Doping on Brokeback Mountain

Any podcast can discuss the latest headlines about Iga Swiatek and Jannik Sinner's positive tests for banned substances, but can they come up with alternative universes of tennis, where ALL drugs or NO drugs are allowed? We discuss wild hypotheticals, sympathize with players forced to run their own businesses (and pharmacies) and call for a little more star power in 2025 player boxes. 

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:14):
Hey, everybody, and welcome to the Renee Subs Tennis Podcast.
I am Renee Stubbs and we are here in my apartment,
and not only in my apartment, but I'm with Caitlin
and with Peco. We are back together, y'all.

Speaker 2 (00:29):
It's reunited, reunited, and it feels good. That song every
time that's happened.

Speaker 1 (00:36):
No, I do not.

Speaker 2 (00:37):
It's great. It's our theme song of three of the
Charlie's Angels.

Speaker 1 (00:41):
It's been a while since the three of us have
been together.

Speaker 2 (00:43):
What do they to see?

Speaker 3 (00:44):
You bet?

Speaker 1 (00:45):
It's bloody freezing in New York right now, it is. Anyway,
we have a lot to talk about. We have a
lot to discuss.

Speaker 3 (00:51):
Of course.

Speaker 1 (00:51):
The news of Eager Ciontech came out a couple of
days ago about her testing positive for TMZ. I'm not
even gonna try and say.

Speaker 3 (00:58):
It is that the gossip magazine from La.

Speaker 1 (01:02):
That's yes, it is.

Speaker 2 (01:03):
Maybe she's an avid consumer.

Speaker 1 (01:05):
She could be seen the type, though doesn't She's more
a type to be reading Tolstoy.

Speaker 2 (01:09):
She's pretty bookish.

Speaker 3 (01:11):
Could I get tested positive for TMZ if I watched
TMZ a lot, which I don't do. I'm asking for
a friend.

Speaker 1 (01:18):
But in other words, you watch a lot of TMZ.
I can see you watching TMZ. You don't watch a
lot of TV, but I could see you sitting in
front of the TV just once in a while getting
some Adam Driver gossip.

Speaker 3 (01:28):
I really like, how was.

Speaker 1 (01:29):
Your Adam Driver We talked about this last time?

Speaker 3 (01:31):
Oh we did well. I'm getting it a little early
on set dementia.

Speaker 2 (01:34):
So Giving Day was the day that I heard the
news about EGO because I was at home starting my
preparation for my beautiful chateaubriand nice.

Speaker 3 (01:46):
How was it? How did it turn out?

Speaker 2 (01:47):
Actually? I undercooked it this year.

Speaker 3 (01:49):
Oh I would have been better or worse than overcooking.

Speaker 2 (01:53):
It messed up the timing of the serving of everything.
We got thrown off by about twenty minutes. So usually
I prided myself on a beautifully medium rare. This year
was a little rare.

Speaker 3 (02:04):
You just did it French medium rare French.

Speaker 2 (02:06):
It is way better to be Is that does that
work for everything?

Speaker 3 (02:09):
Because when, yeah, when you order a plant in France
which is medium, they give it to you rare. Yeah.

Speaker 1 (02:17):
Well it's funny because in Australia, if you ask for medium, rare.

Speaker 3 (02:20):
It comes medium, okay, Like it's just Argentina.

Speaker 2 (02:25):
Give it to me, bloody. It is a lump of core.
No disk to Argentina. Your country is amazing and beautiful,
but your meat is overcooked.

Speaker 3 (02:32):
They well, they do it on really hot heat, probably
right on the I.

Speaker 1 (02:36):
Don't know in Australia, although in certain restaurants now in
Australia they get it right at the spot on. But
if you go to like a Mum pop place, if
you go, I'd like, well done, it'll come out rock.
We don't have outback Steakhouse. It's the biggest light of
ship in. Like when I hear those commercials on Outback Steakhouse,
I'm like, first of all, we don't. Even if you
asked in Australia what a bloomin onion is, they go, what, well,

(02:59):
you guys should adopt that as a national dish.

Speaker 2 (03:01):
You're missing out.

Speaker 1 (03:02):
That's so American. It's so American.

Speaker 3 (03:06):
It's big. We are doing a lot of things to
not talk about the ways because it's another difficult, complex situation.
What it feels like, I mean, it feels like we
just talked about it with Janick Sinna. It just feels
like we've gone through it, and the question is really
I mean, it's not the question, it's just a statement
from myself. It's a terrible look for tennis. I personally

(03:30):
believe EGA's story. I again, like I did with Janick Sinna,
I read through all the things, I read through the statement.
I personally believe her. Whether you do believe or not
is up to everybody, I think individually, but regardless, this
is a terrible look for tennis.

Speaker 2 (03:47):
Yeah. I think a lot of people are probably not
going to do the hard work of reading exactly what
this compared to Janick Sinner, compared to Hanna Halap, compared
to Jensen brooksby cop to and so on and so forth,
and probably people will have their views reinforced whether they
like a player or not, as to whether they want

(04:09):
to defend that player or not, which is really too
bad because it seems like this is actually another case
of the rules and the application of those being just
really opaque and confusing for everyone. And I think for me,
you know, I'm inclined to believe her. It was great
and smart that she had her entire team immediately provide
the other medications so they could batch test it and

(04:30):
confirm that yes, this was essentially an accidental contamination. But again,
the fact that tennis is once again being talked about
in a way that is casting any kind of doubt
about the veracity of the performance of being aware that
you guys, not our current number one women's player but
has spent most of the year.

Speaker 1 (04:49):
Well she basically a loss on no More ranking because
she didn't get to defend her points in Asia as well.

Speaker 2 (04:53):
Ironically, but yeah, like people at the top of the game,
being in the headlines for the wrong reasons is just
not a great tennis advertise advertisement. And I wish, you know,
I have a lot of things to say about what
I want the tennis world to do, but it's not Yeah,
you don't want to spend you want to spend the
end of the year talking about things that we love
this year, things that we want to see next year,

(05:14):
best tournament experience, where we recommend people who listen to
this show go and experience tennis, you know, maybe for
the first time, or maybe a Slam that they haven't
been to before. And instead it's like, you know, we're
all of a sudden experts on doping. You have to
like parse.

Speaker 3 (05:27):
Scientific, Yes, exactly.

Speaker 2 (05:29):
Panels of testing, or talk about another governing body with
acronyms that might have a political agenda, you know.

Speaker 3 (05:36):
So it's just like, ugh, I'm waiting for my biological
chemist degree soon after this year.

Speaker 2 (05:41):
Read the three of us, you're probably the most likely
to get it.

Speaker 1 (05:45):
Yeah, that should be your next that should be your
next sub stack.

Speaker 3 (05:50):
And it's so weird. You know, it's not easy to
come up with a subject matter every single Friday, especial
one now and now. I took a break because I
was like, Oh, the season's over. I'm going to take
break until United Cup and then this happens.

Speaker 1 (06:02):
Yeah, are you going to do something.

Speaker 3 (06:04):
I'm waiting until this season. I'm going to come back on.

Speaker 1 (06:07):
Well, I think you should do something and right about it,
because you'll do the research. But I think one of
the things, look, let's talk about it. I think there's
so many arguments going back and forth. One of them is, oh,
it's preferential treatment. Just like with Janick Sinner, he's getting
preferential treatment as a number one player in the world,
and Eager Siontek is getting preferential treatment because her ranking.
And look, some of it might be true. In the

(06:27):
fact that they both have money, and they both have lawyers,
and they both have a team to be able to
get behind them to get to the bottom of it
really quickly, as opposed to other things. I think the
difference with Simona Hallep same thing, plenty of money, plenty
of resources. I think the issue and the difference is
that it took her a long time to figure out
where the contamination was coming from. That is part of

(06:48):
the problem for her. And then also she had quite
a large amount of whatever the stuff was, roxide that
was in her system, and then there was a discrepancy
with the passport and or biological passport, et cetera, et cetera.
I think that got squashed, I think at some point.
But I think because there.

