Atp World Tour 2015

[Caledonian Craig]

Andy has, on a number of occasions been asked about the No.1 spot and you do not need to be smart te read from his answers that his motivation isnt what it should be to reach that coveted position. He has said he would sooner win slams instead of giving an answer like yes I will be pushing hard for it.

Nobody is denying there may be drug issues in tennis but players are dope tested regularly at each tournament which Andy alludes to and players have been caught. Now to suggest with any confidence that Federer, Nadal or Djokovic are doping and evaded capture for almost 20 years in Federer's case and ten years in Rafa and Novak's case is really not realistic in my opinion as they are all dope tested.

The facts are that A. Murray lacks the consistency level of the top three and B. Lacks the motivation or desire that they have for that coveted spot hence he has never made No.1 and not because those denying him the spot are doped up.

If you can give me evidence of anything he has said that convinces you he is highly motivated for No.1 spot then feel free to produce it. Okay I am going on words but as we all know Andy speaks from the heart and so all I have heard suggests No.1 is not a big pull for him.

[phart]

the amount of typing neccessary to fill in the gaps of knowledge about doping would take more time than i'm ready to do, Passing a doping test is an IQ test. I'm not trying to be a dick but you're incredibly naive about doping, as are most folk. Hence why i spent most of the 2000's and into 2010's arguing about Lance Armstrong on here, trying to explain , against much opposition, why it is startlingly obvious he was doping.

So i come to this discussion as a bit jaded about arguing about doping.

Again you're confusing opinion with fact. you'd still be thinking Lance Armstrong was the greatest tour cyclist ever if he had gave Floyd Landis a job, instead of snubbing him causing Landis to go to USADA and whistleblow on all their techniques enabling them to capture Lance when he returned, they still couldn't get a straight positive on him cause of the techniques used to shield it. But they had enough inside info to get him over a longitudal biological passport, none of these techniques are available to the ATP. In fact the ATP rarely does blood tests, CIR tests, plus other advanced screening techniques.

All I'm saying is Murray's lack of consistency pleases me as consistency CAN be a sign of performance enhancers. I also suspect most athletes use some sort of performance enhancers.

You might be right though, i'm wrong sometimes.

[Caledonian Craig]

So your supposition that Andy Murray has never reached No.1 is more to do with Federer, Nadal and Djokovic doping? They are tegularly dope tested as are all players hence Cilic was banned as was another top player whose name escapes me.

Lets leave doping out of it as an excuse and look at failings in Andy such as a second serve that even women can better. Also losing against players he should beat considering his talent but doesn't and mental frailties are the real reasons for him not reaching No.1. Sorry but bringing Lance Armstrong into this means nothing as question marks were there for him for some time and suspicions rife. Those suspicions have certainly never been around Federer and I presume you are thinking all three have been doping? That is just too damned impossible for all three to be doping yet dope tested and not been caught when others in the dport have. My thoughts by the way have nothing to do with naivety and more to do with honest appraisal of Andy's shortcomings.

Edited March 11, 2015 by Caledonian Craig

[phart]

No my supposition is not being able to maintain form through a whole year is entirely natural.

If you think they regularly test then you are completely mis-informed USADA publishes all tests and all the top players have commented how little they get tested. Novak said he hadn't had a blood test in 7 months.

Anyway you have your theory about why he can;t reach number 1 and maybe you're correct, i'm just saying his dips in form give me comfort that he is not doping. I'm not confusing my opinion for fact.

Actually the same places i got the Lance Armstrong suspicions you also get the Federer and tennis ones. Weirdly before he admitted anything i only encountered a handful of people agreeing that Armstrong doped in about a decade, nowadays everyone seemed to know just a couple dozen months later.

