to do in the foreseeable future.

Given the amount of time he’s had off and the fact that Nadal’s own doctor said in an official ATP press release that his foot is healed, I find his withdrawal from an event that will be without the defending champ, Safin, or Agassi, baffling.

Whether or not there's anything more to this story, I can't say. But I'm going to make a point in Australia to pin down some folks on some of the more compelling issues—like whether or not it's possible to duck out-of-competition testing by simply not answering the door when the testers come around.
__________________

MarkChan
09-13-2014, 06:06 AM
How did Fraud stay injury-free and play matches all season long at 33 yr-old like what he did at the age of 20?

JohnKramer
09-13-2014, 06:07 AM
How did Fraud stay injury-free and play matches all season long at 33 yr-old like what he did at the age of 20?

Thats a super mystery.

Moonball Pusher
09-13-2014, 06:11 AM
Disgusting thread.

Dougie
09-13-2014, 06:13 AM
Thats a super mystery.

Not a mystery at all. He has a great technique that is less consuming than most of the other top players´, he doesn´t slide and strecth like many others. And if you think he plays the same schedule than he did 13 years ago, look again. He takes longer breaks and skips more tournaments.

JohnKramer
09-13-2014, 06:24 AM
Not a mystery at all. He has a great technique that is less consuming than most of the other top players´, he doesn´t slide and strecth like many others. And if you think he plays the same schedule than he did 13 years ago, look again. He takes longer breaks and skips more tournaments.

Technique?

There are so many players (who don't stretch and slide) who has similar style as federer...they all get tired

Backhand Smash
09-13-2014, 06:36 AM
Because he is a spartan warrior, a real samurai and matador, unlike that cheating fraud Nadal?

JohnKramer
09-13-2014, 06:51 AM
Because he is a spartan warrior, a real samurai and matador, unlike that cheating fraud Nadal?

LOL
:haha:

Kateoz
09-13-2014, 06:59 AM
The Brodo article dates from 2006!

Years later and who has the long suspicious absences - certainly not Federer.

When his form dips or he loses unexpectedly, he keeps playing anyway. When it returns, as it has this year, it has happened gradually, and with noticeable changes in technique/equipment as obvious contributors. And he is displaying the signs of age, in his now unreliable serve and groundstrokes, and tiring in five setters.

It is pretty obvious to any but the most blind that Federer's technique, combined with early lessons learnt from the combination of his one serious bout of injury and a girlfriend forced to retire because of it has stood him in good stead. He has always scheduled carefully, by all accounts trained hard but smart.

Federer obviously has some luck on his side in terms of genetics, but he has managed himself carefully as well, and I'm with those who think he will be one of the true outliers in the sport, still going strong for a good few more years yet.

There are some rather more obvious contenders for scrutiny on this front...

Nole fan
09-13-2014, 07:01 AM
Oh sorry when I read Fraud I took it for granted you were talking about Nadal?

masterclass
09-13-2014, 07:07 AM
Embarrassing thread. You obviously are trying to bait. No source. No nothing. Title misrepresents the contents. First, you have to learn how to read more than a word here or there to understand an entire sentence.

Bodo said way back when, that EVERYONE is a potential doper, from Federer to the journeyman. This is not an accusation, it is really not much at all. In other words, he says any player might be a doper, including one's favorite player. So it's yeah, that's obvious, given the little risk vs. great reward, so what?

Your desperate and pathetic baiting/trolling has been noted.

masterclass

JohnKramer
09-13-2014, 07:07 AM
The Brodo article dates from 2006!

Years later and who has the long suspicious absences - certainly not Federer.

When his form dips or he loses unexpectedly, he keeps playing anyway. When it returns, as it has this year, it has happened gradually, and with noticeable changes in technique/equipment as obvious contributors. And he is displaying the signs of age, in his now unreliable serve and groundstrokes, and tiring in five setters.

It is pretty obvious to any but the most blind that Federer's technique, combined with early lessons learnt from the combination of his one serious bout of injury and a girlfriend forced to retire because of it has stood him in good stead. He has always scheduled carefully, by all accounts trained hard but smart.

