Customize Consent Preferences

We use cookies to help you navigate efficiently and perform certain functions. You will find detailed information about all cookies under each consent category below.

The cookies that are categorized as "Necessary" are stored on your browser as they are essential for enabling the basic functionalities of the site. ... 

Always Active

Necessary cookies are required to enable the basic features of this site, such as providing secure log-in or adjusting your consent preferences. These cookies do not store any personally identifiable data.

No cookies to display.

Functional cookies help perform certain functionalities like sharing the content of the website on social media platforms, collecting feedback, and other third-party features.

No cookies to display.

Analytical cookies are used to understand how visitors interact with the website. These cookies help provide information on metrics such as the number of visitors, bounce rate, traffic source, etc.

No cookies to display.

Performance cookies are used to understand and analyze the key performance indexes of the website which helps in delivering a better user experience for the visitors.

No cookies to display.

Advertisement cookies are used to provide visitors with customized advertisements based on the pages you visited previously and to analyze the effectiveness of the ad campaigns.

No cookies to display.

Ad image

Swiatek, Sinner, Halep & Moore – What are the differences and similarities in doping cases?

MONews
2 Min Read

Moore fell 600 places in the world rankings during the incident and ended up making money coaching beginners on public courts in the United States, as players suspended for doping are not allowed into official tennis facilities.

moore said Times of July, external She believes the total cost of the case will be £200,000 and has crowdfunded to cover training and ongoing costs.

Her case was also complicated.

Twenty-one players were tested in Bogota, and Moore was one of three to return an unfavorable analysis result for Boldenon. Independent experts have described it as “amazing” because of how unusual it is.

The panel ruled that contaminated meat was the cause of Moore’s test failure. The written reasons demonstrate how difficult it was to prove when and where Moore consumed the contaminated meat. Because she had eaten meat at several restaurants in Bogotá in the seven days before testing positive, it was difficult to identify the source.

Moore gave evidence of the administration of nandrolone metabolites and boldenone to cattle in Colombia, which the tribunal described as “interesting and compelling”.

But ITIA argued that Moore should have been aware of the risks even if he had eaten the contaminated meat.

The tribunal “categorically rejected” that Moore had acted negligently or negligently by eating the meat. He added that players were not warned of the danger and were given nothing until “well after” the event.

Share This Article