[Caledonian Craig]

Dope will still be detected. I hsve tead tweets from the top players about going for tests. Sure it may not be every tournament but for you to aactively believe the top three players in the world have all found a way of guessing when a dope test (which are random) is coming and quit doping (which wouldnt solve anything as traces remain) then sorry that is too remotely impossible to happen. What is more they collectively have around 30 years of tennis experience and not one of them have even the slightest blot on their copybook or any suspicion or snippet of clues (unlike Lance).

Also can you tell me why Wawrinka and Cilic have won slams and not the three dopers in the last year or so? Bad dope? Decided to pack it up for a bit? Or did those players themselves become part-time dopers?

I know Murray's game inside out and it is his own personal demons of the mind and little flaws that have stopped him making No.1 coupled with the burning desire for that spot and not anything more sinister than that.

[Caledonian Craig]

Dope will still be detected. I have read tweets from the top players about going for tests. Sure it may not be every tournament but for you to aactively believe the top three players in the world have all found a way of guessing when a dope test (which are random) is coming and quit doping (which wouldnt solve anything as traces remain) then sorry that is too remotely impossible to happen. What is more they collectively have around 30 years of tennis experience and not one of them have even the slightest blot on their copybook or any suspicion or snippet of clues (unlike Lance).

Also can you tell me why Wawrinka and Cilic have won slams and not the three dopers in the last year or so? Bad dope? Decided to pack it up for a bit? Or did those players themselves become part-time dopers?

I know Murray's game inside out and it is his own personal demons of the mind and little flaws that have stopped him making No.1 coupled with the burning desire for that spot and not anything more sinister than that.

Edited March 12, 2015 by Caledonian Craig

[phart]

one of the two mentioned has already been caught doping.

Marin Cilic doping scandal hangs over US Open final as short bans leave questions about drugs in tennis

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/tennis/article-2747037/Marin-Cilic-doping-scandal-hangs-US-Open-final-short-bans-leave-questions-drugs-tennis.html

If you're microdosing epo, it has a 8 hour glow time, there is no test for autologous blood transfusions, if you're using HGH that can only be detected by a blood test, sythetic testosterone requires a CIR test, the ATP doesn't do these.

"The International Tennis Federation said on June 26 that Marin Cilic was withdrawing from the Wimbledon championship because of a knee injury. In reality, he was beginning an anti-doping suspension."

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2013-09-24/private-doping-probes-seen-hurting-tennis-as-cilic-feigns-injury

[Caledonian Craig]

Yes and therein lies the evidence that dopers are being caught. Cilic has been a pro nowhere near as long as Federer so how come he has not been caught as well? And how come Federer has been awarded many global sportsman of year awards? How come your non-doping Murray almost has an equal head-to-head record against a supposed doping Federer? How come Federer if doping has not won a slam for almost three years? If doping how come Nadal has won majority of his slams only on clay? Does he only dope especially for the clay season? If Djokovic is doping how come he has lost slam finals against non-doping Murray? And there are a whole load more of holes in the doping theory as well.

Just because sportsmen have consistency does not automatically mean they are doping. Are we to question Muhammed Ali or what about Stephen Hendry for ruling snooker for so long? Was Jack Nicklaus doping? Need I go on?

The facts are that Murray has never reached No.1 because he is lacking in departments such as a half decent second serve, he does not have the same unflappable self-belief of other top pros and consistently loses matches he should win and drops ranking points the others don't. A great player but just lacking in key areas and motivation to reach No.1.

[phart]

One person being caught isn't evidence that all are being caught, your argument is built through false axioms. It's not a linear progression where everyone has equal chance to be caught therefore it's a function of time, that's a simplistic view. For instance did you know the ATP covered up Andre Agassi failed tests?

http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2009/nov/20/andre-agassi-adam-helfant-atp

Nadal won most on Clay because that's his best surface.Most doping is used for recovery so no injuries or niggles and huge consistency year round.

the simple fact is you dont know anything about doping, the products, how detection works, the chances of detection, the types of tests or the transparency of the ATP. Zero knowledge, you have sat at home watching him speak on TV and have your own opinion (not FACT opinion). That's cool, don't try and talk about doping though you're clueless about that process as evidenced by your objections.