Federer obviously has some luck on his side in terms of genetics, but he has managed himself carefully as well, and I'm with those who think he will be one of the true outliers in the sport, still going strong for a good few more years yet.

There are some rather more obvious contenders for scrutiny on this front...

Why would he need a long or short break if he is not sweating.
Dont talk about technique...a lot of players have the same technique as federer...in fact better with better forehand and serve as well.
Its about the energy that is required.
Energy and power doesn't come from genetics, it either comes from good workouts or something else.

JohnKramer
09-13-2014, 07:08 AM
Embarrassing thread. You obviously are trying to bait. No source. No nothing. Title misrepresents the contents. First, you have to learn how to read more than a word here or there to understand an entire sentence.

Bodo said way back when, that EVERYONE is a potential doper, from Federer to the journeyman. This is not an accusation, it is really not much at all. In other words, he says any player might be a doper, including one's favorite player. So it's yeah, that's obvious, given the little risk vs. great reward, so what?

Your desperate and pathetic baiting/trolling has been noted.

masterclass

Did you post the same in Nobama's thread that has Nadal in the title or you just want to be biased in pointing out?

Topspindoctor
09-13-2014, 07:12 AM
How did Fraud stay injury-free and play matches all season long at 33 yr-old like what he did at the age of 20?

It is suspicious indeed. Of course Fraudtard fangirls will claim Fraud is a mystic shaolin monk and his timeless body is a gift from Buddha himself. It's disgusting how much Fraudtards are allowed to slander other players but when the huge Nose comes under scrutiny they cry foul :o

Kateoz
09-13-2014, 07:29 AM
It is suspicious indeed. Of course Fraudtard fangirls will claim Fraud is a mystic shaolin monk and his timeless body is a gift from Buddha himself. It's disgusting how much Fraudtards are allowed to slander other players but when the huge Nose comes under scrutiny they cry foul

Good grief, shouldn't have bothered treating this thread seriously, but honestly. There was not a single bit of slander in my post, I resisted the temptation to draw the obvious dots to Brodo's piece (which by the way was indeed about Nadal, with just a through away line clearly intended not to point at FEd, but raise the issue of others also...).

This is a sport where there have always been a few outliers in terms of age (Rosewall, Gimeno, Laver, etc), and where right now older players are dominating. Are you really suggesting that all of the 16 players aged over 32 in the top 100 are doping? Because frankly that would be ridiculous.

It might be a different matter if Fed was still winning GSs with seeming ease. But he isn't!

tektonac
09-13-2014, 07:35 AM
Bodo can just speculate who's blood was in the blood bags discarded by Julia Patricia Santamaria.

SheepleBuster
09-13-2014, 07:36 AM
JohnKramer and Mark Chan goating in trolling yet again. Seriously people ... get a clue or someone please ban these bozos already. How many times do we have to see these nonsensical threads for the mods to do something ... anything?

How did Fraud stay injury-free and play matches all season long at 33 yr-old like what he did at the age of 20?

This is clear insinuation of Roger doping ... How is this guy not banned? With all the Wozniacki Nole trolling, Nishikori nonsense, and now this?

SheepleBuster
09-13-2014, 07:41 AM
It is suspicious indeed. Of course Fraudtard fangirls will claim Fraud is a mystic shaolin monk and his timeless body is a gift from Buddha himself. It's disgusting how much Fraudtards are allowed to slander other players but when the huge Nose comes under scrutiny they cry foul :o

Do you honestly know anything about doping? People who do it have their body break down faster... that is per rules and instructions by ITF and ATP to find people who are "suspicious." Roger playing longer does not suggest he is on something. It actually makes your point moot. Also, we are not dumb. We see his style of play and his lousy 5-set record, how he gets tired in long matches like a regular human being. Yeah .... those are signs of Roger being on something. Again, I am astounded that some of you bozos are not banned on this site already. From calling Roger a doper, child molestor, ... you guys have done it all, and the Mods just give you a slap on the wrist. Yet I get a warning for being pissed at Brouchard for liking Beyonce.

