Tennis 2016

Djokovics competition no doubt has been better than Federers early years. Even though Roddick was a very good player. Only player to have a winning record against Djokovic! Roddick at his peak would be in the top 6 currently. He was miles better than tosh like Raionic.

But I still think Djokovic is beatable. It's ashame Rafa has had so many injuries the last few years. After the beatings Djokovic gave him in 2011. He came back in 2013 and started beating Djokovic. Since the 2014 French open he's not been the same. It just annoys me as he looked really good these past few months and just mentally I felt he lost to Djokovic at Rome. He had the chances and was leading in the first set like 5-3. The worst thing is wrist injuries are the worst and he could end up missing a lot of tournaments. Just look at Del Potro and Laura Robson. Del Potro has been robbed of a better career because of the injury.

Djokovic for me was much better in 2011 as he beat prime Nadal consistently that year. Only for Federer to beat him at the French otherwise I felt he would have won that year.
 
Ole's_toe_poke said:
Not on clay. Also people do forget how Godly Nadal was when he was 100% fully fit.
Click to expand...
Based on most of the replies I'd say more people forget how good Federer was from 2004 to 2007... But yeah peak Nadal beats anyone on clay, don't think anyone would argue with that.
 
VP said:
Djokovic tries too hard to please the crowd. Charisma is innate, not coached. Also there's a definite sense of only-singing-when-he's-winning with him (eg. applauding Murray's shots once the match was sealed)..
Click to expand...
Djokovic is the only player on the tour who applauds good shots and it doesn't matter what the score is at the time. He was losing to Nishikori at one of the recent masters and applauded a great shot by Kei.
 
Last edited:
Mark_Barca said:
Djokovic is the only player on the tour who applauds good shots and it doesn't matter what the score is at the time. He was losing to Nishikori at one of the recent masters and applauded a great shot by Kei.
Click to expand...

Yeah I agree with that. Ive seen Djokovic applaud great shots against him even in losing positions or when its been fairly even.
 
Sharapova banned for 2 years.

Personally think that is harsh.
 
I don't think it's harsh personally.

On the balance of probabilities (from what I have seen) she was knowingly taking a PED to enhance performance. When it ceased to be a legal PED she continued to take it. Even if that was an oversight there's something insidious about abusing (imo) the lag time between PEDs being established and outlawed in order to gain an advantage in sport.

I fear that the reality of elite sport these days is that it may be bordering on a necessity in order to compete but it is still absolutely right to severely penalise those who are caught crossing the line.
 
She used it 6 times in 7 days in 2015? Was it still legal at that time?
 
Lay said:
She used it 6 times in 7 days in 2015? Was it still legal at that time?
Click to expand...
It was legal, though on WADA (?) watch list last year. I guess a lot of it is down to intent. She was claiming she was taking this drug for a medical condition, or some nonsense like that.

Maybe these symptoms are linked to the grass at Wimbledon and that's why she took it so much during this period...
 
Really have no sympathy. Don't see how there is doubt she was trying to boost her performance by using this thing for purposes it wasn't designed for. That's doping.
 
RDCR07 said:
How is it harsh? It should be more severe.
Click to expand...

Because the drug was legal in 2015. How many other athletes were using it back then. So she shouldn't be punished for that.

She should only be punished for when it was illegal. If they punishing her for 2015 then they should punish every other Russian player or whoever else took it back then.
 
Bojan11 said:
Because the drug was legal in 2015. How many other athletes were using it back then. So she shouldn't be punished for that.

She should only be punished for when it was illegal. If they punishing her for 2015 then they should punish every other Russian player or whoever else took it back then.
Click to expand...

This is what I was trying to figure out. She might have taken it excessively and may have been totally aware that it boosts performance, but you can't punish her for it if it wasn't illegal. Punish her for using it after it was on the banned list, sure.
 
Lay said:
This is what I was trying to figure out. She might have taken it excessively and may have been totally aware that it boosts performance, but you can't punish her for it if it wasn't illegal. Punish her for using it after it was on the banned list, sure.
Click to expand...
I'm entirely comfortable with taking in to account how much she used this thing previously when deciding how to punish her for her mistake once it was banned.
 