Muhammed Ali? You do realise he had missed his prime years, look nothing like he did post ban than he did pre-ban, became flat-footed, lost to Frasier and Norton and got hit so many times he developed pugilists parkinsons,conbat sports are my favourite sports, Ali fought 5 times a year at the upper end, not a 100 matches. Hendry played in a sport that has no physical requirements, so no need for increased hemocrit or recovery.,Didn't Nickalus win a major less than once a year? So he never one at least 75% of the big tournaments he won.

You do also realise that Tiger has been caught up spending 76k to the doctor doping aslex rodriguez? a few years back, hmmm who was the most consistent golfer?

From bloodsport

"Galea visited Woods at his Florida home 14 times between January and August 2009 for a charge to Woods of $76,012. In addition, the book, citing a Florida Department of Health Investigation, said Galea's associate and fellow Canadian, Dr. Mark Lindsay, visited Woods 49 times between September 2008 and October 2009 for a charge of $118,979. Both doctors treated alex rodriguex"

"His executive assistant was detained at the Canadian border in September 2009 while trying to bring unmarked HGH into the U.S., and Galea later pleaded guilty to a reduced charge of bringing into the United States unapproved drugs."

Tiger going to baseballs equivalent of ferrari and feuntes.

Marion Jones and Lance Armstrong both passed every single drug test put in front of them.

Edited March 12, 2015 by phart

[Caledonian Craig]

And you yourself have no evidence whatsoever to the contrary so leave it out eh.

Can you please explain why Federer lost the Olympic Final to Murray at Wimbledon weeks after winning on the same court against the same player if doping and Murray isn't. And lo and behold Murray beat that other supposed doper Djokovic in the semis at the Olympics. And the Olympic Gold is much sought after by Federer to complete the full set of titles which Rafa holds.

True I don't know much about doping but pretty certain Murray does. Pretty sure I recall him saying he was dope tested after US Open win so perhaps that is regulation in which case Federer has 17 slams so presumably he would have been dope tested after all of those so how come he wasn't caught? The same goes for Nadal with 14 slam wins and Djokovic who is approaching 10 slam wins.

Andy also is a guy who speaks his mind (World Cup controversial comment), referendum comment etc so if he had evidence or belief any of the top three was doping he would have voiced his suspicion in their direction as well as he doesn't hold back.

Do you think anyone who is consistent in any sport is doping? Do you think Pete Sampras was doping for example or Lleyton Hewitt who spent around 80 weeks at No.1 and if so why has the latter only got two slam titles?

[Caledonian Craig]

Also do you think Murray dabbled then in 2012/2013 as he had a mighty consistent streak and far outdid what Federer and Nadal acheived in this spell and perhaps even Djokovic.

2012 July Wimbledon Finalist

2012 August Olympic Champion

2012 September US Open Champion

2013 January Australian Open Finalist

2013 July Wimbledon Champion

What happened to the dopers in that spell? Did they take a sabbatical or did Murray dabble?

Edited March 12, 2015 by Caledonian Craig

[phart]

You say leave it out then ask loads and loads of questions, not sure what it is you're wanting.

I don't know, why did Armstrong never win the veulta or the giro de itailia? You're assuming doping makes you win always it doesn't. So individual results can never be looked at in isolation. Why doesn't any tennis player win every match? Form is a mysterious concept no one understands or they would bottle it.

Getting drug tested at an event means nothing, a lot of doping is used in preparation, hgh to gain lean muscle mass,micro epo to increase hemocrit test your blood wait till epo is out. Take a pint of it out freeze it, and then halfway through a grandslam re-infuse it and bam you're refreshed(no test for this). Cortisoids used to lose weight. AICAR (no tests for this) to increase power and reduce weight.