Slade
09-13-2014, 08:22 AM
Baiting thread is open for over 2 hours. And you Dulltards complain that the forum is biased towards Roger?

Dumb thread, dumb responses, dumb logic, and dumb tards.

Speed of Light
09-13-2014, 08:24 AM
JohnKramer and Mark Chan goating in trolling yet again. Seriously people ... get a clue or someone please ban these bozos already. How many times do we have to see these nonsensical threads for the mods to do something ... anything?



This is clear insinuation of Roger doping ... How is this guy not banned? With all the Wozniacki Nole trolling, Nishikori nonsense, and now this?

Your Fedtard counterparts here day and night slander Rafa as being a doper in no uncertain terms without any proof, and the moment someone points out that other top players including your hero are not above suspicion too, the moment the discussion turns to your favourite, you ask for the mods to ban the posters involved and close down the thread?

That's mighty hypocritcal of you lot. You should learn to take what's coming. It's called karma.

Speed of Light
09-13-2014, 08:26 AM
you Dulltards complain that the forum is biased towards Roger?

We're not complaining. We're providing undisputed facts. The fact that the two threads have been merged, prove as much.

Honestly
09-13-2014, 08:28 AM
Bald has been suspected of doping since 2006 already? Wow. You know the saying 'where there is smoke there is fire'...:o

Honestly
09-13-2014, 08:29 AM
Oh and why is he bald? I don't remember his dad being bald :o

Slade
09-13-2014, 08:30 AM
We're not complaining. We're providing undisputed facts. The fact that the two threads have been merged, prove as much.

Proving what facts? Failing to quote mine Bozo? ROFL.

Speed of Light
09-13-2014, 08:34 AM
One Fedtard cries foul and says that certain posters should be banned for daring to say that Roger Federer is not above suspicion when it comes to doping.



This is clear insinuation of Roger doping ... How is this guy not banned?

And another Fedtard goes on, just a few minutes later, to directly implying that Rafael Nadal is doping.

Bald has been suspected of doping since 2006 already? Wow. You know the saying 'where there is smoke there is fire'...:o


And yet we all know who's side the mods will take.

Unbelievable double-standards.

Just keep 'em coming. I'll be more than happy to hold up a mirror every time, you hypocrites.

Honestly
09-13-2014, 08:56 AM
One Fedtard cries foul and says that certain posters should be banned for daring to say that Roger Federer is not above suspicion when it comes to doping.



And another Fedtard goes on, just a few minutes later, to directly implying that Rafael Nadal is doping.




And yet we all know who's side the mods will take.

Unbelievable double-standards.

Just keep 'em coming. I'll be more than happy to hold up a mirror every time, you hypocrites.

No need for the mod bashing. Dumbtards are as guilty as Fedfans, if not more so. No one is saying that Fed is not above suspicion. But certainly there has been a lot more suspicion surrounding bald, and much more reason to believe he is doping.

Speed of Light
09-13-2014, 08:58 AM
No need for the mod bashing. Dumbtards are as guilty as Fedfans, if not more so. No one is saying that Fed is not above suspicion. But certainly there has been a lot more suspicion surrounding bald, and much more reason to believe he is doping.

This was not mod-bashing. I did not insult any the mods.
Please try to stop attaching tags to my actions to gain favours. They're already too biased in your favour to start with.
I am gently reminding them and everyone else who type with their eyes closed of the hypocrisy prevalent on this site.
:wavey:

IOFH
09-13-2014, 09:46 AM
Meh. Let's wait for something like 2024.

Fastgrass
09-13-2014, 12:06 PM
Rochus's brother also alleged Nadal for taking "shots" in MTO against Wawa AO final.

Doping allegations are nothing new for Nadal from Dr. Fuentes to Dr Sanchez he was always alleged but never proven so far.

No fire only smoke, that's the case of Nadal.

Fastgrass
09-13-2014, 12:07 PM
Oh and why is he bald? I don't remember his dad being bald :o

Hair gene he received from mom, not Dad.