Speaker 3 (07:06):
Was so much, it was a hot mask, it was
a hot it was chaos, and that's why it wasn't
easily resolved and that's why it took so long for
it. And understand that she feels hurt and then she feels
maltreated in a way. But I do think that and
I think if these cases have taught us nothing but
to look at each and every single one and independently. Yeah, yes,

(07:29):
and you know, look with Sinner Immediately his trainer in
physio were able to pinpoint, you know, the suspect issue
with the spray with the finger, et cetera, et cetera. Now,
whether you believe it or him or them or not
is not the issue. The issue is a lot of
people have a problem because they feel like because he
was number one in the world, he got preferential treatment. No,

(07:50):
it was because immediately they were able to figure out
where it came from. Now, if it's bullshit or not,
it's still the facts are. You have a certain amount
of time to figure it out. Right, then, really important
just for this, just to underline your point, when these
jurors get the case.

Speaker 1 (08:06):
Rural juror yeah, they don't have their name.

Speaker 3 (08:08):
Yes, I think that's just important to reiterate over and
over again.

Speaker 2 (08:12):
Because there's a number where it is the sample of
a famous player. They could just be any player. That
is a good that is a good reminder. You're a
number there.

Speaker 1 (08:21):
You have a number on top of that bottle and
it's like one, two eight, five, five, five six, whatever,
and that's it. And you get given a piece of
paper when you do your test, they give you the
copy of it and you take it away, you know
what your number is, you know, all of that sort
of stuff. And they have two batches and they test
two batches. That's why with the thing with Yannick, it's like,
well that was twice?

Speaker 3 (08:39):
Is it?

Speaker 1 (08:40):
Was it twice? Or is it the two batches, because
we all know there's two batches that get left. There's
sample A and sample B, and they're from the same
p that comes out of you that day, and they.

Speaker 3 (08:49):
Do that just to explain it. They do that to
ensure that not one of the samples got contaminated while
the test was being performed, because that can happen too. Right,
you're on a toilet in a random club house. The officer,
the doping officer or agent is standing with you in
the stall. You're peeing into it. Who knows maybe somebody

(09:10):
cleaned the toilet with a certain disinfectant and the batch
can be contaminated or why they are sealing it off.
So that's why they split the samples and they send
it to the two different laboratories. Laboratories. Is that the
right thing?

Speaker 1 (09:22):
That's laboratories?

Speaker 4 (09:24):
Yeah, laboratory is great, and that's so just this is
these are all details that we take for granted, but
I think they are important in these cases when something
happens to just know why this is performed this way,
to ensure on all fronts that it's really the p
that is contaminated and not the cup or the whatever,

(09:45):
the doping agent's gloves, whatever it will be.

Speaker 2 (09:47):
Yeah. Yeah, So let me just situate us in the
timeframe of we're now talking four days, five days after
the announcement that IgA had a batch of melatonin that
seemed to contain a banded substance that was now identified.

(10:07):
Her band has already been issued and served.

Speaker 1 (10:10):
Not she's serving it now. She's serving she's serving the
second part of it now.

Speaker 2 (10:15):
But I guess my point is that administratively is handled
and now when she comes back that will be in
the pass behind her. And I'm questioning because I actually
don't know what the answer to this is. Yannick Sinner
is now back in the conversation because Wada has now
appealed the decision to dismiss or or essentially count the

(10:39):
band that he had been imposed trying.

Speaker 1 (10:41):
To give him.

Speaker 3 (10:42):
They are well trying to differentiate, y yeah, just so
they are basically Vada in the case of Fjanik. They
are reevaluating the so they do not think that he
was at fault and doping. But what they are trying
to re evaluate whether his behavior was negligent or not. Yes,
because the i A ruled it was not his fault

(11:03):
because it was the physio who was because he was
using the thing, who was using the spray. It was
not a him. It's not the same as an egos.
That's why she had to have a band. Or with Simona,
where they took something, they did take it personally, it
was just contaminated. But with Yannick, he didn't actually take anything. Yeah,
he didn't know. It was his physio. And now the

(11:23):
VADA is trying to discern, sorry, is trying to discern
whether Yannick is responsible for his team and the people
he hires or whether they can rule no fault. That's
the thing that they are trying to decide. I think
you and I should know that. I think you are
still responsible for your team. So that's probably why they've

(11:43):
gone after that long. And I have a feeling that
what are going to make an example. I think they
will ban him after this strowne open just to make
a point.

Speaker 2 (11:50):
But I want to get the point, just to finish
the point that they would be making is that you
have to be even more about what you or any
member your team are consuming using on you having around you.
And for those uninitiated the fact that there are two
bodies governing this, that.

Speaker 1 (12:09):
I is the problem t A and I T I
A I T I.

Speaker 2 (12:14):
A and water who are not necessarily seeing eye on
this is adding another complication.

Speaker 1 (12:20):
Absolutely, it's adding it and it's something there.

Speaker 3 (12:23):
Actually there are actually three. Yeah, there is the National
Antidoping Agency, the NADA, the World Anti Doping Agency which
is the WADA, and then the IT T I A
which is the basically for tennis players antidoping agency. And
every single sport has an own, not every single sport,
but bigger sports, the Olympic sports.

Speaker 1 (12:44):
So basically, look as when tennis became an Olympic sport again,
all of a sudden, we went under our national NADA,
basically our national drug administration. So as an Olympian, as
an Australian, on the look, someone ranked one thousand is
not going to be being tested buy their national drug Association, right,
So in Australia, in Germany, in Poland, if you're a

(13:06):
tennis player and you're in the top X like top
ten for example, you are you are on the list
of a possible entrant into the Olympics. Therefore you must
be under the national drug testing system as well, so
you are under national drug testing. So some people would
come to my house when I was playing and they
were like, oh, there's the Australian Drug Olympic Drug Committee.

(13:28):
They're not WADA, and they're not they're not it tennis.

Speaker 3 (13:32):
Yeah, they used to be called ITF. Now it's ITAA.
But when I still played, they would come. So they
have to show you their badges when they test you,
and they're like, we are from the WADA or the NADA.
And I had did you have two people over?

Speaker 2 (13:44):
And they're like, oh, excuse me, everyone, the International Sheriffs
of Urine are at my front door.

Speaker 3 (13:49):
So I had two days. It didn't happen a lot.
I had sixteen years of my career, but two times
both the ITF and the na that were in front
of my house at the exact actually the same time,
and they were basically fighting over who will get the sample. Yeah,
this has happened to me twice, and to Angie because
she was ranked much higher. So they so just as
a as a rule of thumb. In Germany they are

(14:12):
really strict with testing. And when I was top twenty player,
whether it was top ten or top twenty, but when
I was in the best twenty players in the world,
they would test me four times a month out of competition,
and then on top of that would come to IF
and the WADA testing Angie, who was a top five
player for a very long time she had it happened
many more times that all three of the agency at

(14:34):
the at her door at the same time, or two
of the agencies at the same time. Because the higher
you are ranked, the more you get tested.

Speaker 2 (14:40):
Basically that which makes sense to me. It's just it's
a little bit computively eger I E.

Speaker 1 (14:45):
Yannick.

Speaker 2 (14:46):
Sure, and I think.

Speaker 3 (14:47):
Just to maybe explain this is my theory. This is
very important for me to say, this is my theory.
Why do we have more of these positive tests? I
think there are three things coming together. Testing has gotten better, Yes,
I think tennis has optimized itself so much that all
these players are taking every single medication that can make

(15:09):
them somehow better, whether that is vitamins, electrolytes, proteins, or tailenol, melatonin,
whatever it is that is allowed and that you can
use to optimize your body. Because it has become so professionalized.
I think that's part of it. And the funding in
an Olympic year is always higher for these agencies test
tests more than they usually would, and I think that's

(15:32):
why we had the increase in numbers of these positive tests.
But regardless, this is a terrible look. I can't reiterate
it enough. It's a terrible fucking look that we have
two number ones in the world in the same year
tested positive for DOPA.

Speaker 1 (15:47):
Yeah, I mean, listen, it is a terrible look. Here's
the thing. Apparently the test that that EGA came up with,
it was like a grain of salt dropped into an
Olympic sized pool. Is the how soon all the contamination
was so think about that for a second. Take a
piece of salt, drop it in an Olympic pool. It's
like nothing. So that lends itself certainly to being a

(16:11):
contamination of a batch. Where where these melotonin pillows have
come from? And apparently she's been taking them for years
for a sleep and we both know her. She's a
nervous nelly like we can't even imagine her taking something
of a substance of a positive it's gonna put her
in a positive substance. Because she's so nervous about everything.
She'd be like, are you sure I'm allowed to take this?

