The full official decision doesn't appear to be posted at this time. Below is the press release.
ITF Press Release
"London, UK, 14 Feb 2013 - Ms Zahlavova Strýcová, a 26-year-old tennis player from Czech Republic, provided a sample on 16 October 2012 at the BGL BNP Paribas Luxembourg Open. That sample was sent to the WADA-accredited laboratory in Montreal, Canada for analysis, and was found to contain sibutramine, a stimulant. Sibutramine is a Prohibited Substance under section S6 of the 2012 WADA List of Prohibited Substances and Prohibited Methods, and is therefore also prohibited under the Tennis Anti-Doping Programme (the “Programme”). Ms Zahlavova Strýcová was therefore charged with an Anti-Doping Rule Violation under Article 2.1 of the Programme.
"Ms Zahlavova Strýcová asserted that the sibutramine, for which she did not hold a valid therapeutic use exemption, had got into her system through her ingestion of the supplement ACAI Berry Thin.
"She denied any intent to enhance her performance as a result of taking the ACAI Berry Thin.
The ITF did not dispute Ms Zahlavova Strýcová’s account of the circumstances surrounding her ingestion of sibutramine, or that she (a) met the requirements to satisfy article 10.4 of the Programme (Elimination or Reduction of the Period of Ineligibility for Specified Substance under Specified Circumstances), and (b) bore No Significant Fault or Negligence.
"Ms Zahlavova Strýcová’s commission of an Anti-Doping Rule Violation under Article 2.1 of the Programme was confirmed, and it was determined that she is suspended from participation for a period of six months, back-dated to commence from 16 October 2012 and so ending at midnight on 15 April 2013. It was also determined that Ms Zahlavova Strýcová’s results at the 2012 BGL BNP Paribas Luxembourg Open and the ITF Bueschl Open should be disqualified, with resulting forfeiture of the ranking points and prize money that she won at those events."
Another big name caught!
ReplyDeleteWouldn't call her a big name lol
Delete^Your sarcasm detector needs a tune up :P
DeleteMy, the ITF is making quite a show of openness now. All this detail to convince the world they're serious about anti-doping.
ReplyDeleteThat backdating is nice. So she only has to serve two months of suspension but the record will say "six months' suspension".
Oh, and since she only made the first round of Luxembourg, and the second round of Ismaning (the Bueschl Open), she loses 17 ranking points and $2,865. Zahlavova Strycova has made over $2.2 million in her entire career, so as you see, they're really getting tough on doping violators!
She's lucky that she isn't ranked high enough to gain direct entry into the man draw of a Slam! Even a first round AO loss would've multiplied her income by ~10.
DeleteGee, a whole whopping six months - and backdated to October to boot. And people say the ITF isn't tough on doping (sarcasm).
ReplyDeleteBaddest ass on the Tour, finally caught! Congrats, ITF! Now go for the small fry, you determined, dedicated officials, you! Go, go, go!
ReplyDeleteThere are murder convictions that take less than four months. Imagine how long it would take to sort something out if they were charging an athlete with substances and circumstances more complex than a stimulant.
ReplyDeleteWow, 'Panic room' Serena #1 in the world...
ReplyDeletePistorius...'roid rage? If he has a steroid doctor like Armstrong, will the doctor be held equally liable for murder?
ReplyDeleteWhen the South African police have the blood tested, do they look for PEDs? If not, even if so, could the Olympic Anti-Doping people ask for a sample of the blood from the police so they can test it? Out-of-competion testing anyone???
DeleteHA! Lookee here!
Deletehttp://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/southafrica/9877016/Oscar-Pistorius-murder-charge-steroids-found-at-athletes-home.html
Great catch Spartina.
DeleteI have only just come across this case. I have been a bit occupied with matters in Australia.
ReplyDeleteIn the absence of more details about this case, there are a number of things that don't make sense to me.
The sample was collected on 16 October 2012. Normally it would take several weeks before the A sample was confirmed positive. Indeed this player competed the week of 22 October in Germany after which her competition schedule ends.