Get a life Fraudtard. :lol:

Speed of Light
09-13-2014, 12:16 PM
Rochus's brother also alleged Nadal for taking "shots" in MTO against Wawa AO final.


Rochus's brother didn't see anything. He was anchoring for a tv channel when he made these comments and these were his statements on how he concluded this from:

"When he returned from the locker room he was limping. Then, surprisingly, he could run in the third and fourth set. Clearly left the track to get a shot"

:haha:
We all watched the same final, didn't we?. There's still highlights of it on youtube.

Was there any massive difference between how he was performing after he came back and in those third and fourth sets?.

Clearly no, he was still playing at 50%, hitting winners out of desperation and not trying too hard to reach for any balls. Not more difference than any painkiller at work.


And this may also be speculation on my part, but it has more depth than what Mr. Christopher said - but what's to say he isn't one of the rabid fedtards who are so eager on "proving" that Rafa dopes, that inhibit these forums, someone like Slade perhaps? :haha:

People in general like him, live of these conspiracies that have no basis on reality. Maybe they get intimidated by a super-star's demi-god status perhaps?.

And before you go on latching to the Lance Armstrong stories, the people accusing Lance Armstrong of doping from the get-go were people who he worked with, people who he was close to and people who knew what he was doing.


For Rafael Nadal, these people seem to be rabid Fedtards who'd stop at nothing to uplift their idol's achievements and sports journalists/commentators on crack. :D

Honestly
09-13-2014, 12:22 PM
Hair gene he received from mom, not Dad.

Get a life Fraudtard. :lol:

:haha:

ShanksBboy
09-13-2014, 12:26 PM
One Fedtard cries foul and says that certain posters should be banned for daring to say that Roger Federer is not above suspicion when it comes to doping.


Poor dull tards trying to say Federer is doping just because he doesn't get injured.:spit: Doping doesn't make you immune to injuries tards :wavey:

The only reason this discussion started is because Dull gets injured, tells the media he has a life threatening injury that won't let him play again close to his best (poor Hormonito :sad:) and then comes back running from corner to corner and outlasting players in stamina. :spit:

I think its quite fair for people to believe something is going behind the curtains.

Fastgrass
09-13-2014, 12:27 PM
Rochus's brother didn't see anything. He was anchoring for a tv channel when he made these comments and these were his statements on how he concluded this from:

"When he returned from the locker room he was limping. Then, surprisingly, he could run in the third and fourth set. Clearly left the track to get a shot"

:haha:
We all watched the same final, didn't we?. There's still highlights of it on youtube.

Was there any massive difference between how he was performing after he came back and in those third and fourth sets?.

Clearly no, he was still playing at 50%, hitting winners out of desperation and not trying too hard to reach for any balls. Not more difference than any painkiller at work.


And this may also be speculation on my part, but it has more depth than what Mr. Christopher said - but what's to say he isn't one of the rabid fedtards who are so eager on "proving" that Rafa dopes, that inhibit these forums, someone like Slade perhaps? :haha:

People in general like him, live of these conspiracies that have no basis on reality. Maybe they get intimidated by a super-star's demi-god status perhaps?.

And before you go on latching to the Lance Armstrong stories, the people accusing Lance Armstrong of doping from the get-go were people who he worked with, people who he was close to and people who knew what he was doing.


For Rafael Nadal, these people seem to be rabid Fedtards who'd stop at nothing to uplift their idol's achievements and sports journalists/commentators on crack. :D

Rochus couldn't prove it so it's accusation so far but I disagree with Nadal was injured in Final. If you ask every spectator sitting in stands witnessed drama, responded with booing, they'll tell the same.


Rochus tried to find reason for fake injury still no one can say he's right or vice versa.

Speed of Light
09-13-2014, 12:34 PM
If you ask every spectator sitting in stands witnessed drama, responded with booing, they'll tell the same.


Rochus tried to find reason for fake injury still no one can say he's right or vice versa.

:bs:

Why should we ask the spectators, didn't we all witness the same thing live via the magic of television?.
Isn't the final still available to us via the magic of video?