(16:32):
I mean that's the thing about Simona. I mean, you know,
you know that was the one thing Darren said. He's like,
she would ask what is in this? What is that?
But then when she started working with Patrick, it's like
it seems like she wasn't as diligent, diligent with her
own independence. It was like she gave the independence of
herself and her choices to Patrick.

Speaker 3 (16:53):
Yes, and that's to just make choices on.

Speaker 1 (16:56):
Her, she said that. He said that, whereas Darren was
always like she was so on top of it with
the Romanian guy that was with her and Darren and everyone,
she'd be like, are you sure this is okay? And
it seems to me that she gave up way too
much of her own power. I think that's where she
got fucked when it came to working with Patrick and
his team, is that she sort of gave over her
independence of what am I taking, what am I doing?

(17:18):
What am my training regimen to him? And you know
he has come out eventually took him forever to say
it's on me because this is my team that I
brought in. So why anyone would want to work with
him anymore, I don't know, because that to me is such.

Speaker 3 (17:31):
A such a bad look.

Speaker 1 (17:33):
But with Eager, I just feel like you said it already.
The testing has gotten so good, and I think over
the last couple of days, Wada has basically come out
and said, we need to be a little bit better
of if it comes back so minusculey, how are we
going to handle this going forward because that is such

(17:53):
a bad look for the player, and you know they've
already admitted essentially you know here it is in the batch,
the same batch numbers the whole thing. There was definitely
TMZ in this batch. And apparently where they do the
melatonin these pills come from, they do also sell TMZ.
So you can see how easily could possibly get contaminated
so minutely in a bottle of melatonin. It's almost like, wa,

(18:17):
it needs to come up with it. If it is
a certain amount, we don't even make it public because again,
this is just ruining a player's reputation.

Speaker 3 (18:25):
I will say, I think eager handled it the best
of all the players with her video speaking right down
the barrel in her language where she feels most comfortable
with the translation, of course in subtitles. But I was
really moved by having did it because you could see
the distress also the relief that it's over in her mind,

(18:47):
and just explaining right down the barrel as if she
was looking into your eyes. I thought that was really
powerful from her, and I have to say she really
gained my respect and appreciation that she did that, because
I think that's really hard.

Speaker 2 (19:02):
I think you and I both that's a lot of
poise for early.

Speaker 3 (19:06):
Twenty one.

Speaker 2 (19:08):
It's something very serious that you know, do you essentially
get called into the principal's office. That's a bad It's
going to be.

Speaker 1 (19:15):
Interesting to see how she comes out of it, too,
because knowing her pretty well, you know her reasonably enough,
you know, I think that you know she's the type
of person that is quite panicked on the court and
plays with fear and all that sort of stuff, sort
of how you talked about Rafa. It'll be interesting to
see how she reacts now knowing that you know Tennis

(19:37):
is it's a joy for her, But it's also very stressful.
It'll be interesting to see how she handles it going
forward because it might give her a bit of a
lease on her tennis to be like, oh God, I'm
so happy I'm playing. You know, I actually really do
appreciate being on the court now as opposed to God,
I could have had a band of a year or
two or eighteen months or whatever it was if they
hadn't found it or figured it out. But also I

(19:59):
just just really think that, you know, I hope Wada
does look at this and say how much is too
much and how much is not enough to be able
to make it public Because to me, with this particular situation,
maybe even with Annik, it's like it was so minuscule.
How what are we going to do going forward to
not ruin a player's reputation?

Speaker 3 (20:20):
You know?

Speaker 1 (20:21):
Now with Simona now we've have situations like the British
player that got banned as well, Tara Moore, and apparently
she's sort of it was a very similar situation. And
she also was able to find where it was coming from.
I think it was the meat in Argentina or where and.

Speaker 2 (20:34):
She got a log wasn't well done enough.

Speaker 1 (20:37):
It was not well done enough. But how she said
she feels like it was very similar, but she didn't
have the money to be able to lawyers. And yes,
that is a problem, but that's where a players association
needs to be a part of this.

Speaker 3 (20:48):
I think this is where we all look at Keithlin. Yes,
texting right, I'm trying to.

Speaker 2 (20:51):
Move back a meeting so we can talk about this
a little longer.

Speaker 1 (20:54):
For me, the.

Speaker 2 (20:56):
I have so many questions about, like what is the
purpose of anti doping in a sport where we have
players getting supplements and working with teams from all countries,
where certain standards, certain things are purchasable over the counter.
Like none of this is very intuitive. None of this
seems to make a ton of sense to me. And

(21:18):
I think whether or not you agree that we should
have a clean sport, which I think most people agree,
I'm actually the outlier who doesn't really care candidly about
doping because I feel like tennis is so hard and
unlike a sport like you know, this is the golf.
This is the part where everyone gets mad at me,
which I'm fine with. If you're taking steroids, for example,
like something that is meant to make you bigger, and

(21:39):
you're playing on the offensive line of a professional football
team and you can take off the other person's head. Yeah,
that's a danger to you.

Speaker 1 (21:46):
Yeah, but no, you can't have it in Tennessee because
if you're taking shit, that's allowing you to be on
the court for three hours and not be as tight
as me.

Speaker 2 (21:52):
I'm not sure that we are catching people who are
doing that with blood doping and various things. So for me,
the notion of having a clean sport is I don't know.
I'm a little bit cynical that it's possible to get that. Said,
if we all agree that we're going to test and
make the protocols that we have in place function, then

(22:12):
it seems like something definitely needs to change, both in
terms of the sensitivity the tests, which are clearly more
sophisticated that they need to be with regards to who
what they are actually intending to catch, and then also
just the transparency of the system. I think a lot
of the issues that people have with this is that
there are three different bodies seemingly in conflict with each

(22:34):
other or at times in conflict with each other, and.

Speaker 1 (22:37):
There's also the length of It's also the problem a
lot of people are having. Is the length of suspension
there's certain things and not certain.

Speaker 2 (22:44):
Things does seem a little bit arbitrary. I also happen
to know, and I'm sure you guys, but is.

Speaker 1 (22:49):
It aubitrary because it does.

Speaker 2 (22:51):
Seem to be arbitrary. It seems like sometimes people need
to want to be made an example out of and
sometimes people are totally you know, accepting of the place excuse.
I would also like to know which players are on
If we're going to go down this road and care
what people are taking, then I'd like to know exactly
what medical exemptions people have for for yeah, add add

(23:13):
there's a lot of grumbling, especially among the men, feeling
like the abuse of Rittlin and other ADHD drugs.

Speaker 3 (23:20):
I've never taken it, but maybe you can speak on it.
I heard that this is this technically would be the
best open you can have in tennis because the.

Speaker 2 (23:28):
Thing that attention for three hours, stay focused in a heartbeat,
that would actually be helpful.

Speaker 3 (23:35):
Yeah, you don't have to be a professional. You can
be an amateur playing matches in your club to know
that the things that lose you a match is the
thirty seconds you wandered off because you were like, my
kids are there.

Speaker 1 (23:46):
Yes, I know, I know one player that's on medication
for ADHD.

Speaker 3 (23:50):
Well, if they do have ADHD. On the other hand,
if you actually have ADHD, I live with somebody who
has ADHD. That is freaking condition to live your life with.
And then the professional tennis player, yeah, I mean for anything,
because you.

Speaker 1 (24:05):
Could be like standing there and all of a sudden
you got bright point and then all a sudden you
start looking around like, oh, he's in the crowd. Oh
what no, focus, like that's not rafa.

Speaker 2 (24:13):
You know me knowing that these are not simple conversations,
knowing that these are highly emotional for both the fanship
obviously the teams who feel like they've been well.

Speaker 1 (24:24):
Have you read some of the shit on Twitter?

Speaker 3 (24:26):
And I've don't.