When the A sample is confirmed, a provisional suspension is put in place then. Any period of provisional suspension is credited towards the final sanction length.
If this player was provisionally suspended after Ismaning (which appears to be the case and would be consistent with the timeline), I don't understand why the sanction start date would be backdated to the date of the test itself. The sanction should start on the day of her provisional suspension so she gets a full6 months ban.
As to the sanction itself, ACAI Berry Thin is a branded weight loss powder. Its ingredients are listed as not containing any banned substance.
http://www.acaiberry-thin.com/au/
In this case the player would have to prove to the tribunal that what she took DID contain the banned substance. That is not impossible but it is very difficult to do as the product apparently does not contain the banned substance.
Finally the banned substance itself, it not a trivial substance. It is banned for human consumption in Australia by the TGA and it has also been suspended from sale by the European Medicines Agency.
http://www.tga.gov.au/safety/alerts-medicine-sibutramine-101008.htm
Not suggesting anything untoward in all this as it is an independent tribunal that imposes the sanction.
It just looks very generous.
It's an interesting point you make about the substance itself. That's bizarre.
DeleteAs for the back-dated suspension, isn't it standard procedure to take away points and prize money for an event where the sample was collected and any future event, and as such to back-date the suspension to include those events. It's like they never played them, and that's why the points and prize money were taken away.
Kutrovsky played a challenger in Texas after his positive sample in San Jose. His suspension was back-dated to the date of his sample in San Jose.
Standard practice is to nullify the results, however ITF Tribunals have been inconsistent in backdating bans to the date of the positive test versus when the player was provisionally suspended. This ban, Kendrick, and Kutrovsky were backed to positive test. However, in the recent case of Kaitlyn Verfuerth the sample was from 23 July 2011, but period of ineligibility back-dated to 1 September, 2011, when she accepted a provisional suspension.
DeleteEither way, I would like to see the full Tribunal decision. The ITF hasn't posted it yet.
Players can immediately accept the provisional ban or contest the provisional ban (independently of actually contesting the case), right? I wonder if there's some distinction being made where people who immediately accept the provisional ban are given back-dated treatment, whereas people who fight the provisional ban are not afforded that treatment. I don't know the details of the Verfeurth case, and I'm too busy to go read that, but she did have almost 6 weeks between her sample and when she took the provisional. I wonder if her case can be distinguished from the others on the point that I just made.
DeleteThe way it works is that a provisional suspension is mandatory at the A sample but sports must afford players an opportunity for an expedited tribunal if they are provisionally suspended. There is an opportunity for a player to contest a provisional suspension but this is normally a quick phone tribunal which quickly rejects the players case.
DeleteIn all these types of sanctions there is opportunity for judgement to be applied based on the facts.
But my rule of thumb is that a period of suspension means a period where you are banned from playing. If it is 6 months then you are banned from playing for 6 months.
So I preferred to have the ban start from the date of provisional suspension. Then it is a true 6 month ban.
It is true that results are lost for the weeks between the ban and the provisional suspension but remember that this is about the clean players not having to compete against a confirmed doper for 6 months. Between the sample being collected and the provisional suspension the player is competing, and beating people taking prize money from them. So only fair they must return that money and also fair that they not play again for 6 months.
Judgement applies on this of course as if the offence took place many years earlier it is hard to scrub 2 years worth of results and then ban for 2 years for example.
But for a short suspension like 6 months I would seek a ban starting from the day of provisional suspension.