Of course he was booed and that may have made him mentally give up a bit, but does that mean he went into the lockers after the first set to dope just because he saw the opponent was coming off stronger in the first set?. If that were the case, wouldn't he have just doped to the maximum before ever coming onto the field?. :haha:

These stupid conspiracy theories will lead you nowhere.

If you adopt that approach and say Rafa "faked" the injury, I could just refute you by questioning every single thing you or your favourite player does by saying you're "faking" it.

Fastgrass
09-13-2014, 12:48 PM
:bs:

Why should we ask the spectators, didn't we all witness the same thing live via the magic of television?.
Isn't the final still available to us via the magic of video?

Of course he was booed and that may have made him mentally give up a bit, but does that mean he went into the lockers after the first set to dope just because he saw the opponent was coming off stronger in the first set?. If that were the case, wouldn't he have just doped to the maximum before ever coming onto the field?. :haha:

These stupid conspiracy theories will lead you nowhere.

If you adopt that approach and say Rafa "faked" the injury, I could just refute you by questioning every single thing you or your favourite player does by saying you're "faking" it.

It's been stupid theory of "Injured Nadal" for almost decade leads "Fake injury theory"

JolánGagó
09-13-2014, 12:55 PM
Seems staff does nothing about baseless doping allegations on this site. Situation already far beyond tolerable, so Nadal legal office will know about this crap going on here and site's owner will need to answer some questions.

:wavey:

Matt01
09-13-2014, 01:46 PM
Do you honestly know anything about doping? People who do it have their body break down faster... that is per rules and instructions by ITF and ATP to find people who are "suspicious." Roger playing longer does not suggest he is on something. It actually makes your point moot. Also, we are not dumb. We see his style of play and his lousy 5-set record, how he gets tired in long matches like a regular human being.


Where? When? :o

IOFH
09-13-2014, 01:49 PM
Seems staff does nothing about baseless doping allegations on this site. Situation already far beyond tolerable, so Nadal legal office will know about this crap going on here and site's owner will need to answer some questions.

:wavey:

http://i.imgur.com/XNa4v.gif

JoWilly
09-13-2014, 01:56 PM
The Nadal fans deflecting and trying to call other players dopers is hilarious and against the rules. No one can say for sure who is doping and who isn't, but there is no doubt that Nadal's sudden injuries and then amazing recoveries are suspicious. We all know he will come back strong from this supposed wrist injury, so of course people will ask questions. I'm not saying he is doping,but something odd is going on. Could just be strategic breaks, could be something else. Who knows. But the Nadal fans get a bit too defensive.

serveandvolley80
09-13-2014, 02:42 PM
The Nadal fans deflecting and trying to call other players dopers is hilarious and against the rules. No one can say for sure who is doping and who isn't, but there is no doubt that Nadal's sudden injuries and then amazing recoveries are suspicious. We all know he will come back strong from this supposed wrist injury, so of course people will ask questions. I'm not saying he is doping,but something odd is going on. Could just be strategic breaks, could be something else. Who knows. But the Nadal fans get a bit too defensive.

I would suspect any players that have long absences then come back with no rust, no fatigue issue, no getting back to form, just dominating the field. There is an issue in doping in the off season, and since the tennis off season is so short you have to look at the Aussie open as a prime example of strange goings on. Its been kind of always unofficially known as the fluke slam as it produces a lot of one and done champions if you want to call them that. I think its because of the cycling effect of the drugs and the off season training that you do not get the full benefit of whatever you are on, until a few months or the midway point of the season.

I suspect everyone, including the supposed GOAT, who knows what he uses to recover from his injuries. There is a degree of doping though and i think the clear cut guilty parties are the ones that have many significant injuries to their knees, blood clot issues, and developing various blood diseases as a result of years of doping. I won't go into the medical part, you can google what kind of health issues develops from PED's.