Speaker 2 (24:27):
I don't currently exist on Twitter anymore good, But also
because of the other players seeming to like roll their
eyes at the verdicts, who are maybe, yeah, for me,
what a long. We're not going to fix all these things,
not one agency or one person certainly, but I think
having a leadership that would be out in front of this,
explaining it consistent and having again one sort of unified voice.

(24:50):
Tennis really does need a commissioner. It needs somebody to
be the way that the NFL when there's an issue,
or FIFA or the IOC. You know, no, he thinks
that the IOC urel corrupt. Is our there corrupt, totally
clean organizations? Correct that. I don't think the goal here
is reasonable.

Speaker 1 (25:08):
I think I know where they're going. You just want
them to all to be like fuck it, just let
everyone take drugs.

Speaker 3 (25:13):
Honestly, no now, listening to Kit, I think she's gonna know.
But then it comes down to money. But right, that's true. True,
But I honestly you kind of convinced me because.

Speaker 1 (25:22):
Someone one hundred in the world kind of for the
best chemist.

Speaker 3 (25:25):
But someone like you know that's true. But then if
all top one hundred players took adderall or ritalin, then
at least the play.

Speaker 2 (25:31):
Think about how the quality of the tennis would be.

Speaker 3 (25:34):
I don't think.

Speaker 2 (25:35):
Whether or not my crazy thought experiments are correct. I
think a long way towards gaining trust among the athletes,
among the fanship, and among the stakeholders would just be
to have a person to be like, yeah, I'll take
your questions. Here's why we're doing this. I admit it's
not perfect. Here's what we're trying to achieve, here's what
we're going with these goals.

Speaker 3 (25:56):
So instead of us basically having to read seventeen different
sources to try and gather what the thing is about,
you mean, there should be one person that explains exactly
what is the difference.

Speaker 2 (26:09):
To achieve this, the reason that Yanik is different from
palap is different than than Ega is this, and just
have essentially what we're trying to create exactly to your
point right now, which is a reasonable conversation among reasonable people.
There was also, and this is sort of just an idea,
very true, a woman Eliza West, who we sometimes do
content with, was sort of saying, what if what if

(26:30):
Tennis had one big pharmacy, what if the tours pulled
their resources?

Speaker 1 (26:34):
Well, the women do women have had you Sana and
they're still usingsa pharmacy.

Speaker 3 (26:39):
All of rent that works, with all of.

Speaker 2 (26:40):
The supplements and all of the things that the athletes
took were just from this one pharmacy.

Speaker 3 (26:45):
If there's a.

Speaker 1 (26:46):
Bad batch and it got it got spine, that's what
happens with the women. They have you Sana, and if
you get caught with a positive test with anything from
the Yusana package, they give you like a million dollars,
like they're putting their money where their mouth is.

Speaker 2 (26:58):
And I guess what if we had a store where
they all could go and be like, well, I was
I only take the melotone and then the tour gave me.
So if there's something wrong with the malotone, and it's
because the what if you did something like that where
it was like, Okay, We're gonna still create a list
of band and approove substances, but they all come from
the same source, so we don't have to be like, oh,
I guess I'll buy two of everything just in case
I get batch tested. Like it just seems like we're

(27:19):
putting a lot on these athletes.

Speaker 1 (27:21):
As I was saying, there is the WTA have you sauna,
and there are supplements that they do give to the
players and everyone collects them at the physicals.

Speaker 3 (27:29):
But that's just supplements. So Caitlin is arguing or Eliza,
everyone everything well and there should be medication as well.
So if you have a headache before you go on match,
instead of taking title all.

Speaker 5 (27:40):
You go to the WTA and yeah, take here's my
muscle relaxing like exactly WTTA and all, and also think
about the amazing like they've become essentially a pharma company
and they'd probably make a lot more money.

Speaker 2 (27:51):
But I also think, like you know.

Speaker 1 (27:52):
Caitlin, we're talking about the WTA here.

Speaker 2 (27:54):
Well you'd have to convince them to try to be
business people and try to figure out how to make
more money. But I think you maybe could hold their
arm and get them there. But I think, like you know,
in the NBA, in the NHL, in other leagues, it's
like you have the team doctor, you have the team resources.
What if we could start to try to kind of
replic to that where it's like, oh, Tennis has you know,

(28:14):
essentially an online pharmacy with pre vetted vendors and whatever
you want. Also that would let people know, like, hey,
Renee has a cold shoulder this year, so she's taking
muscle relaxed and for this it's been approved and it's
on the list, and it's just she's getting it from
this and we know about it.

Speaker 3 (28:29):
Right if you wanted to play there, because then if
you go outside of that didn't even have to be
So it doesn't even have to be. It doesn't even
have to be a full pharma company. It could just
be a digital marketplace where they collect everything.

Speaker 2 (28:43):
Up and up, so you're if you're and then if
you're caught with something else then it's like that then.

Speaker 3 (28:49):
And then you have to be banned no matter who
and what you are and what happens.

Speaker 2 (28:53):
Right, It's like if all of a sudden you know.

Speaker 3 (28:56):
You and then you just have like three band three months,
six months, that is the thing, is it?

Speaker 2 (29:03):
Really?

Speaker 3 (29:03):
But if you do a death Nick not even he
didn't even get caught by doping agencies. He got caught
by the customer in Australia.

Speaker 1 (29:10):
Yeah with ah, yeah, that's right.

Speaker 3 (29:12):
God I forgot about him, remember this?

Speaker 1 (29:13):
Yeah, So anyway, I think the bottom line is I
think for all of us, we feel like this was
absolutely something that was not nefarious. It was a complete
and other It's very unlucky. My thing is, and I
said this to you Caitlin a couple of times recently
as well. I think if you don't have a band
and there's it is suspect you're looking into it, if
you're WADA or it I A or whatever. Nobody needs

(29:36):
to know if they're found to be not negligent and
they don't, you know, have a band. We shouldn't know
about it because it just ruins their reputation. Now, if
they're a banned for two years or a band for
six months, yes hell, yes we should find out about it.
But I think if you're not going to ban them,
obviously she's been given a you know, she couldn't play
in Asia, and now she's been given this extra one

(29:57):
month in between last tournament in here, which was kind
of everyone's like, well, that's weird in and of itself.
I'm like, well, if she's found not, if she's found
not their fault. Yeah, I mean we shouldn't know about it.
We talked about this last time with the A. Yeah,
it's like, I just don't feel like we should know
about it. I think it just ruins people's reputation.

Speaker 2 (30:18):
Now.

Speaker 1 (30:18):
I'm all for throwing people into the bloody under the
bus if they've done it and they've been found at
fault and they're the ones that did it, But in
this circumstance, I'm like, really, do we really need to
know about it now? Forever in a day, everyone's going
to say it's because of this, and it's because of that.

Speaker 3 (30:32):
Oh, of course, ego.

Speaker 2 (30:33):
I think also like having a chair person just takes
a lot of the heat off of the players so
that it doesn't feel like such a every person for themselves.
The tour chairperson, the tenant, the spokesperson, chair of tennis
could say like, hey, listen, this is to your point
why each of these cases is a little different. Here's
what we're trying to do, here's what we're trying to achieve.

(30:55):
You know, we're obviously always on the side of players,
but in some cases, you know, if players spend the rules,
and here's when we feel like, unequivocally does that.

Speaker 1 (31:03):
How do we feel about these players?

Speaker 2 (31:04):
Like I feel like Igoiantec who you think I don't
like her? I don't not.

Speaker 1 (31:08):
I did not say that, Yes you did. I You've
said some.

Speaker 2 (31:13):
Things I have. I compared her to another player who
I think was also not We don't need to talk
about it. Who I love justin Hannah. But I think
for me, the the fact that she in a poised,
tiery or sort of a poised, really emotional way has
to you know, appeal to people through a video chat.
What that's like A that's a bad outcome for her too.

Speaker 1 (31:33):
Like yeah, of course it is terrible.

Speaker 2 (31:35):
You know, I'm aware of how exploitive playing professional sports is,
especially one that makes players feel like they're as alone
as tennis players probably feel they have to be their
own pharmacists. They have to be their own you know,
head of human resources, making their own coaching decisions, making
their own paying further, and she's kids are kids, and

(31:56):
like she's facing a very very serious allegation that she
handled really beautifully and with poise. But should she have.