For what it's worth, Sibutramine does have a long history of being found in products in places where it is banned:
DeleteOn December 22, 2008, the United States Food and Drug Administration issued an alert to consumers naming 27 different products marketed as “dietary supplements” for weight loss, that illegally contain undisclosed amounts of sibutramine.[27][28] In March 2009, Dieter Müller et al. published a study of sibutramine poisoning cases from similar Chinese "herbal supplements" sold in Europe, containing as much as twice the dosage of the legally licensed drug.[29]
An additional 34 products were recalled by the FDA on April 22, 2009, further underscoring the risks associated with unregulated "herbal supplements" to unsuspecting persons. This concern is especially relevant to those with underlying medical conditions incompatible with undeclared pharmaceutical adulterants.[30] In January 2010, a similar alert was issued for counterfeit versions of the over-the-counter weight loss drug Alli sold over the Internet. Instead of the active ingredient orlistat, the counterfeit drugs contain sibutramine, and at concentrations at least twice the amount recommended for weight loss.[31]
In March 2010 Health Canada advised the public that illegal "Herbal Diet Natural" had been found on the market, containing sibutramine, which is a prescription drug in Canada, without listing sibutramine as an ingredient.[32] In October 2010 FDA notified consumers that "Slimming Beauty Bitter Orange Slimming Capsules contain the active pharmaceutical ingredient sibutramine, a prescription-only drug which is a stimulant. Sibutramine is not listed on the product label."[33]
In October 2010 the MHRA in the UK issued a warning regarding "Payouji tea" and "Pai You Guo Slim Capsules" which were found to contain undeclared quantities of sibutramine.[34]
On December 30, 2010 the FDA released a warning regarding "Fruta Planta" dietary products, which were found to contain undeclared amounts of sibutramine. The recall stated that "there is NO SAFE formula on the US market and that all versions of Fruta Planta contain sibutramine. All versions of the formula are UNSAFE and should not be purchased from any source."[35]
Some illegal weight loss products imported into Ireland have been found to contain sibutramine.[36][37] Similar concerns have been raised in Australia, where illegal imported supplements have been found to contact sibutramine, resulting in public alerts from Australia's Therapeutic Goods Administration. [38]
In October 2011, the FDA warned that 20 brands of dietary supplements were tainted with sibutramine.[39]
from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sibutramine#Counterfeit_weight-loss_products
Richard,
DeleteCan it really be subjective as to whether they back-date the suspension? If so, that bothers me. There should be a protocol in place. Take out all the unusual circumstances where the issue comes up years later. If somebody provides a dirty sample, and is then suspended within a reasonable amount of time related to that sample, it seems to me that it should be set in stone that the person is either suspended as of the date of the sample OR as of the date of the provisional suspension. There shouldn't be any discretion. I don't care what the answer is really, but it shouldn't be arbitrary enough for us to be here trying to figure out why one thing was done in one case and something else done in another case that doesn't seem distinguishable on the merits or timeline.
Nadal says "I’m missing all the things that make me competitive and give me physical confidence, something I’ve had for my whole career and that right now, given the circumstances, I don’t have,” he told reporters. “I’m playing with what I’ve got and I hope to get stronger every day... I’m lacking speed in my reactions. I’m lacking energy when I need it. I’m lacking power in my legs to be able to hit the ball deep."
ReplyDeletehttp://www.tennis.com/pro-game/2013/02/nadal-im-missing-things-make-me-competitive/46453/
Could it be that he is missing the PEDs that give him "speed", "energy", and "power"? Could it be that the "circumstances" are that he is being targeted right now and has to play without PEDs?
oh the irony. He complains ad nauseum about the Sao Paulo tournament and still goes on to win it. After 7 months away from the game no less.
DeleteHe just needs to switch to Serena's coach who says that physical abilities are minor compared to the 20 other factors that make a tennis player great.
DeleteIndeed, the only thing Nadal is complaining about is his physical abilities. But I thought these were minor in tennis and that "mental toughness" and "skill" were far more important, no?
Actually Nadal complains about a lot more than that. There are too many hard-court tournaments in his view, damaging players' knees (well, his anyway) and umpires should not be requiring players to stick to the 20-second limit between points (he is known for going over a minute - but in his case rules are selective), and drug testers don't always respect the players - whatever that means. Perhaps they don't give him an automatic pass. He is certainly an A-grade whinger, metaphorically clutching his backside - like Murray does, literally - in feigned distress when it looks like fortunes are going against him.