DiseaseOfTheAge said:
I'm entirely comfortable with taking in to account how much she used this thing previously when deciding how to punish her for her mistake once it was banned.
Click to expand...

But it wasn't illegal.

Cillic got 4 months. Troiki got 12 months for missing a drugs test. Serena got nothing when she refused to let drug testers in her house.

She should have been given 12 months and no doubt she will get that when she appeals. It should be a year for every tournament they cheat in.
 
Bojan11 said:
But it wasn't illegal.

Cillic got 4 months. Troiki got 12 months for missing a drugs test. Serena got nothing when she refused to let drug testers in her house.

She should have been given 12 months and no doubt she will get that when she appeals. It should be a year for every tournament they cheat in.
Click to expand...
One of the biggest scandals in tennis. They didn't even come back for another test. A joke.
 
Bojan11 said:
But it wasn't illegal.

Cillic got 4 months. Troiki got 12 months for missing a drugs test. Serena got nothing when she refused to let drug testers in her house.

She should have been given 12 months and no doubt she will get that when she appeals. It should be a year for every tournament they cheat in.
Click to expand...
I don't know anything about those cases but I'm always on the side of harsh sentencing. If they were lenient then that's not something I'm okay with.

But I am okay with punishing people who abused the fact something was legal and then were stupid enough not to stop once it was banned.
 
Bojan11 said:
Because the drug was legal in 2015. How many other athletes were using it back then. So she shouldn't be punished for that.

She should only be punished for when it was illegal. If they punishing her for 2015 then they should punish every other Russian player or whoever else took it back then.
Click to expand...

She admitted to taking it in 2016 didn't she? I'm almost certain she did.

She's incredibly lucky not to get a 4 year ban, in fact, I'm not sure why she didn't.
 
NinjaFletch said:
She admitted to taking it in 2016 didn't she? I'm almost certain she did.

She's incredibly lucky not to get a 4 year ban, in fact, I'm not sure why she didn't.
Click to expand...
Yes, she did. She apparently didn't know it was now banned (which sounds entirely believable as I can't believe she'd be stupid enough not to know it was easily tested for - even if she was stupid enough not to check the list).
 
NinjaFletch said:
She admitted to taking it in 2016 didn't she? I'm almost certain she did.

She's incredibly lucky not to get a 4 year ban, in fact, I'm not sure why she didn't.
Click to expand...
Yeah she has.

Bojan11 said:
But it wasn't illegal.

Cillic got 4 months. Troiki got 12 months for missing a drugs test. Serena got nothing when she refused to let drug testers in her house.

She should have been given 12 months and no doubt she will get that when she appeals. It should be a year for every tournament they cheat in.
Click to expand...
One of the main points they consider is intent, no?. If someone takes something by accident; medical purposes or a one off, they will give some slack.

Seems pretty clear what her intentions were and 2015 demonstrates why. She's not getting punished for 2015, but if you're going to abuse the rules, you better fix up when they change.
 
NinjaFletch said:
She admitted to taking it in 2016 didn't she? I'm almost certain she did.

She's incredibly lucky not to get a 4 year ban, in fact, I'm not sure why she didn't.
Click to expand...

Yes the drug was added to the banned list at the beginning of 2016 and once she realised that she informed the ITF.

But like I said you can only ban her for the tournament she played in and took it. Which was the Aussie open. So technically it is not a repeat offence.

It is harsh compared to other sports and recent cases.

Cillic got 4 months because his mum went out to buy him medicine, which had performance enhancing boosts. He didn't read the warning on the box and he was also playing in a tournament at the time.
 
saivet said:
One of the main points they consider is intent, no?. If someone takes something by accident; medical purposes or a one off, they will give some slack.

Seems pretty clear what her intentions were and 2015 demonstrates why. She's not getting punished for 2015, but if you're going to abuse the rules, you better fix up when they change.
Click to expand...
That is a rather better put version of what I've been trying to say.
 