Speaker 1 (32:03):
To That's what I'm saying. But I hope that LOT
is being serious about looking into If it is so minuscule,
do that test. They should have just done that test.
Oh yeah, here it is. It's it's a fucking grain
of salt in a you know, fifty made a swimming pool.
We don't need to put this.

Speaker 2 (32:19):
Tours should come out of this, in my view, saying
we no longer recognize or want to work with this
organization unless the threshold for noting is.

Speaker 1 (32:30):
X y ORC.

Speaker 2 (32:30):
When I was in college tennis, I had a school test,
we had a conference test, and we had an NC
double a test. So hearing you guys explain the three levels,
all of a sudden made sense to me because of
course the NC double A test was the hardest, was
the most stringent, and was the one that came the
most by surprise. And it made sense to me because
as an NC DOUBLEA athlete receiving a free scholarship for college,
they were entitled to know how we were behaving in

(32:52):
whether we were taking you know, supplements or not. So
it was under I understood it. But again, to what
end are we doing this? And how how is this?

Speaker 1 (33:01):
How's help for?

Speaker 2 (33:03):
How is it helpful?

Speaker 3 (33:04):
I think the biggest difference here is and there is
no getting around it unless we change tennis the sport
from the ground up is that in every other sport
you are more an employee than a self employed person.
Tennis is probably the only sport where you are strictly
the well us. But that's not a sport, that's a game.

Speaker 1 (33:28):
Hey, hey, I agree with you.

Speaker 6 (33:32):
We just shed on a little other sport. We just

(33:54):
shed on a little other sport.

Speaker 3 (33:56):
But you know what, making more of arguments, it's accept
golf as a sport.

Speaker 1 (34:05):
No, we all agree.

Speaker 2 (34:06):
It's usually it's me.

Speaker 3 (34:08):
But it's like maybe the only sport where you're the
CEO of your own company and as you just rightily
put Caitlin, you have to hire all the people and
make sure that you're clean and all the while, playing
tennis and trying to become.

Speaker 2 (34:20):
Tennis is so hard, so hard, and it's like one
of the so many things that these people are.

Speaker 1 (34:25):
He is already paranoid about everything going on in her life.
She looks like she's panicked about everything at all times.
You think she's going to be pet go And I'm like,
you can't even imagine someone like Eager doing something illegal,
because she'd be just on the court. You could tell
in the first point, she'd like, do they all know?
Do they all know?

Speaker 3 (34:41):
Oh? My god, Like I'm a great lawyer.

Speaker 1 (34:44):
Like there's just no way. She's like the last person
to have done something like that, because you just see
in her life she'd be like, oh, they all know,
they all know.

Speaker 2 (34:52):
This happened to me two days ago. I took an
accidental accidental, well, I took it on purpose, but I
thank you, dosed my self with a recovery gummy. That
was a pre performance.

Speaker 1 (35:04):
Okay, but hold on, you just said it. You took
a recovery gummy prior to playing tennis.

Speaker 2 (35:09):
It was it was a preector.

Speaker 1 (35:11):
Can I ask you before she finishes the story, if
you say something.

Speaker 2 (35:15):
I would have already a recovery interview.

Speaker 1 (35:17):
If you would have a recovery something, What what does
that mean?

Speaker 3 (35:20):
Say no to drugs. That is all I have to say.

Speaker 1 (35:23):
So you took a recovery gummy before you played.

Speaker 2 (35:25):
I have misspoke. It was a performance gummy that helps
with recovery.

Speaker 1 (35:30):
So it is meaning it's for recovery.

Speaker 2 (35:33):
You're supposed to take it beforehand so that your recovery
is easier.

Speaker 1 (35:37):
What it is called is THHC.

Speaker 2 (35:39):
It was spiked with THHD and that was the feature,
not the bug. It was supposed to be. And I
had a terrible hour of panic attack on the tennis court.

Speaker 1 (35:48):
Yeah, because you were high. It was scary.

Speaker 3 (35:51):
Yeah, you were high.

Speaker 2 (35:53):
I realized the core emotions of each of my strokes.

Speaker 3 (35:55):
Yeah.

Speaker 1 (35:56):
So in other words, what you say, I want to
recommend it weed is not to performance in Hanser, not
in the least because you've done it all, You've done meldonium,
You've done this.

Speaker 2 (36:05):
You tried to be said was awesome.

Speaker 3 (36:08):
Yeah.

Speaker 2 (36:09):
Yeah, I cannot recommend it enough because.

Speaker 1 (36:12):
Unless you're playing professional tennis, do not take it.

Speaker 2 (36:16):
Yeah, I mean, don't take it if you're being administered.
In my own defense, I asked the USTA, I said,
I am taking a performance enhancing drugs planning to do this.
Do you guys have any rules against this? And they
said no, we think this is stupid, but it is
not against the rules.

Speaker 3 (36:31):
Did they say stupid? Totally?

Speaker 2 (36:32):
I told the USDA officials. I told my fellow teammates
people I would be competing against. I'm going to have
an edge, and they're like, are you you know because
they know I've play done it, like I'm still going
to make dumb joys.

Speaker 3 (36:46):
Like I changed the grip of my forehand a week ago.
But I also I am taking meldonia. But one question,
if we are going from all in, you're saying let's
just allow everything, how about we go all out and
say that's not allowed. Let's not allow anything, you know.

Speaker 1 (37:03):
What I mean, like cold medicine and nothing.

Speaker 3 (37:06):
As long as you're a professional athlete, you're not allowed anything.
How would that be shit?

Speaker 1 (37:12):
Terrible? We're basically already like that. Like I remember when
I would get a cold, which I still sound like
I do because it's been like twelve days it's like,
and why am I not taking something illegal? But anyway,
it's like you were so paranoid to take anything. You're like,
Okay a title and no, I guess I can take
maybe cold and flu. No, I can't take that. It's
got a pseudo effordrine in it. You're like a fucking

(37:33):
not it was.

Speaker 3 (37:33):
You want to hear the best story ever. Okay, it's
not the best story ever. I shouldn't have started it
like that. But so to your point, the no spray,
how do you.

Speaker 1 (37:42):
Yeah, the afron?

Speaker 3 (37:45):
Is that? How like an affron? Yeah? So nasal sprays
and most of them, I think ninety nine percent of
them have fatterments, yes, and fetaments in them. So they
are all on the band substance list. And so while
I was playing for sixteen years, I had never to
take and a nose spra nasal spray in my entire life,
right indeed, basically, And I had COVID while I was

(38:05):
still playing, and my sister gave me her badge of
medication because she had had it before me. Two weeks
dryer covid. Yeah, And there was like and it was
while I was still playing, and there was a bunch
of things that I was allowed to take. But there
was also a nasal spray a spray, and I just
put it to the side and didn't take it because
you know, I was still playing tennis. A year later,

(38:27):
I retire from tennis. I get it cold. I take
my medication out and I see this the spray, and
I'm like, oh, now I can't take it. I'm gonna
put it and I couldn't breathe. I shoot it up
my nose and I'm like on the floor dying, crying,
sneezing for an hour. I was like, oh my god,
this is what people do. The sprays that fucking intense.

(38:49):
It did clear up my sinus of an hour later.
I look at it. It was a spray for your throat.

Speaker 2 (38:55):
Oh no, you use the wrong spray your.

Speaker 3 (39:01):
It was a spray for your throat to kill bacteria
in your throat. And I shut it up my brain
like a dumb da. So in case I make it,
don't make sense. This is why I don't make sense
because I probably burned half of my brain with this
throat spray.

Speaker 2 (39:16):
Yeah, can you even taste or smell? I think if
you did, know nothing nothing allowed and you sent everyone
to like the Amish Country to like train in the
off season. I mean I could see a really cool
reality show there where it's like who who is really
the strongest, Who is really the most mentally tough? Who
is really like the immune system?

Speaker 1 (39:36):
Yes, the best of you like make it in you
taking antium trees nothing for an injury?

Speaker 3 (39:42):
Well, I'm just would make if you make if you
make an argument for why don't we allow everything? Because
everyone is doing, you know, based on the money and resources.

