Jannik Sinner ‘deliberate’ doping theory floated by leading scientist in shock claim

Jannik Sinner is continuing his defence of the Australian Open title despite a huge cloud hovering over him following his two failed drug tests last March.
Sinner was initially cleared by the International Tennis Integrity Agency (ITIA) of wrongdoing after an anabolic steroid was found in his system, but the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) appeal has prolonged his agony and there is a widespread expectation that he could now serve a ban.
The ITIA cleared Sinner of blame as they accepted his explanation that the banned substance entered his body as a result of a massage from his physio, who had used a spray containing the steroid to treat a cut on their finger with the Court of Arbitration for Sport set to hear the WADA appeal against the decision not to ban Sinner on April 16 and 17.
The world No 1 will be hoping to convince the CAS tribunal that he did everything he could to avoid the positive doping result, yet renowned sports scientist Dr Ross Tucker has raised the prospect that he ‘could have been using clostebol deliberately’, as he gave his views on the story to the Indo Sport podcast.
Citing a medical study that highlighted how clostebol could enter an athlete’s system via a massage, Dr Tucker suggested that could have opened the door for an athlete to cheat.
“There is a chance that Sinner was using clostebol deliberately, knowing it is in the cream and knowing that if he is ever caught, he has got a ready-made defence from contamination because there has been a study that clears me,” said Tucker.
“So it is possible that it is just a really clever way of doping, but you can’t prove that. So therefore you have to say the player is clear. Maybe CAS will explore some things that the initial decision didn’t.”
The story Sinner offered up to explain how the clostebol got into his system was considered to be unbelievable by many observers, but Dr Tucker confirmed the position offered up by the world No 1 was credible.
“He produced a paper in his defence that was set up to look at this from an Italian university,” he continued. “This study explored different ways you could be contaminated.
“So, for instance, participant A uses the clostebol cream and shakes hands with half a dozen people. So that is a very short contact.
“They tested those people over the next 48 hours to see if they could detect it and they could. So it stacked up. It is possible to transfer clostebol in massage cream from one person to another. So he is able to make the case for the source of the positive test.”
More Tennis News
Jannik Sinner ‘suspension may be coming’ warns Grand Slam-winning great
Despite that explanation, Dr Tucker added this significant observation, as he suggested Sinner may struggle to prove he took every precaution to avoid a positive test.
“Clostebol has a history from Eastern Germany and it was very clearly used for deliberate doping,” he added.
“Then it falls off the map and it re-emerges in Italy, where there is a spait of these contamination arguments. Only in Italy, which was interesting. The point is, clostebol raises eyebrows.
“WADA have said they accept Sinner’s explanation for the contamination, but they are arguing there should be some degree of fault. WADA will argue the athlete should be more responsible than the first decision.”
Tennis365 spoke to ITIA CEO Karen Moorhouse about the Sinner case, as she suggested the Italian will face a minimum one-year suspension from tennis if the WADA appeal goes against him, as she compared his case to those of former world No 1’s Iga Swiatek and Simona Halep after they failed doping tests.
“If you test positive for a banned substance, your starting point for a possible sanction is four years,” Moorhouse told Tennis365 in an exclusive interview.
“If you can demonstrate that it was not intentional, that reduces to two years. Then, if you can prove there was no fault, there is no sanction.
“In addition, a decision of ‘no significant fault or negligence’ could fall between a reprimand and two years. That applies to any cases around a contaminated substance.
“It’s the same rules and the same processes for every player. All cases are different and each case turns on individual facts.
“Cases can also be quite complex, so it isn’t right to look at two headlines and draw comparisons as the detail is always the key part.
“Let’s take Swiatek and Halep. The CAS tribunal found that her (Halep’s) supplement was contaminated. So just in relation to that finding, they said nine months (suspension).
“In relation to Swiatek, the contaminated product was a medication. So it was not unreasonable for a player to assume that a regulated medication would contain what it says on the ingredients.
“Therefore, the level of fault she could accept was at the lowest level as there was very little more she could have done reasonably to mitigate the risk of that product being contaminated.
“Halep’s contamination was not a medication. It was a collagen supplement and her level of fault was found to be higher.
“The complication with the Sinner case is the positive test was not a result of a contaminated product. That is the difference between Swiatek and Halep. There is no contamination here.
“The product that the masseuse used on his finger was not contaminated. That is exactly what it said the product contained on the packaging.
“And so because it is not a contaminated product, the range for a sanction is one year to two years.”
Moorhouse’s comments banish the notion that Sinner could be handed a brief ban like Swiatek if WADA successfully proves this case should fall into the bracket of ‘no significant fault or negligence’.
The date of WADA’s appeal against Sinner’s punishment following his failed drug tests has yet to be set, but it will not be in the first set of CAS appeals in 2025 that are set to take place in February.
If Sinner receives a one-year suspension, it would rule him out of four Grand Slam tournaments and see his world No 1 status evaporate as he would be forced to return to the game with zero ranking points.
READ NEXT: What happened after Jannik Sinner and Iga Swiatek’s failed drug tests? Full explainer