DeleteBut the knees are still causing him pain, he says, as he wins his second tournament back in a straight sets drubbing over yet another South American pigeon (and his great defender that he is not a doper) in David Nalbandian. So why is Nadal back playing - and winning - if he is still injured? Wasn't the break so he could cure the problem? If it was so bad how is it that he didn't have surgery? If his knees are hurting on his beloved soft clay then what is going to happen when he turns to the N. American hard-court season this coming month? You gotta feel for him.
But his memory is poor. Before Christmas and when he came down with the virus that delayed his return he said his knees were feeling good. I am sure he must have tested them out on court. That was two months ago. I also recall that back in 2010, when his career miraculously recovered from the ashes of 2009 and he won 3 grand slams, he pronounced his knee problems were 100% cured by Dr Sanchez's miraculous PRP treatments. He should be suing the guy. But then we are supposed to believe Nadal has been chronically injured since he first started wearing knee bandages back in 2005 - despite 11 grand slams since then. But don't expect the media to call him on any of this bullshit.
.
Richard you make some good points. Why on earth is Nadal competing if he still has knee pain? A few months back he said he would only come back when he felt like he was 100%. After seven months, he STILL has knee pain and did not have surgery for this "serious injury?"
DeletePlus why was Nadal's dad so emotional after a 250 tournament win in South America? Why did Nadal look so unhappy after his win yesterday? Something is fishy in Denmark, no question about it and it has nothing to do with a "knee injury" methinks. I can't escape from the feeling that something is going to break in tennis involving a big star or two and drug use.
richard is always on-point. It's particularly interesting to me that in the past Nadal has claimed PRP to be enormously beneficial to his "condition." So I wonder why he didn't opt for PRP during this "hiatus" of hi, now that his knees are evidently worse than ever. Surely if his knees were actually still bothering him he would have opted for it again, right? His m.o. is that the PRP heals him but then those vicious, mean hardcourts re-aggravate his malady. So now we're left with the simple fact that PRP either helped or it didn't help.
Delete- If it helped in the past then why doesn't he think it will help any more? That doesn't make sense.
- If it never actually helped why did he say it did? That doesn't make sense either for obvious reasons. That would lead to more questions than answers.
What is the other option in the PRP scenario?
Seems much more obvious that his "knee problems' are total horseshit. He doesn't have knee problems. He never has. At least not chronic, debilitating knee problems. Sure, maybe he's twisted his knee in the past a time or two. But the type of condition we're lead to believe he has is a complete ruse.
THASP posted a thousand times that PRP is used for injection of PED's - that's the whole point. PRP is NOT some miraculous therapy. It's a mask.
As richard so aptly pointed out he was all ready to go in early January. Knees were fine. But then that damned ol' "virus" got him. Next thing we know his knees are shaky all over again, but this time he's decided to go ahead and play through it and "hope" it gets better.
Not to mention that he hasn't played a hard court tournament in 11 months so one has to ask - is it really the hardcourts that cause his "ailment?" One would have to believe he actually has knee problems to believer they're caused by hardcourts. I don't.
If one chooses to believe his claims of how many times he's been tested recently without believing it's HIGHLY SUSPICIOUS and represents the smoke to the proverbial fire, then one chooses to be a complete idiot. If he was actually tested that many times there's a reason for it. If he wasn't actually tested that many times then why the hell is he lying about it?
Even the the Great Yellow Wonder got popped at least twice in his tenure, and an extraordinarily small number of people were privy to it. If that can happen to the GYW it can happen to Nadal. They have one major thing in common - they were the two most obviously suspicious competitors in their respective sport.
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteHe's just a whiny b****. Even claimed that the Sao Paulo clay is faster than the USO hardcourt, among other excuses. I saw his match against the lucky loser who didn't play well at all but the match still went over 3 sets. I'd say Monte Carlo and RG 2013 are both up for grabs (for now).