Speaker 1 (39:50):
I mean Sam Stars was taking amobic every day for
her shoulder and ship. You know, like if you have a.

Speaker 3 (39:56):
Bad shoulder, you don't belong in tennis.

Speaker 2 (39:58):
There you go, Wow, so you either have the Survival
of the Fittest tennis or you have completely bio hacked
like the android Gai.

Speaker 1 (40:08):
Because that's all about money again, like if you're rich,
you can afford the best.

Speaker 3 (40:11):
So then nothing allowed.

Speaker 1 (40:13):
Talking hyperbole, No, I think the thing that we need
to move I think we're going to finish this drug
conversation in saying how.

Speaker 2 (40:19):
Are we going to finish it?

Speaker 1 (40:20):
That there is absolutely no doubt that I think you're right,
Caitlin in the fact that there should be a spokesperson
that knows this insides and outsides of every single.

Speaker 3 (40:29):
Ten sad on that. And I also think that the
agency should work together because clearly.

Speaker 1 (40:34):
I was getting I think we need to figure out Tennis.
The hierarchy of tennis needs to figure out how the
fuck we need to get them all together, because it's
clear that they all hate each other and they all
think they're the best. So some somewhere along the line,
with the IOC and with the w t AN, A
t P and every other sporting you know, federation, the

(40:55):
US soccer team or whatever, everyone needs to get under
the same umbrella and saying how, what is what the level,
what are the stipulations, and what's going to come out publicly?
They all need to be on the same page because
ruining a player's career is not okay in my opinion,
and but letting people get away with shit is not
okay as well. So everyone needs to be back more
on the on the on the same page. And Tennis

(41:17):
needs to have some kind of a commissioner that can
handle this better than they are, because right now it's
a fucking disgrace the way they're all getting handled all
these cases in so many ways. And I feel sorry
for the players that get done for not doing something nefarious.
And I feel sorry for the players, certainly the ones
that have had to had a big band. I meant
Jensen Brooksby, we weren't going to really talk much more.

(41:39):
But you know, he missed three tests. That's not great,
that's not great. You know I missed two one time.
One was completely like, oh my god, I forgot to
change my whereabouts and that can happen. The same thing
happened to Emo, same thing happened with him. So there
has to be certain things that we look at where
we can do it better. It's so hard, just so
everyone knows, every single player has to account for every

(42:02):
single day and they have to stipulate an hour of
every single day where they are. Now, you ask yourself,
do your plans change sometimes? Do you take a trip
overnight that you didn't expect to take and then you
fucking forgot to change reform that happens. So there are
all kinds of things. There's it, I a there's wada,
there's nada. There's so many different things. Something has to
be done to make this better for everybody, everybody.

Speaker 3 (42:25):
I will say one thing that I think tennis players
should not do is I know many of them who
let their agents change their whereabouts for them, and I
think that's the yeah, that was you can supposedly share
a pover's issue. That's the worst thing you can do
because if you decide, I mean just that take.

Speaker 2 (42:41):
Sounds very mons issue, which is if you let somebody else,
whether it's the agent of the coach, handle your business,
then that business and that's also subject to fault.

Speaker 1 (42:51):
And Caitlin that's also why she had a hard time
figuring out because she didn't really know whereas. Immediately Ego
was like, here's all of the stuff, here's my supplements,
here it all test it now. And they were like, oh,
it's in your melatonin and she's like, oh okay, well
he is the rest of the batch of my melatonin
and they tested that and it's like, oh, it's all contented.

Speaker 2 (43:13):
Actually, think in the era of consolidation, which I think
we all need to embrace, which I think is needs
to happen sooner rather than later, it can't be seven
governing bodies. It can't be three different doping agencies. It
can't be tours and players and stakeholders in term and
older all on opposite sides of things. I think there
needs to be good luck. A no, but good luck.

(43:34):
I mean, the things change overnight, like people can decide, okay,
we're going to majority own three quarters of the tennis ecosystem,
and then all of a sudden that forces consolidation. Right
like it happens in corporate America, it happens all over
the world. And I think a real players union that
was actually the players advocating on their own behalf would
be amazing to see. And this, to me, would be
one of the obvious things that they would want to

(43:56):
change and say, hey, listen, this is what we're currently doing,
this is what we want, This is actually what's going
to enable us to have a better experience as professional athletes.
It feels fair to everybody. And then if something happens,
the protocol has been approved by a majority of players
because their own union approved it and they know what
the rules are, and then they don't feel like this
person is getting away with something. That person is cheating
in some way that I can't quite pinpoint but I

(44:18):
feel strongly about. And the DEMA standards aren't.

Speaker 3 (44:20):
I mean, I say, the only problem with that is
that players don't read their emails because I remember when
they were complaining how all the top traits during COVID
in Australia when there was a quarantine, why do they
have a bicycle, why do they have a treadmill? And
we don't. We got an email where you could send
a request the things you need in your hotel room

(44:41):
for the time that you have to quarantine. They just
didn't and they didn't read it and didn't request it,
and then they didn't have obviously, just the treadmill sitting
in the high Grand higher to send to your room
when you got to So that's the same thing. Tennis
players are also dumb, like you can see with Chappova,
Love and Curios. They don't read the thing. They just
opine on the internet. Yeah, He's like, what are you

(45:01):
the society?

Speaker 1 (45:04):
I don't understand why these guys. There's no doubt they
read a headline and then they just go, oh, one
month he wrote one month. What it's like, did you
even bother to look at it? Like what it said,
what the reasoning behind it was. I mean, I don't
understand these plays that come out and do this publicly
on x and the social media, saying this ship.

Speaker 3 (45:24):
It's like, what are you doing?

Speaker 1 (45:26):
Like, you know, you don't want to wish it upon anyone,
you'dn't be like, I hope it doesn't happen to you, bro,
because if it happens to you, you know who's coming
after you. Everyone.

Speaker 2 (45:34):
I feel like, having been in the headlines for some
pretty bad reasons at the beginning of his career, has
benefited from an imageryhabilitation. So he of our people who
are actually should not be casting.

Speaker 1 (45:42):
Anything of all peoples, of all people.

Speaker 2 (45:45):
Most people not take out an umpire, granted by mistake.

Speaker 1 (45:48):
Same with Nick Curios and the ship that he's done
on the court.

Speaker 2 (45:50):
Come on, man, it's like, yeah, we could use spokespeople
who are, you know, a little bit more last house,
you know, throwing stones.

Speaker 3 (45:58):
I throw Andrea pekovicin.

Speaker 2 (46:00):
Yeah, me too, because she's commission that's commissioner. No, yeah,
I'd be so good at it, you would be.

Speaker 1 (46:07):
Okay, So everyone out there, right to the WTN A
TP and tell them the commissioner of tennis.

Speaker 2 (46:12):
Or just the people with all the money and they
can do it all.

Speaker 1 (46:15):
Right, Let's get off the subject.

Speaker 2 (46:17):
Let's about something pastile.

Speaker 3 (46:18):
Let's talk about something positive.

Speaker 2 (46:19):
But podcast is over twenty twenty five, you guys are
going to be traveling.

Speaker 1 (46:23):
Down in Australia. Who's your PIXI Straight and Open Now, Oh.

Speaker 3 (46:27):
I don't know. I don't want to. I just have
two players that are because I was not because I
don't want to pick Austria and Open champions, because I
have two players that I really look forward to the
season twenty twenty five. And on the men's side, it's
Ben Shelton. I think he will mature and I think
he will be a real contender to take up favorites
in major tournaments. And I'm excited because I think he's

(46:49):
very talented. But this year I commented a lot of
his matches in the beginning of the year and they
drove me insane. I'm making a massive.

Speaker 1 (46:56):
Definitely not your type of player.

Speaker 3 (46:58):
No, because there was zero structure, zero brain, zero anything.
But I felt like at the end of the.

Speaker 1 (47:04):
Se you were all structure and too much brain.

Speaker 3 (47:06):
Yeah, exactly exactly. So he was like he was driving
me insane. But at the end of the season, I
really think I saw a development. So that's why I'm
very excited for his tennis.

