HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS REGISTER		Author Keyword(s) Vol Page [Advanced]

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) web only appendix Submit a response Read responses to this article Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when eLetters are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this link to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Add article to my folders Download to citation manager Request Permissions Google Scholar Articles by Pluim, B. PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Pluim, B.

A doping sinner is not always a cheat

The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below.

The doping rules these days are really tough. The basic principle is: first offence gets a 2 year ban, second offence a lifetime ban. Everyone seems to agree that doping is cheating, and those who cheat should be sanctioned, so if an athlete provides a positive sample in any sporting situation, the inference must be that they are cheating. Unfortunately, both for the athlete and the anti-doping system, that is not always the case.

The International Tennis Federation (ITF) is very open and transparent about all their past positive doping cases and publishes them on their anti-doping website (www.itftennis.com). There were 40 positive findings in the 5 year period 2003–2007, but it appears that in only 13 of the 40 cases was a prohibited substance taken to enhance performance. In all the other cases (67.5%) it was accepted at the independent hearings that there was "no intent to . . . [Full text of this article]

eLetters: