Is tennis cooked? No, but the temperature is increased

Whether the world's best male tennis player has exercised the degree of caution commensurate with his excellence on the court in order to trigger defense availability is highly questionable. The prospect of Sinner being ordered to sit in the stands for two years remains a distinct possibility.

For the record, add my own CASE 3. Somewhere in the middle is two-time Grand Slam champion Simona Halep. The former world number 1 now has a world ranking in the 800s.

In September 2022, the Romanian was provisionally suspended by the doping authorities after testing positive for the presence of two banned substances, including roxadustat, which stimulates the production of red blood cells and the body's production of erythropoietin, the blood booster that cheating cyclists love.

Unlike the Sinners and Swiateks cases, Halep was suspended for four years, reduced to nine months after her partially successful appeal to the CAS (the case regarding the second banned substance was dismissed).

However, does all this mean that tennis is cooked to a greater extent than any other sport? By comparison, it is inexplicable that those 23 Chinese swimmers will never be asked to answer to an independent referee as to why they all had the same substance pumping through their bloodstreams, like Swiatek and Kamila Valieva. Is swimming boiled?

But despite that debate, the reputational carnage associated with the dominant male sports player and his prominent female counterpart remains both To be fined for doping in 2024 and both hit on the knuckles with a twig is immeasurable. It's a shocking look for tennis.

The findings, that Sinners and then Swiateks respectively imposed sanctions, an eliminated period of ineligibility and a month-long holiday, usually under the guise of secrecy, each of which were announced after the findings, do nothing to increase confidence in tennis' integrity systems cultivate.

There are important reasons why these cases take place under the guise of confidentiality, to protect the interests of athletes. The downside, however, is that the announced decisions must be able to withstand reasonable scrutiny.

In September 2022, another Italian tennis player, Stefano Battaglino, also tested positive for clostebol metabolites. Just like Sinner. And like Sinner, Battaglino claimed he ingested the substance through a physical therapist who massaged it into him.

To distinguish from Sinner's outcome, Battaglino could not prove his arguments based on available evidence. Also in contrast to Sinner's outcome, Battaglino was suspended for four years. His CAS appeal failed.

Although they are both professional tennis players and Italians, that's where the split in the road lies. Because also for comparison purposes, official ATP Tours data shows that Sinner has amassed $34 million in prize money throughout his career. Battaglino was never ranked in the top 700 players in the world; his total career prize money is less than what Sinner and his entourage would spend on restaurants in a month.

One must wonder whether this disparity in the financial resources available to each player is a determining factor in each player's ability to legally defend their positions.

Next, something needs to be said about Halep and her protests on Instagram this past week, about the injustice done to her; that the ITIA has done absolutely everything to destroy her, despite the evidence relevant to her case.

On the surface, you have to wonder if there's at least something to this. Swiatek was given a one-month ban after determining that the trimetazidine was found in her sample because she was using an over-the-counter product. Purchased in Poland, it contained an undisclosed and banned contaminant.

Halep proved on appeal in the CAS that she tested positive for the presence of roxadustat because the player used a supplement product called Keto MCT, which was contaminated with the undisclosed banned roxadustat.

Each player proved that he was not guilty of any serious error or negligence. Yet that is not a complete defense where an athlete proves that he or she is not guilty of any significant error or negligence whatsoever proves that their violation stems from the use of a contaminated product, the possible sanction ranges from a mere reprimand to two years on the sidelines, depending on the extent of the athlete's non-significant error.

Swiatek and Halep each were found to be guilty to some extent; Halep even more. Swiatek had been using the same product for a long time; this time it was sourced in another country and manufactured in another place. Halep used a supplement for the first time.

Halep turned to her physical therapist and tennis coach for advice and guidance on using Keto MCT. Neither of them is qualified as a doctor, sports dietitian or anything else relevantly useful. Neither consulted other people who might be eligible.

Loading

However, Swiatek had been under the direct care of a doctor since 2019, also due to the player's difficulties dealing with jet lag associated with traveling between tournaments. It was the doctor who recommended the use of the product containing the contaminant, as it was sold without a prescription in Poland.

However, when she submitted her sample in August and was asked to report all medications, supplements and vitamins she was taking, she named Swiatek outright, but not the product to which she attributed all the blame, once her test results came back. returned.

The cases of Swiatek and Halep are not the same. They are different; all such cases are based on their own facts. Halep had no problem with it.

Conversely, it can be a worrying time for Swiatek, just as it is for Sinner. A sanction as insignificant as an imposed one-month vacation seems so serious that WADA could appeal. COOKED? No. Non-edifying? Certainly.

Sports news, results and expert commentary. Sign up for our Sports Newsletter.