If you take a urine test after the event (which is normally done) then you can't test for any of the doping i exampled above. You need a blood test (and even two are still not really detectable) and then a CIR test on top of that. To have a half chance of catching anyone.

I think doping is somewhat proportional to the money that can be made. there has been cover ups in most major sports regarding doping. They say they do these tests which the uninformed think must catch folk, but it's a much more complicated subject than that. They do tests that only catch certain things. During the Feuntes case an schedule was brought out heavily redacted that showed one football team was getting 4 times the amount EPO 2 full racing cycling teams were getting. Team cycling 9 a side, football 11 a side, but 8 times the amount of dope.

Barcelona worked with Armstrong doctor in the late 2000's and early 2010's, then stopped answering questions about him, after he got struck off following the Armstrong revelations.

So yeah i'm a cynic/skeptic on most sports.

[Caledonian Craig]

The leave it out was on your tone as in patronising.

I am presuming you are throwing a wider net here though? I mean more than just Roger Federer, Rafael Nadal and Novak Djokovic doping? When do you suspect they began doping please? Junior level? Had to be because all were successful at that level as well. Yet you dispel Murray from doping even though he does fall into a consistency category between 2012 and late 2013? Sorry but that shows your reasoning and logic up as flawed. Murray is the most consistent player outside of the top three by some distance by the way - doping??

Edited March 12, 2015 by Caledonian Craig

[phart]

Also do you think Murray dabbled then in 2012/2013 as he had a mighty consistent streak and far outdid what Federer and Nadal acheived in this spell and perhaps even Djokovic.

2012 July Wimbledon Finalist

2012 August Olympic Champion

2012 September US Open Champion

2013 January Australian Open Finalist

2013 July Wimbledon Champion

What happened to the dopers in that spell? Did they take a sabbatical or did Murray dabble?

Well i've read some people become suspicious over that period, and his crap form since then has been cited.

Dope tests in Tennis didn't really start to get semi-serious till 2014.

Dunno why did Lance Armstrong not win the dauphin each year? How come Marion Jones never won every race? How come Barry Bonds never hit a home-run each time. How come David Millar never won the tour de France.

[Caledonian Craig]

Well i've read some people become suspicious over that period, and his crap form since then has been cited.

Dope tests in Tennis didn't really start to get semi-serious till 2014.

That still doesn't explain 2012 and Olympics in particular. You earlier said Murray wasn't doping but suspect Federer, Nadal and Djokovic are so how in heaven's name did Murray (clean) beat Djokovic (doping) and Federer (doping) in the semis and final at the Olympics?

[Fairbairn]

That still doesn't explain 2012 and Olympics in particular. You earlier said Murray wasn't doping but suspect Federer, Nadal and Djokovic are so how in heaven's name did Murray (clean) beat Djokovic (doping) and Federer (doping) in the semis and final at the Olympics?

Doping doesn't guarantee victory.

[phart]

The leave it out was on your tone as in patronising.

I am presuming you are throwing a wider net here though? I mean more than just Roger Federer, Rafael Nadal and Novak Djokovic doping? When do you suspect they began doping please? Junior level? Had to be because all were successful at that level as well. Yet you dispel Murray from doping even though he does fall into a consistency category between 2012 and late 2013? Sorry but that shows your reasoning and logic up as flawed.

I don't dispel Murray i hadn't read that post yet as i was typing an other one.

No that's an incorrect reading of logic. Yes when i talk of doping i am throwing a wider net, that should be evident with the multiple people and sports i've cited in our conversation. Rafas name was leaked in 2006 as part of operation Peurto, in which Feuntes was treating folk for several years before a whistleblower shopped him. So the better part of a decade for sure, probably much longer.

Federer i suspect the least cause of the way he plays his game.

Novak is the most suspicious outside of Rafa for me. Puts his recovery down to pseudo-science, like gluten-free diets.

I don't know when or even if any of them started doping.