DiseaseOfTheAge said:
Yes, she did. She apparently didn't know it was now banned (which sounds entirely believable as I can't believe she'd be stupid enough not to know it was easily tested for - even if she was stupid enough not to check the list).
Click to expand...

It's believable, but its downright daft and no defence.

If you're taking a drug for performance enhancing reasons (hence why the 2015 info is relevant) you should check, double check and triple check to make sure that its not been banned (especially if its already on the watchlist, which it was).

Ignorance of the law is no excuse to break the law.

She broke the Wada code by taking a banned substance and should have been banned for four years, in consistency with the policy that Wada themselves set out. Her and her dad being massive idiots doesn't change that.

Edit: I've just read that the 2 year punishment is in line with Wada policy if the athlete comes clean which seems daft, but if thats the case then there's no cause for complaint.
 
Last edited:
NinjaFletch said:
It's believable, but its downright daft and no defence.

If you're taking a drug for performance enhancing reasons (hence why the 2015 info is relevant) you should check, double check and triple check to make sure that its not been banned (especially if its already on the watchlist, which it was).

Ignorance of the law is no excuse to break the law.

She broke the Wada code by taking a banned substance and should have been banned for four years, in consistency with the policy that Wada themselves set out. Her and her dad being massive idiots doesn't change that.
Click to expand...
Yep, absolutely.
 
Saying she only caught her once is missing the point entirely.

The system already gets abused - if you're going to abuse the system don't expect leniency when you fall foul of it.
 
Nike Inc. said Wednesday it will continue its sponsorship of tennis player Maria Sharapova, following a ruling by the International Tennis Federation that the tennis champion serve a two-year ban for doping.

"The ITF tribunal has found that Maria did not intentionally break its rules,” the company said. "Maria has always made her position clear, has apologized for her mistake and is now appealing the length of the ban. Based on the decision of the ITF and their factual findings, we hope to see Maria back on court and will continue to partner with her."
Click to expand...
In other words Nike are perfectly fine with intentional doping with not-yet-banned PEDs.
 
Last edited:
A lot of athletes in different sports were caught since the start of the year because of Meldonium, but many were let off the hook as WADA admitted they weren't sure how long it takes the body to clean itself from this stuff, meaning they could have used it in 2015 when it was OK.

But Sharapova admitted using it in 2016, which obviously makes all the difference.
 
Red Devil 26 said:
I've always felt this about watching these two play, but don't possess a more nuanced knowledge of Tennis to truly explain why. Would you say it's down to their similarities style wise? Always seemed to me that Djokovic just plays Murray's game in a more aggressive and efficient manner. Mentally much tougher too of course. Even some of their 5 setters have bored me.
Click to expand...
Pretty much. Murray is way too passive against Djokovic who is at his best on the baseline pinging balls crosso courticaria. Murray relies on his ability to work shots with his great defence and athleticism and his tactical mind to create openings. Djokovic is machine like in his offensive game and Murray can't outrun him or outlast him defensively until he gets an error.

Wawrinka has the best game for him. His game is the most aggressive and powerful, forcing Djokovic back and he also has one of the best passing shot I have seen making it very hard for Djokovic to step forwards and dictate the game.
 
HEAD and Nike sticking by Sharapova and have heavily criticised WADA.
 
Red Devil 26 said:
I've always felt this about watching these two play, but don't possess a more nuanced knowledge of Tennis to truly explain why. Would you say it's down to their similarities style wise? Always seemed to me that Djokovic just plays Murray's game in a more aggressive and efficient manner. Mentally much tougher too of course. Even some of their 5 setters have bored me.
Click to expand...

Essentially.

I feel a bit sorry for Murray. He's lost so many Grand Slam finals but in another era I am sure he would have won 4 or 5. He has been placed against arguably the 3 greatest players of all time.
 
Poor Nadal out of Wimbledon. Terrible luck with injuries.
 
does it really matter these days? when you look at his results there in the last 5 years, it's like Viktor Troicki missing the tournament.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.