I read an interesting article today about anti-doping investigations in tennis. This was rumored to have been intensified by the Lance Armstrong deal and the doping in cycling. According to Christiane Ayotte, a highly respected figure in the world of anti-doping, tennis is definitely not suspected to be as bad as cycling. The limitations of tennis versus what the limitations are in cycling are much different. It allows for less sketchy stuff happening behind the scenes. In cycling some who tested positive were found with multiple substances in their bodies. Ayotte states that in tennis that is almost never the case, so the concern is definitely not as great. The tennis federation also keep track of the health profiles of the top 25 players to make sure everything looks normal; this is not usually done in major sports, so that is helping in keeping doping at a minimum in the game. This translates into the amount of money spent in anti-doping. ATP only spends around $1.3 million annually whereas the cycling circuit spends around three times that amount. Still they are thinking of putting a stronger grip around the anti-doping services in the circuit. The problems now surrounding the anti-doping is the predictability of the tests. They usually happen at grandslams after losses. Also there blood-tests have decreased while urine tests are just remaining at a steady amount. This means that substances only detected through the bloodstream may be safer from the tests and used more often in the game. Some substances, like testosterone, can only be detected 15-20 hours after ingestion, so the timing for tests has to be more frequent and random. Although there is no reason to suspect too much of this going on, it is very important they do more tests to ensure that everyone is competing as fairly as possible.
No comments:
Post a Comment