I've just read too much about doping to ever be convinced a sport is clean, i'll leave the last word for the greatest of them Roger Federer

"Federer: 'Naive to think tennis is clean"

http://edition.cnn.com/2013/03/01/sport/tennis/federer-doping-drugs-tennis/

[Caledonian Craig]

Doping doesn't guarantee victory.

No but phart is going on the premise it gives consistency and Murray is certainly one of the most consistent players on the tennis circuit but phart reckons he isn't doping. Cilic has been caught doping but is nowhere near as consistent as Murray has been in his career. Explanation?

[phart]

That still doesn't explain 2012 and Olympics in particular. You earlier said Murray wasn't doping but suspect Federer, Nadal and Djokovic are so how in heaven's name did Murray (clean) beat Djokovic (doping) and Federer (doping) in the semis and final at the Olympics?

everything i said is a matter of record here is what i said

No but phart is going on the premise it gives consistency and Murray is certainly one of the most consistent players on the tennis circuit but phart reckons he isn't doping. Cilic has been caught doping but is nowhere near as consistent as Murray has been in his career. Explanation?

dips in form like this happen though, if you're able to maintain the same form consistently through out a year that raises doping suspicions (well from me anyway, which might not amount to much).

So using what i said why would you say i think Murray is clean when he was able to maintain the same form consistently through out a year?

Edited March 12, 2015 by phart

[phart]

No but phart is going on the premise it gives consistency and Murray is certainly one of the most consistent players on the tennis circuit but phart reckons he isn't doping. Cilic has been caught doping but is nowhere near as consistent as Murray has been in his career. Explanation?

No i dont, i've posted what i actually said not the confused interpretation you have of what i said.

Classic TAMB reduced to arguing semantics.

[Caledonian Craig]

I don't dispel Murray i hadn't read that post yet as i was typing an other one.

No that's an incorrect reading of logic. Yes when i talk of doping i am throwing a wider net, that should be evident with the multiple people and sports i've cited in our conversation. Rafas name was leaked in 2006 as part of operation Peurto, in which Feuntes was treating folk for several years before a whistleblower shopped him. So the better part of a decade for sure, probably much longer.

Federer i suspect the least cause of the way he plays his game.

Novak is the most suspicious outside of Rafa for me. Puts his recovery down to pseudo-science, like gluten-free diets.

I don't know when or even if any of them started doping.

I've just read too much about doping to ever be convinced a sport is clean, i'll leave the last word for the greatest of them Roger Federer

"Federer: 'Naive to think tennis is clean"

http://edition.cnn.com/2013/03/01/sport/tennis/federer-doping-drugs-tennis/

I don't think I or anyone is saying tennis is clean as it is evident it isn't. My feeling is that there is no way it can be said Federer, Nadal and Djokovic are or have doped and never been caught. They have a collective career total of 30+ years where they will have been dope tested dozens of times. The doping system has already caught some players who have been dope tested a lot less so why not these three? That is just one reason why I think your claim is fanciful to say the least.

[Caledonian Craig]

So phart, Murray's consistency in 2012/2013 raises doping suspicions? Okay then so if that were the case and he was doping then I do recall Murray being dope tested after the US Open win in 2012 so as nothing showed up it is very good evidence he wasn't doping. So again how come this was his most consistent spell in tennis yet he seemingly was not doping. Kind of shoots holes in your theory that consistency raising doping suspicions.

If we look deeper at tennis talent/consistency alone then Murray just has more flaws in his game - simple as that. Ask tennis experts/pundits/coaches/commentators and they will all tell you this. He has a second serve that even women can do better with (do believe speed-wise ir was around 70th best on men's tour last year), he suffers mental walkabouts like we saw in this year's Australian Open Final, loses matches he is expected to win and lacks self-confidence. Those are the reasons he has not reached No.1 for me and the fact that he is playing in an era by most experts opinion is littered with the greatest players of all-time.