Speaker 2 (47:16):
And I heard you talking about it on our podcast
last week with the Davis Cup. What is it that
you saw in his mindset? Did you see him constructing
points more? It wasn't just a huge serve and than.

Speaker 3 (47:26):
What Yeah, So I think what he did really what
made him really dangerous when he was playing well before
he got a bit more structure in it is also
what made him the dumbest player ever. Where he the
moment it was tight, he would just go bigger. He
would go like two serfs, one hundred and sixty miles
per hour. He would play serve and valet or like

(47:49):
chip and charge on the first serve and things like this.
Because he has balls, it has to be said. He's crazy,
but in a great way. And if you can just
get a bit more structure those balls that he had
will get him very far in tennis because unfortunately, you
need that. And on the other hand, I'm very excited
for Coco Gofs twenty twenty, yeahson, because I really liked
what I saw in the end of the year with

(48:11):
the coaching change and the freaking grip change in the
middle of the season on her surf.

Speaker 2 (48:16):
I was super impressed.

Speaker 3 (48:18):
She has massive balls too, So those that random that
they are both American, and I didn't plan on this
because that's what America needs, is more success attention.

Speaker 2 (48:29):
Those are good answers I because I also like, I
care less about who wins what, although in the time
it's exciting because the matchup is exciting usually, but it's
more like who am I looking forward to seeing play more?
And Coco definitely is not somebody who I typically like
all that much, just because I think she's a little
more defensive and what I saw with her, especially as
Renee noted, if she serves well at the finals, she can.

Speaker 1 (48:50):
Win it, and then she did.

Speaker 2 (48:51):
And the forehand, like, I like seeing her dictate to
go along with the great teavents and the great movement
she's so I like when players add dimensions to their game,
and she has certainly done that. And I'm also really
excited to see what, like what does Danielle Collins have left?

Speaker 1 (49:08):
First?

Speaker 2 (49:08):
Yeah, like, I like the fact that she decided to
retire after having spent most of the season talking about
how she was going to retire to what end.

Speaker 1 (49:17):
I think now I know why she didn't want to
talk about it all the time, because remember they're like,
why is she won't want to talk about it. Maybe
even the US Open where she didn't want to do
the thing and she walked off the court. I think
she already knew.

Speaker 2 (49:26):
Yeah, so if something happened the flip of switch, maybe
she knows something we don't.

Speaker 3 (49:29):
I'm glad. I'm happy No.

Speaker 2 (49:31):
Tennis is better with her in it. I'm looking forward
to seeing that and uh I cocoa for me, Yeah,
same the men. I'm I'm kind of wondering what has
happened to players that I like, who who didn't seem
to have much of a year, Like I wonder if
seb Corda is for real or if he's going to
kind of continue a downward slide. I thought this year

(49:53):
was a step backwards, but I like his game.

Speaker 1 (49:55):
I think was a step sideways coming back from injury.
He still won a tournament, he had some good wins.
I think he had step Toronto.

Speaker 3 (50:03):
I don't think he took a backward step.

Speaker 2 (50:05):
Good. I'm glad to hear you say that because I
really like his game, and also the two French guys
for me are the ones to.

Speaker 3 (50:09):
Watch, like Pica.

Speaker 1 (50:12):
It's so fun you like say that, both of you, don't.

Speaker 3 (50:15):
You, Becca, Becca Boris Becker, he loves fist. He said
he has his eyes on him in twenty twenty five.
I'm exciting to see.

Speaker 2 (50:21):
What he'll do. My favorite, Boris says it.

Speaker 3 (50:24):
Yeah, he says his eyes are on and Ben Shelton too,
but for him.

Speaker 2 (50:29):
I think both of the French guys for me, are
the most exciting. Like I'm curious to see in late
stages of slams with five sets how they hold up, yeah,
and how how they're shot making goes. I mean they're
brother exciting.

Speaker 3 (50:40):
Yeah, I agree. I agree on the Coco.

Speaker 1 (50:42):
It'll be interesting to see how now going out of
indoors because we know that playing indoors helps you, so
if you're double folding indoors, you really have a major problem.
So I want to see how she can handle that
going into the outdoors with the sun, with elements, et cetera.
Because I think if she can get a a more
consistent kick serve, I think that will be huge and

(51:04):
that will take perfect timing right now to work on that,
because that's all she needs to work on the serve.
The first the forehand is getting better. I can see
her that will be okay. Her biggest issue is the surf.
If she's double folding, she's hurting herself beyond. So I
think she's a real threat at this train open if
that's under control. I'm kind of looking forward to seeing

(51:24):
what the Rebakina can do. You know, look, we know
that she had a very hard year this year in
twenty twenty four. There was a lot going on. Certainly
there was something more than just injuries going on. There
was a lot of other things that she was dealing with,
whether it be her coach, whether it be you know,
her own issues. So I'm hoping that with Goran, we're

(51:47):
going to see this player come through next year because
you and I can, all of us can agree that
when she is a rebst she's arguably the best player
in the world. I mean her serve, her backhand, her
ground it like she is just she can get anyone
off the court. She smoked Sabolenka at the start of
the year this year in Brisbane and then you know,
we know how dumb she was with that scheduling that

(52:08):
she chose to go to Adelaide. That really threw her
back because she had the achilles problem and there was
a lot of unsuredness to her start to the year,
even though she played great at the start of the year.
So I'm looking forward to seeing how emotionally and physically
she is in twenty twenty five because she's at at
her best. Lookout because she could be the player with
no points to defend, certainly not mid through the last

(52:32):
part of this year. A lot of points the start,
but not at the strain open she lost early to me.

Speaker 2 (52:37):
So I really liked the way that she ended the year.
I thought she was surprisingly given the rusts, like, came
back and made a.

Speaker 1 (52:44):
Start Sablanca.

Speaker 2 (52:47):
And yeah, she she got it out I think some some.

Speaker 1 (52:49):
Yeah, and she played well in the other matches. It
was just she you know, and people don't really like
the step but well because she played and like, yeah.

Speaker 2 (52:55):
But she only missed a step as opposed to looking
like she didn't belong there. And so for me, I
was happy with how she ended, which I hope pretends
well for the next year.

Speaker 1 (53:03):
I think that's who I'm excited about seeing. And also
and she doesn't have the coach that she had last year,
and so you know how I feel about that. Very
excited about you. Oh, I love him too.

Speaker 3 (53:14):
Hope he's doing well.

Speaker 1 (53:17):
And I'm really looking forward to seeing how much Taylor
Fritz can just push that extra envelope of improving his
net game and his forward momentum.

Speaker 3 (53:29):
Can he become the more famous Taylor in America?

Speaker 2 (53:32):
No, great question.

Speaker 1 (53:34):
I don't think that's possible. I think Swifties are going
to not give him that mantle, but I will say
that I just want to see. I think he got
a taste for it this year. I think that he
got very close to winning his first Grand Slam, and
there's you know, I can I can say like when
I made my first Grand Slam final, and I know
it was only doubles, but it's still the same thing

(53:54):
of like, oh, this is the next big step. I
think that once you're there, once you go okay. Same
with Jesspagoula, Let's see where she runs into in twenty
twenty five, because it was a bit of an up
and down year. I think that he got the taste
for it. I know. I think he knows what he
has to do to get to that next step, and
it'll be interesting to see if he tries to implement it,
because moving forward and being better at moving forward is

(54:15):
going to help him and he needs that, and if
he doesn't, he's not gonna beat Alcoraz and he's not
gonna beat Sinner when it comes down to it. And
one of those guys, just like Roger and Rafa and Novak,
they're always going to be there, right.

Speaker 2 (54:27):
I think that's probably the best possible scenario for him,
which is he has he has to improve, He has
to Yeah, like there's a significant step up, and I.

Speaker 1 (54:37):
Think I don't think it's a significant step, but there
is definitely a step.

Speaker 3 (54:42):
There is a big difference because I saw all his
matches this year. I commented all his mattrees against Cinner,
and he just lacks one dimension. Yeah, hits hard through
the cord. He doesn't play angles, and he doesn't have
a difference maker right now, and so he feels so
much pressure on his serf to serve well. He got
for too close to the lines, he gets broken early,

(55:02):
and he loses the set six four every single time.

