Skip to main content

Initial thoughts on Sharapova drug test failure

So Sharapova fails a test for a drug she was using for 10 years.  It was legal (or 'not-yet-illegal') until Jan 1, 2016.

She claims it was for medicinal reasons, irregular heartbeat, family history of diabetes...
but it turns out she was not the only athlete using this drug.

A Russian icedancer, two Russian biathletes, a Russian cyclist

It all looks rather systematic.  Yes it was 'legal'.  But it appears it was definitely intended to be performance enhancing.

Here's a quote from an article on Meldonium

"Some pharmaceutical companies have recently marketed it explicitly as a performance-enhancing drug."
http://roidvisor.com/performance-enhanc … gly-legal/

Maria's doing her best to look innocent, while freely acknowledging she was using a legal substance, but her intent in using it seems to have been - as the growing bulk of circumstantial evidence points to - performance enhancement.

It all makes me wonder...
What else is going in the tennis world re: performance enhancement?
How deep is this?
What other 'legal' substances are being used?  How much performance-enhancing activity is regularly engaged in by the top tennis players? which ones? and what activities?

I'd bet this is far bigger than we can see now...

Labels

Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Men’s Tennis 2024 Yearend and 2025 Predictions

2 January 2025   The Big Three is dead!  Long Live the Big Three!  For the first time in 22 years, none of Federer, Nadal, or Djokovic are in the yearend top three.  Instead we have a new set – Sinner, Alcaraz, and Zverev.  Now it would certainly be debatable if Zverev has the significance of the other two. Afterall, he still has not won a slam and he’s half a generation older than his younger counterparts.  At age 27 he should be mid-arc in career accomplishments – but in some metrics he’s just starting out.  However, his superlative play over the year landed him at #2 and who are we to argue with the algorithm? One of the biggest clouds hanging over the coming year is the fate of Jannik Sinner.  By all accounts he is the top dog, and primed to have another banner year, but whether or not he will get to play depends on what happens with WADA (the World Anti-Doping Agency).  Anyone can see he’s essentially innocent – I mean, a massage...
Post a Comment
Read more

Wimbledon Women 2024

The divas have gathered, the grass is fresh, the blades are out, the Venus Rosewater Dish beckons. Is there a favourite?  There are only three former champions in the draw, and while they may be among the top picks it’s dangerous to count on any of them: Kerber (past her prime), Rybakina (constantly sick), and Vondrousova (chronically unreliable).  So who will it be lifting the plate in two weeks’ time?   First Quarter Iga Swiatek (1) is the top seed and has pretty much nailed down this slot across the board for the last two and a half years.   But grass is her least-accomplished surface.   She pulled out of her warm-up tournament citing emotional recuperation after her fifth slam crown and third consecutive at Roland Garros.   But there is cause for hope among the Swiatek-azzi. She made the quarters last year in a game effort against a surging Svitolina.   Her strokes should hold up well on grass, although I think she loses some of the movement...
Post a Comment
Read more

The Case for Rod Laver as GOAT - 25 Dec 2010

The Case for Rod Laver Two grand slams.   When one considers the near impossibility of winning a calendar year grand slam in this day and age, the thought of one player winning two boggles the mind.   It’s difficult enough to win the career slam – only 7 men have ever done it and only 4 in the Open era.   Winning a non-calendar slam is even more difficult and many great players have won three in a row and fallen just short:   like Roger Federer, Rafael Nadal, and Pete Sampras. So Rod Laver should be an open and shut case for the greatest of all time.   But it’s not that simple.   His first grand slam is really negligible and doesn’t count.   It was an amateur slam won in an era when the best players were professionals.   Especially in the 1960’s the pros were gaining more and more credibility.   The sheer number of pros was increasing as more and more tournaments began to be established for pro players.   Laver was by no means considered...
3 comments
Read more