Some of the more severe users won't live past 40, i can only find about 2 or 3 examples on the ATP and WTA of extreme doping, i am sure most can figure it out for themselves without me throwing names out there. Also pay attention to adults that suddenly start developing a bigger jawline and bigger head then years past, its like puberty is still hitting them. Though most tennis players won't be dumb enough to take HGH or straight up anabolic steroids because it would make them too heavy and it would be too obvious.

The ATP already proved that they do hand out silent bans, you can easily find the story, though that could be an isolated incident but its strange when you start thinking about certain players that have been gone for months or years and show no signs of coming back. A WTA player all of a sudden retires after winning a major at a pretty young age where she showed she can still compete at a high level. Then you have players coming back and forth from retirement stating that they no longer had a passion for the game, the result a comeback with no visible rust or stamina problems. They roll over the entire competition including beating someone who people consider an alltime great. Sorry for lumping in the WTA but its a issue with the whole game. Though you could argue that these days the issue extends to more then just one sport.

There are too many people willing to defend their favorite athletes and make excuses for them, to me they are all guilty either of taking something, or looking the other way and being too cowardly to make a stand even when they already have enough money to live for the next 100 years in insane luxury.

A_Skywalker
09-13-2014, 02:51 PM
The Nadal fans deflecting and trying to call other players dopers is hilarious and against the rules. No one can say for sure who is doping and who isn't, but there is no doubt that Nadal's sudden injuries and then amazing recoveries are suspicious. We all know he will come back strong from this supposed wrist injury, so of course people will ask questions. I'm not saying he is doping,but something odd is going on. Could just be strategic breaks, could be something else. Who knows. But the Nadal fans get a bit too defensive.

:)

JoWilly
09-13-2014, 03:32 PM
:)

Your point is? When did I say he was doping? I said it's weird. Reading comprehension isn't your strong suit.

T.C
09-13-2014, 03:36 PM
The Nadal fans deflecting and trying to call other players dopers is hilarious and against the rules. No one can say for sure who is doping and who isn't, but there is no doubt that Nadal's sudden injuries and then amazing recoveries are suspicious. We all know he will come back strong from this supposed wrist injury, so of course people will ask questions. I'm not saying he is doping,but something odd is going on. Could just be strategic breaks, could be something else. Who knows. But the Nadal fans get a bit too defensive.

:)

In case you aren't trolling and deliberately misunderstanding, the "no doubt" refers to "Nadal's sudden injuries and then amazing recoveries are suspicious", not to "no one can say for sure who is doping and who isn't".

Speed of Light
09-13-2014, 03:43 PM
Your point is? When did I say he was doping? I said it's weird. Reading comprehension isn't your strong suit.

The point isn't his reading comprehension. Of course you'll only imply it instead of saying it outright.
The point is that all your hateful posts are veiled attacks at Rafa Nadal.. and anyone who has been on MTF long enough recognizes that.

JoWilly
09-13-2014, 04:11 PM
The point isn't his reading comprehension. Of course you'll only imply it instead of saying it outright.
The point is that all your hateful posts are veiled attacks at Rafa Nadal.. and anyone who has been on MTF long enough recognizes that.

Dude, you are a textbook troll. You think anyone genuinely believes you are a Nadal fan? Your posts are clearly parody posts, and that's fine. I enjoy you mocking the tragic Nadal fans on here, who probably do think Rafa is love and life. But don't think anyone is fooled by your act.

I'm not implying anything either. Just stating a fact. It's very strange.

Honestly
09-13-2014, 04:11 PM
The point isn't his reading comprehension. Of course you'll only imply it instead of saying it outright.
The point is that all your hateful posts are veiled attacks at Rafa Nadal.. and anyone who has been on MTF long enough recognizes that.

Well freedom of speech is not allowed here and you are not allowed to say you think Nadal is doping. Why would he risk getting banned?

JoWilly
09-13-2014, 04:16 PM
Well freedom of speech is not allowed here and you are not allowed to say you think Nadal is doping. Why would he risk getting banned?