Speaker 2 (55:05):
It was a lot of six four sets in.

Speaker 3 (55:06):
That six four six three six four. It's always.

Speaker 2 (55:09):
But I also think that's also the cool opportunity.

Speaker 3 (55:11):
I think so too, because he can add something and
he has the spirit, he has the spirit of wanting
to improve.

Speaker 2 (55:16):
That's why I think the most exciting time where he's
right there and he can choose whether or not he
wants to add and I think he does. I think
he wants. He's a taste for it and he knows
now what he has to do.

Speaker 3 (55:24):
Yeah, I mean we talked about it last time. He's
the player that has convinced me the most this year.
Like I was lukewarm on him and red hot and
burning it in a non creepy way.

Speaker 1 (55:36):
Well, somebody people had asked me on you know what
I did. I think, good Morning America or something, and
they said, who's the American that you feel like in
win a Grand Slam? Because God knows, we've been talking
about it at nausea with the men. The women do
it all the time. And I said Ben Shelton. And
the reason I said Ben is because he has the game.
He has the weapons, and he has the.

Speaker 3 (55:52):
Hootspa, the hoods.

Speaker 1 (55:54):
But I actually think Taylor in the last six months
has proven to me that he has all of those attributes.
It's just it's it's not so much the HUTSPA with
Taylor maybe a little bit subconscious conscious mind need to
come together. But for me, if he can just improve
slightly his volleys, it will make all the difference, because
I feel like he's sitting six or seven great shots
and he's not implementing the forward movement to finish those points.

(56:16):
And against Alcoraz and against Sinner, as I've said many
times now, he's not going to win those eight, nine,
ten twelve ball rallies against them under pressure.

Speaker 3 (56:25):
Well, with him, it's not the chutzpah, it's with him.
He has the right amount of obsessiveness about tennis. I
could see it because I interviewed him in lever A
Cup and he's shy, he's not well spoken necessarily, but
and that was so interesting. It was like a glimpse
into his mind. Anytime I asked him anything about not tennis,
he was kind of stuttering looking for words. But at

(56:48):
the moment I asked him something very strategically about tennis,
he was so well spoken, so smart, so insightful that
I was like, Oh, this is what he thinks about
the whole day. And that's why he almost changes personality
the moment he's outspoken, he wants to talk about it.

Speaker 1 (57:06):
I have an interesting story there because you know, he
and I have talked back and forth sometimes on like
Instagram and various things, and I did mention to him,
you know, I'm always just I'm always sort of pushing
him to go forward, you know, with these volleys and things.
And then I remember, I think I saw him. I
saw him in Cincinnati after they lost the doubles final

(57:29):
for the gold medal, him and Tommy Paul against the
Aussie guys who clearly can volley very well. And I
said something along the lines of about volleying or about whatever,
and he said, who needs to volley in doubles? I mean,
we just we just want to silver medal or something.
But the way he said it made me realize. I
was like, oh, you just don't value volleys. You actually

(57:50):
don't value that part of tennis. In stipulating while I
beat these doubles guys, not even being at the net
on the baseline and doubles, I'm like, first of all,
you're playing on clay. Second of all, you didn't win
the gold And the reason you didn't is because they
probably picked on you at the net. Because any good
doubles team is going to be like, dude, I'm going
right at him at the net. Just be ready for
a shitty volley and then finish it because I don't

(58:11):
because I've played against people just like him, you know,
but on the women's side. So it's like, I think
that he needs to understand that. Yeah, you might not
need volleys to win all matches, but I'm telling you
right now you need them if you want to win
a Slam. And I hope he proves me wrong. I
hope he wins a Grand Slam playing from the back
of the court and never needing to hit a volley
under pressure.

Speaker 2 (58:29):
I don't I want to see him at the net.

Speaker 1 (58:30):
Well, yeah, me too, But I'm just saying.

Speaker 3 (58:32):
What if you win, see your stern up and that
would be fun.

Speaker 1 (58:34):
If he could move forward, change his grip on his
floor in volley.

Speaker 3 (58:38):
I will throw in two more bonus names into the
head bonus name Jack Draper, Jack Draper, mir Andreva and
Mi Andre's my other one. By her side. Off season,
have time to work on her game.

Speaker 2 (58:50):
She's got so much games, so much, she's got more experience.

Speaker 3 (58:54):
Now this year she's got it all. Yeah, and I
think it will be interesting. I think French Open she
will have to defend points for the first time, so
she will get she will grow into herself as an
adults woman, even though she's so young, but with the
experience she's had.

Speaker 2 (59:08):
I liked seeing her emotional reaction in losing that final
to Caseccina to Kazakina, because I felt like she was
ready to be there, yes, and it didn't feel like
she was. It was a young person's reaction, but a
young person who I think feels yeah, who wants it.
And I saw that as a and it was a
lovely moment because not can I give her hug? And
it was nice and can shea you know, everybody loves her.

(59:30):
But I also made me think like, oh, she's ready
to kind of take it a little bit. And I think,
because she's so young but already has all the game,
like yeah, she's going to be real.

Speaker 1 (59:39):
She was my other one outside of that's a good
Volkina was Andreva to see where the next improvement comes
in the next twelve months, because I think she's going
to be a perennial top ten and how because everything
she does is very solid.

Speaker 2 (59:50):
Everything she does, can I just implore on the Jack
Draper note and visa VI the tailor's I think Jack Draper,
I want to see him play tennis more and rock
really good fits. But also, somebody here needs to have
a legitimate celebrity girlfriend. And I think it's Jack.

Speaker 3 (01:00:09):
Taper who is the celebrity girl friend.

Speaker 1 (01:00:11):
I don't know.

Speaker 2 (01:00:12):
I think he needs like a dua lipa or he
needs would be fun, he needs like a he needs something.

Speaker 3 (01:00:17):
How that just came out of your I mean of
your mouth.

Speaker 2 (01:00:20):
Random example. No, but I think he needs like a
glamorous I want a real celebrity in the player's box again,
you know what.

Speaker 1 (01:00:27):
I mean, like a Brookshield spec.

Speaker 2 (01:00:29):
Yeah, like I want Zindia in the way. She looks
so great at do.

Speaker 3 (01:00:34):
You want her?

Speaker 1 (01:00:34):
And whose bucks? Do you want her? Jack Draper?

Speaker 3 (01:00:36):
Oh, Jack Draper.

Speaker 2 (01:00:37):
She likes British guys. She's got Tom Holland who seems
very nice. No, no, slight to him. I want some
I want some star power.

Speaker 1 (01:00:45):
Okay, all right, we're putting that out there.

Speaker 2 (01:00:47):
Well, yes, actually this is something I would like to
crowd source people who listen to the show. It seems
like you're actually finding us on Blue Sky, maybe more
than you're finding us on Threat. Oh yes, it seems
like maybe the place to find us anyway, Please nominate
who you would like good it see in a player's box.
It doesn't have to be Jack Draper's, any player's box,
any gender, any any player, any type of star. But

(01:01:08):
just you know, who would you like to look at
when the camera's.

Speaker 3 (01:01:10):
Pan Adam and Adam Driver and Jack Draper and a
gay relationship that broke back okay Tennis, Yes, Okay, broke
him back Mountain?

Speaker 1 (01:01:22):
Feel me, I think we have to end almost honestly,
I'll bring you two together and this is so we
get broke back.

Speaker 2 (01:01:29):
Broke back, broke back, he broke him back, He broke
him back.

Speaker 1 (01:01:36):
Anyway.

Speaker 3 (01:01:37):
Yeah, so we're going to get into.

Speaker 1 (01:01:39):
Maybe next week talking about our favorites for the Austra
and Open and the season eating up to it and
all that sort of stuff. But in the meantime, I
hope you enjoyed our Broke Back Mountain edition of Drugs
in Tennis.

Speaker 2 (01:01:52):
Drugs and tennis, do them, don't just don't.

Speaker 3 (01:01:55):
Get come, don't get caught.

Speaker 1 (01:01:58):
Drug And now that I've say this, Petko is gonna
want my melotone and that I have downstairs liquid. It's
always a good one. All right bye, everyone, thanks for
joining us this week jeez, m

Speaker 2 (01:02:12):
M m