The worst cheating excuse of all time?

I didn’t eat any cake…

BTW, I linked to it before but that increased threshold for diuretics came in part from this paper https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8635962/pdf/fspor-03-692244.pdf . Figure 1 is notable as it shows that nobody taking the drug legitimately has a value below 100 ng/mL. It’s a matter of time before such statistical reasoning is accepted for other classes. And those of a more mathematical persuasion will note that doping science has yet to discover the semi-log plot.

You won’t. If they are explained by contamination, they remain confidential and are not released.

I used to get the reports (statistics and detailed) on a monthly basis, everything anonymized until there was a certain amount of evidence and a first (possibly second) hearing with the authorities. That was reports from from UKAD and BC.

With regards to Sinner in particular, notwithstanding hand washing before massage, Paragraphs 83 and 84 are notable for geography;

The Trofodermin Spray is focussed on the Italian consumer market and over 50% of anti- doping proceedings relating to Clostebol involve its detection in Italy. It appears there is now a recognised issue for Clostebol cases involving Italian athletes. The Player submits that it cannot be the intention of the TADP or the WADC to disadvantage athletes from certain jurisdictions, yet that is the impact upon the Player. It is notable that the Player’s attention has never been drawn specifically to the risk to him of Clostebol.

This spray is OTC in Italy and widely available – hence one would a priori expect more cases of testing failure. There is a process in place to obtain a TUI for legitimate use of medications (Sinner may have one for other topical steroid use for his plantar psoriasis – which I also suffer from). I suspect that WADA are appealing the “No fault” part and would like a ban of two years due to the athlete bearing some fault or negligence, not the four years for malicious intent.

The administration of Clostebol must have happened around the time of the Event since the Player has been tested, on average, once a month over the 12-month period between April 2023 and March 2024, and none of the previous tests gave rise to any AAF for Clostebol (or any other Prohibited Substance).

Normally, one of the best defences supporting contamination is a very recent negative test preceding the positive. There are TWO necessary pieces of information; TIME and DOSE – was it a big dose a long time ago (doping), or a small dose recently (contamination)? A single drug failure is only one piece of information. A second negative test a week before means that one can put a bound on the DOSE – and hence infer contamination. Which is part of Sinner’s defence. Some athletes I have worked with submit weekly voluntary drug tests.

A good podcast on this case:

A little while since I listened to so apologies if I have mis-remembered details, but I seem to remember Sinner made the arguement that he had asked the masseuse what the cut was from and whether he’d used anything on it, thus helping to demonstrate that he’d done everything possible to comply with anti-doping (although that is complete anecdata). Also the substance he got an adverse finding for has been shown in one study to contaminate others even just from the skin-skin contact of a handshake. So there does seem to be some plausibility.