Yep. I'm not saying Nadal dopes. I have no idea which players dope and I include my favourites in that. We can't know. What I do now is that Nadal clearly fakes injuries and has very strange breaks from the game. I don't believe a word he says about his injuries, he never looks injured and only uses those injuries as lame excuses. Does that make him a doper? Nope. Does it make him shady as hell? Bingo.

Speed of Light
09-13-2014, 04:34 PM
Dude, you are a textbook troll. You think anyone genuinely believes you are a Nadal fan? Your posts are clearly parody posts, and that's fine. I enjoy you mocking the tragic Nadal fans on here, who probably do think Rafa is love and life. But don't think anyone is fooled by your act.

I'm not implying anything either. Just stating a fact. It's very strange.

You always say this whenever you see me post. I have no idea where you got this impression from. Is this your way of some kind of pre-emptive counter-trolling that you do so that you can avoid answering my questions or points that I raise?.

And yes, I believe in Love, Life and Rafa.

Yep. I'm not saying Nadal dopes. I have no idea which players dope and I include my favourites in that. We can't know. What I do now is that Nadal clearly fakes injuries and has very strange breaks from the game. I don't believe a word he says about his injuries, he never looks injured and only uses those injuries as lame excuses. Does that make him a doper? Nope. Does it make him shady as hell? Bingo.

First you are saying things like anybody can dope and then you go on and say things that make Rafa stand out, equate it with doping.
If I said things like "Anybody can dope, I'm sure not even my favourite player is above suspicion but nobody can deny that Roger Federer is certainly a paradox cause he doesn't sweat a lot even when playing long matches and has never had any real injuries which has made him miss a part of the tour throughout his entire career. But of I'm not saying that Roger Federer dopes." (WHICH BTW, I WOULD NEVER SAY)... wouldn't that make me look like an extremely deceitful and cunning troll to you?

That's how you come across with your Rafa hate, buddy. Please tone it down a notch.

JohnKramer
09-13-2014, 04:54 PM
Baiting thread is open for over 2 hours. And you Dulltards complain that the forum is biased towards Roger?

Dumb thread, dumb responses, dumb logic, and dumb tards.


I am convinced now...the forum is biased towards Roger....the moderators do not understand....look at this thread Nadal is in the title ....and the one with ROger is merged with this.....so where is Rogers name in the thread title?


If you are merging ensure Rogers name is there along with Nadal.....Mods and Admins should understand there are lot of paid people on internet post content against Nadal.

TigerTim
09-13-2014, 04:55 PM
this thread (since the bump) is a perfect example of why mtf will be so much better off when Fedal and their idiotic fans retire, :wavey:

bunch of utter idiots

JohnKramer
09-13-2014, 04:59 PM
Why this bait thread is still on?
I mean admins/mods don't see Nadal's name on title?

Delete this thread.

Speed of Light
09-13-2014, 05:03 PM
Agreed. This is a baiting thread.

Mods/Admin please delete this thread and make sure that a thread linking an ATP player to doping never re-surfaces on this forum, unless they have been proven of doping.

This is both defamation to the player in question and a playground for rabid Fedtards to vent their anger towards his arch-rival Rafael Nadal.

Plus this is an 8 year old thread which has been re-opened for nothing but baiting purposes.
Kindly do the needful.

Honestly
09-13-2014, 05:03 PM
this thread (since the bump) is a perfect example of why mtf will be so much better off when Fedal and their idiotic fans retire, :wavey:

bunch of utter idiots

Says a Mugray fangirl. Now that's fresh :lol:

Troll Hunter
09-13-2014, 05:15 PM
http://static.comicvine.com/uploads/original/11111/111111188/3417719-4515167982-why-i.jpg

Whiznot
09-13-2014, 06:03 PM
How did Fraud stay injury-free and play matches all season long at 33 yr-old like what he did at the age of 20?

Federer managed to stay injury free by not using PEDs to bulk up and overstress his body.

Whiznot
09-13-2014, 06:26 PM
Oh and why is he bald? I don't remember his dad being bald :o

The male pattern baldness gene is passed from the mother if her father was balding. We have never seen Nadal's maternal grandfather.

Other factors are more suspicious than the hair loss which could be natural.