itf/atp biological passport fully operational sept 2014

[JesuslookslikeBorg]

seeing as we know this biological passport is 100% fully operational next month..its a chance to discuss the future and if it will help tennis of trying to shed its image as being soft on drugs. and if it will help catch any potential players on the "hot sauce".

this has to be good news eh ?...and can we keep any comments to tennis players in general and not focus on one or two players.

 

[Kieran]

Well, I think any steps towards tightening control in this issue are positive ones. If this works, it could be significant. And I agree with your last remark, let's keep the discussion based on facts and the issue, instead of fan-based slurs on our least favourite players.

I'm not sure on the details of how this biological passport works, or its success in other sports, but I applaud any serious attempts to not only keep tennis clean, but to deter any youngsters coming up from making bad decisions.

Anybody got any links relating to this? I'm unable to post links at the moment, sorry...

 

[Front242]

Given how infrequently they test for blood and the timespan they have to test for HGH it'd be a miracle to actually catch anyone imo. It'll take someone to rat the offenders out like in cycling if you ask me.

 

[JesuslookslikeBorg]

links :idea: i just typed tennis biological passport into google and items came up, i tried looking at some info on itf official site but was all in tedious pdf files. :s

ok I did this poll/thread I was tired and whatnot..but I think I set it up so the poll is open indefinately..also it is an anonymous poll (is it?) so folk can vote without feeling they might get pulled up on how they vote in here.

about the blood passport we all know it was flagged uo as being fully operational in sept 2014 after being announced as they need a certain number of blood samples to build up the players data,

apparently a player can actually be banned even if they have not actually failed a test, if certain markers in a load of blood samples are out of whack (or something like that ????).

 

[Front242]

^ Yeah abnormal and large spikes in testosterone levels, far higher number of red blood cells etc.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

There are two issues here.

1. Biological passport is definitely a step in the right direction. But, that is not
fool proof either. There are ways to go around that too. But, it is a step in
the right direction.

2. Forgetting the scientific aspects of drug testing, there is also the issue of
what you do with the results once you get it. ATP/ITF has shown us
that they do not have the gall to unfiormly treat different players for the
same offence as we have seen huge disparity in treatment meted out to
different players. If the results are not going to be used properly, it does
not matter even if the scientific tests become fool proof.

 

[JesuslookslikeBorg]

this is the problem with itf/atp pathetic doping tests in the past, anyone on the "hot sauce" can swerve any positive test as we saw in cycling and athletics in the old days..

if its possible to ban players in the future due to the new biological passport even if they never failed a test..that's at least a big improvement on before, and with more blood/urine testing since 2012 at least there is also more chance of players being caught doping in the usual way of failing a test.

 

[Front242]

The testing is still woefully inadequate though. Check this out.

"The fight against drugs
Drug-testing is carried out under the auspices of the International Tennis Federation (ITF).
At the 2013 French Open, almost 200 tests were carried out on players entered in the men's and women's singles and doubles main draws as well as the qualifiers and the juniors' tournaments.
Special areas dedicated to testing are located in the players' zone near to the locker-rooms."

http://www.rolandgarros.com/en_FR/info/sustainability/index.html

That's 200 tests and add up the total number of players in the draws at it's not even half. They still have a ton of work to do. EVERYONE should be tested.

Good article about EPO here http://www.antidopingresearch.org/EPOtestJuly08.pdf

"In any case, cyclists can cheat the test. When told they are to be tested, apparently they have 10 minutes to report to the medical team. Why 10 minutes? A cynical informant claims that's long enough for an athlete to run 500 ml of saline into a vein. By diluting the blood, the saline immediately brings the hematocrit down by a few percent. The normal hematocrit for "clean" elite cyclists is around 44% (Saris et al., 1998; Schumacher et al., 2000). So it's possible for a cyclist to take enough EPO to increase the hematocrit to around 52%, then infuse saline just before the test to bring the hematocrit back below the limit of 50% (or 51%, to allow for error of measurement). As a bonus, the saline infusion itself almost certainly enhances performance in long hot events like the Tour de France."

HGH detection is impossible after 24-48 hours and that's why sadly I don't think much will come of this biological passport. You reap the benefits of HGH and keep them if you manage to successfully inject and get away without being tested within 24-48 hours of taking it.

"Blood screening can only detect HGH taken within the previous 24 to 48 hours. Nanotechnology may allow urine detection out to that two-week range."

http://mmajunkie.com/2009/09/ask-the-doc-with-steroid-and-hgh-testing-is-blood-or-urine-best

 

[Front242]

Basically you could pick a random day to inject and hope for the best and they may or may not test you. Now compare that to a situation where you have an exemption for a procedure as your fall back plan for variations in blood and you can also see the huge degree out there for TUEs and injury time off.

 

[JesuslookslikeBorg]

mmm yes..not ideal.:huh: still I'm hoping for the best. at least more and more "tennis people" fans like us included are talking about potential drugs in tennis, folk were in complete denial until even a couple of years ago..

i came across an article yesterday from about apr2013 I think, I defo remember at the time and tim henman was going "oh no I don't think anyone in tennis is doping and blahblahblah" but he isn't very switched on in the head, to be in his prominent position saying that..and while it may be his opinion 'timbo the ostrich' is sticking his head in the sand and not facing up to the potential reality of drugs in tennis.

 

[JesuslookslikeBorg]

money talks and bullsh1t walks..folk don't wanna burst the cosy bubble that everything is ok (when everything might defo not be ok).

still..things are moving in the right direction so lets see what happens.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

the idea was to not mention any particular player. :huh:

I am not so sure that we can talk about doping in abstract leaving out doping (alleged
or real) of specific players.

Would folks like to have a discussion of volleying in abstract with no reference to volleying by
McEnroe, Fed or Edberg?

However, I am against other threads with specific topics (which are clearly not
related to doping) being taken over by a discussion of possible doping though.

By keeping all doping discussion on one thread, at least folks who don't want to
go into "sewage" know where not to go.

 

[Front242]

^ Said people tend to get butt hurt 'cos there's way more grounds for their favourite players to be cheating than others and when they can't find a whole lot except one stupid article on EPO on old Roger and mono/glandular fever has been around for thousands of years it annoys them so everything else is "sewage".

 

[Kieran]

the idea was to not mention any particular player. :huh:

I am not so sure that we can talk about doping in abstract leaving out doping (alleged
or real) of specific players.

Would folks like to have a discussion of volleying in abstravt with no reference to volleying by
McEnroe, Fed or Edberg?

However, I am against other threads with specific topics (which are clearly not
related to doping) being taken over by a discussion of possible doping though.

By keeping all doping discussion on one thread, at least folks who don't want to
go into "sewage" know where not to go.

That's an excellent idea, however, this isn't the thread, according to the OP, and blokes like you and Front, hiding behind nicknames slandering tennis players is just as abstract as a discussion of volleying without mentioning McEnroe.

It's a little sneaky of you to equate Ferrer with drugs the way the rest of us would equate Mac with volleys. Do you have any proof for this? Because we have plenty of proof about McEnroe's volleys.

 

[Front242]

the idea was to not mention any particular player. :huh:

I am not so sure that we can talk about doping in abstract leaving out doping (alleged
or real) of specific players.

Would folks like to have a discussion of volleying in abstravt with no reference to volleying by
McEnroe, Fed or Edberg?

However, I am against other threads with specific topics (which are clearly not
related to doping) being taken over by a discussion of possible doping though.

By keeping all doping discussion on one thread, at least folks who don't want to
go into "sewage" know where not to go.

That's an excellent idea, however, this isn't the thread, according to the OP, and blokes like you and Front, hiding behind nicknames slandering tennis players is just as abstract as a discussion of volleying without mentioning McEnroe.

It's a little sneaky of you to equate Ferrer with drugs the way the rest of us would equate Mac with volleys. Do you have any proof for this? Because we have plenty of proof about McEnroe's volleys.

We also have proof from McEnroe himself that he was using steroids for 6 years!

"For six years I was unaware I was being given a form of steroid of the legal kind they used to give horses until they decided it was too strong even for horses.

http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/tennis/mcenroe-i-was-given-steroids-but-did-not-know-572791.html

Also, it's not sneaky when he's worked at the same tennis academy as Lance friggin Armstrong's doctor. How many times do people have to spell it out?! He's getting fitter and fitter since age 30 and worked alongside the most corrupt doctor in sport's history! Wake up!

 

[Moxie]

the idea was to not mention any particular player. :huh:

I am not so sure that we can talk about doping in abstract leaving out doping (alleged
or real) of specific players.

Would folks like to have a discussion of volleying in abstravt with no reference to volleying by
McEnroe, Fed or Edberg?

However, I am against other threads with specific topics (which are clearly not
related to doping) being taken over by a discussion of possible doping though.

By keeping all doping discussion on one thread, at least folks who don't want to
go into "sewage" know where not to go.

Our basic policy is kind of that: discuss doping on doping threads, and don't slander specific players, where the "evidence" is often internet driven and circumstantial. However, we don't like to over-police conversations, and have let some flow. But when they turn into back-biting and innuendo, it's unpleasant.

JLLB invited us to discuss the passport idea here, and asked that it not devolve into accusations against specific players, which it has. This is unfair to the OP. This is a perfectly good place to learn more about how the passport can work, and its limitations, as has been mentioned, and also learn more about how doping can work in sports, as it's not just one thing.

If a player has been sanctioned for doping, the circumstances and relative fairness/unfairness of their cases would come into this discussion, so names can be mentioned. But making a case for the circumstantial evidence against other specific players derails the stated purpose of this thread. So here I only partially agree with you, GSM: we can talk about "real" bannings, but not "alleged," as that invites too many unsubstantiated theories, and tends to derail the conversation.

This is an interesting topic, i.e., the potential effective of the passport, in its infancy, and maybe how drugs are used and can be masked, but let's stick to it.

 

[Moxie]

folk can name particular players if they really want to..and/or if it doesn't result in the thread being deleted.

its just by naming players it usually becomes a big argument..but as mr clay death says..have at it and have fun.

The thread won't be deleted. That's not our style. If you're good with it, that's cool. But we do not go in for an excessive (and repetitive) amount of innuendo.

 

[Front242]

"Many players left out of ITF's random drug-testing programme last year. Laura Robson, Juan Martin Del Potro and Jelena Jankovic among those all omitted."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/tennis/10738199/Many-players-left-out-of-ITFs-random-drug-testing-programme-last-year.html

 

[tented]

JLLB invited us to discuss the passport idea here, and asked that it not devolve into accusations against specific players, which it has. This is unfair to the OP. This is a perfectly good place to learn more about how the passport can work, and its limitations, as has been mentioned, and also learn more about how doping can work in sports, as it's not just one thing.

This is an interesting topic, i.e., the potential effective of the passport, in its infancy, and maybe how drugs are used and can be masked, but let's stick to it.

I think it would be useful to have a thread with the discrete purpose of discussing the technology, its uses, implementation, limitations, and doping itself, without venturing into other topics. They could be discussed in other threads, but leave this one for this specific purpose, kind of like what we've done with the rankings thread.

 

[Front242]

http://www.thetennisspace.com/anomalies-abound-in-2013-drug-testing-figures/