[phart]

So phart, Murray's consistency in 2012/2013 raises doping suspicions? Okay then so if that were the case and he was doping then I do recall Murray being dope tested after the US Open win in 2012 so as nothing showed up it is very good evidence he wasn't doping. So again how come this was his most consistent spell in tennis yet he seemingly was not doping. Kind of shoots holes in your theory that consistency raising doping suspicions.

Right so glad we've cleared up the confusion about what i was saying.

What doping test was administered then if you recall him being tested and what was tested for? The simple answer is you have no clue what type of test it was, or even what was tested for, yet you claim it is very good evidence, this is a complete faith based belief system. Not withstanding the organization also has a shown proven capacity for inherent deceit in it;s system by claiming folk are injured when they're actually serving doping suspensions and also completely covering up other positives.

the bold bit is totally false, it's a false axiom. Marion Jones , Lance Armstrong never failed a single doping test between them, hundreds of them.

The other bit i agree with in principal, i've read about the faults in his game, remember my original statement is reproduced again , so folk can know what i was saying. As the argument drifted as the interpretation of my words differed.

[Caledonian Craig]

Okay here is further evidence of how often top players are dope tested:-

http://www.tennis-x.com/xblog/2015-02-04/18347.php

I cannot say what test he was given at US Open but in 2013 (still amidst his golden consistency) he was blood tested as stated in this report:-

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/tennis/andymurray/10290293/US-Open-2013-blood-testing-is-the-passport-to-a-brighter-future-says-Andy-Murray.html

Nothing showed up so despite coming through his most consistent period of his career seemingly he wasn't doping.

[phart]

So phart, Murray's consistency in 2012/2013 raises doping suspicions? Okay then so if that were the case and he was doping then I do recall Murray being dope tested after the US Open win in 2012 so as nothing showed up it is very good evidence he wasn't doping. So again how come this was his most consistent spell in tennis yet he seemingly was not doping. Kind of shoots holes in your theory that consistency raising doping suspicions.

If we look deeper at tennis talent/consistency alone then Murray just has more flaws in his game - simple as that. Ask tennis experts/pundits/coaches/commentators and they will all tell you this. He has a second serve that even women can do better with (do believe speed-wise ir was around 70th best on men's tour last year), he suffers mental walkabouts like we saw in this year's Australian Open Final, loses matches he is expected to win and lacks self-confidence. Those are the reasons he has not reached No.1 for me and the fact that he is playing in an era by most experts opinion is littered with the greatest players of all-time.

Okay here is further evidence of how often top players are dope tested:-

http://www.tennis-x.com/xblog/2015-02-04/18347.php

I cannot say what test he was given at US Open but in 2013 (still amidst his golden consistency) he was blood tested as stated in this report:-

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/tennis/andymurray/10290293/US-Open-2013-blood-testing-is-the-passport-to-a-brighter-future-says-Andy-Murray.html

Nothing showed up so despite coming through his most consistent period of his career seemingly he wasn't doping.

The ATP have implemented a testing programme which is slightly less sophisticated than the one Lance Amrstrong passed every single test for.

The problem is you're trying to debate and learn on the job at the same time. I did all my reading before starting to write stuff down.

You keep saying passing drug tests is a function of cleanliness when in fact that has proven to be completely wrong, you have to let go of that false axiom. Unless you're stating that Lance Armstrong actually was clean for all those wins and he's lying about doping. Which seems to be the less likely option to me, or Marion Jones passed the Olympic level testing on numerous occasions so must not have been doping either, and just said she was cause she wanted to go to prison.

So again you know nothing about what test was given or what was tested for, yet you say this is evidence of not doping. You can cite he was given a blood test a year later, but again know nothing about what was tested and what techniques were applied, again this is good enough for you, even though you know the ATP has a history of deception with regards to doping.

That's fine it seems our disagreement hinges on credulity levels, and what were willing to accept on good faith.