ReplyDelete"I’m missing all the things that make me competitive and give me physical confidence, something I’ve had for my whole career and that right now, given the circumstances, I don’t have"
ReplyDeleteWow! Can't believe he actally said that!
It really sounds like he's talking about PED's!
DeleteAre we to believe he actually won a tournament clean? Is that why his father was so emotional after the win? Does the senior Nadal maybe think winning a 250 tournament playing not a single player in the top 50 is some indication of how he'll perform when he faces some real competition? All the power to him but I have a feeling he'll even have trouble in Acapulco if he's actually clean. TBH I find it hard to believe he's clean, even as i write this. If he is clean or cleaner it would explain him starting his return on clay and possibly skipping IW and Miami. He's got to be terrified of how he'll perform off of clay. After all, he hasn't even won a non-clay tournament since 2010.
DeleteRemember, he is struggling because he is still "injured". Although it's hard to understand why he is back if he still has bad knees.
DeleteSo, surprise surprise, steroids found in the home of Oscar Pistorius aka The Blade. The Southafrican double amputee runner who won two golds (I believe) in the Paraolympics and won the right to race side by side with runners in the actual Olympics. Oh, and he just brutally murdered his girlfriend.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
DeleteIsn't that slander? He hasn't been convicted yet, therefore he is innocent. You should remove his comment as well.
DeleteAlso, why the "brutally"? Is there a non brutal way you can kill somebody?
DeleteI mean you could mean "particularly brutal" but I'd say shooting someone is average.
He's hardly got the physique of a steroid user nor has he ever failed a test. As a sports fan, it's truly impossible to trust that anyone is 100% clean. Pistorius as a doper is not something that I would've guessed. I suppose I bought into the myth of the "blade runner" as much as anyone.
ReplyDeleteLance never failed a test. Nor did Marion. Or Barry Bonds. Maybe Pistorius is just one of the "60% of athletes" believed to be doping at the London Olympics (estimate courtesy of Victor Conte)?
DeleteYes that means everyone whether or not they failed a test MUST be a doper.
DeleteNo, it doesn't. The fact that some are doping does not mean all are - a point of basic logic. But given the difficulties of detection we can infer there are likely to be many more doping than are caught. As we know, testing is no guarantee of catching cheats, or that they are clean because they don't produce a positive. Hence Victor Conte's assessment (accepted by former WADA head Dick Pound as probably true) that a majority of athletes at the Olympics were likely to be doping. So why was Pistorius (who we are told never failed a drug test) in possession of steroids?
DeleteI didn't claim that I don't believe he is doping.
DeleteGood news is that NIKE has now dumped Pistorius & may pull current advertising that features him. Also, WADA says it is now aware of steroids found in Pistorius' home & will wait until the criminal case is over before opening a case against him. Looks like one by one major athletes will fall... I also wonder if Lleyton Hewitt & Samantha Stosur will be outed eventually due to the problems with widespread doping in Oz. Time will tell...
ReplyDeletethat awkward moment when Pistorius gets acquitted because accidentally shooting your girlfriend is just as likely, if not more likely than intentionally murdering her.
DeleteOh wait, that would make too much sense would it?
Yep, accidentally blowing away your girlfriend in the bathroom happens all the time.
Delete3 bullets were accidentally discharged. Literally got no legs to stand on with his claim.
DeleteI think Nike should be more pro-active and dump their stars BEFORE they are outed as dopers. It beggars belief that sporting insiders couldn't know what is going on backstage.
ReplyDeleteA skeptical person might think that sponsors are part of the reason why athletes aren't caught. There's a lot of money involved and maybe (this is purely hypothetical) the sponsors have a lot of pull and are able to protect their top athletes. That is, until they're arrested for murder or are outed by their teammates. I'm not pointing any fingers here, just sayin'...
ReplyDeleteThat's an excellent point. A cynical person might also suggest that athletes' charity work also contributes to their "untouchability" when it comes to misbehaviour.
Delete