Wayne Odesnik’s ban is this big
Wayne Odesnik‘s career came to an abrupt end.
Tennis’ most notorious drug offender (and FSOT content provider) managed to trigger the testing system in handsome style by recording another positive and was handed a 15 year ban after his past ‘dabbling’ with Human Growth Hormone.
Despite protesting he was the victim of a contaminated supplement (to the inevitable widespread derision), Odesnik swiftly announced his retirement, rather than go through the delights of appeals and the Court of Arbitration for Sport. He also managed to thank his fans in a retirement statement that read as an almost uniquely deluded piece of literary construct.
So hooray. The sport’s great pariah has finally been removed. Clearly, not before time. He has obviously cheated other players out of money, ranking points, tournament entries and opportunity by enhancing what ability he had through drug use. It’s only last year that he was able to claim a USTA wild card into the US Open main draw through Challenger success. Rhyne Williams can argue he is entitled to Odesnik’s first round prize money of more than US$30,000 for a start. But that is to digress.
Back to the narrative.
The initial reaction to the ban went like this, with Andys Roddick & Murray quickly installed as the de-facto spokesmen for the locker room:
Bye bye Wayne… Good riddance
— Andy Murray (@andy_murray) March 18, 2015
There was savage derision from some of the journalistic community. Neil Harman congratulated himself for giving Odesnik a hard time at Wimbledon, and here is Craig Gabriel, usually a man long on levity and “lightening up”.
Odnesik’s name should be wiped from any and all records in tennis, as if he did not exist. As @andyroddick said “cheat”. — Craig Gabriel (@crosscourt1) March 18, 2015
He should be a pariah, a disgrace, removed, no longer talked about. This is not really a learning process to improve our understanding of systems or detection of cheats.
The problem is Odesnik is brilliantly suited to the role of outcast. A player that existed, at times, but had no real impact on the main tour, and a personality on or off court that hasn’t won favour. Multiple tales can be found of him being abrupt with ball boys/girls. His tennis won’t be missed. His personality won’t be either. It’s almost as if the ideal person to characterise as unworthy of a place in the sport had been created.
This may be a melodramatic comparison, but it’s always nice to dismiss a murderer as “evil”. You don’t have to question their position as one of us, the civilised arm of society, nor waste time understanding them, or thinking about them. You can whack the pinata, safely demonstrating appropriate outrage, and get on with the rest of your day.
But while Odesnik disappears somewhere into the Florida sunset, on to “new and exciting” challenges, there are some matters that need clearing up and issues to look at which shouldn’t be left to go inactive on the questions to be asked ranking list.
It’s important not to lock him up, throw away the key, treat him as unique and whistle happily about a job well done while heading off to Court Two.
THE ITF’S JUDGEMENT
As you may recall if you have ploughed through past Odesnik missives before, The International Tennis Federation cut Odesnik’s initial ban when he was found in possession of human growth hormone. The reason given for this was for “substantial assistance” – a 2012 analysis of this is provided in the link.
Two years on, this looks even worse. There is no evidence in the public domain Odesnik has performed any role in offering evidence in doping cases. Reports continue that Odesnik offered testimony in the match fixing case where the Tennis Integrity Unit managed to get a life ban for Daniel Kollerer, only for it to be dismissed as unreliable.
Odesnik’s role in the world of tennis
This leaves uncomfortable questions.
1) Did the ITF reduce the ban of a man found with human growth hormone for assistance that was tokenistic,or promised and not delivered, rather than substantial? A “yes” cuts away at strict enforcement of punishments.
2) If there is evidence provided in other cases by Odesnik that we don’t know about, how worthy is it if his contribution to the Kollerer case was not reliable?
3) Are the ITF drug policies and TIU held in such low regard by players that a character seemingly as loathed as Odesnik is the only type they can get to help them, when he has no option if he is to resume his career? Do the players feel comfortable in reporting concerns to the authorities? Has Odesnik’s informant role, such as it might have been, put them off?
4) Is it a case of appalling judgement by the ITF to thik that Odesnik would be of value?
The players appears to have distrusted him. Ben Rothenberg’s New York Times article suggested Odesnik struggled to get practice partners.
It’s also confused in the nice v nasty debate if the players resented him as a drugs cheat, or a snitch. But anyway…
Andy Murray told the BBC’s Tennis Correspondent Russell Fuller that he “wasn’t buying Odesnik’s story” after his first ban, while Amer Delic was kind enough to respond to a tweet from this blog. Not only did he say beforehand “It amazes me that he was able to mask ITF/ATPs eyes for this long” but he added this:
@FSOTennis (Terrible decision. Plenty people raised their concerns about it, but nothing was done. He made a fool of everyone for years)
— Amer Delic (@AmerDelic) March 19, 2015
The numbers of tests conducted on Odesnik were certainly higher than average for a player of his standing in the sport. Last year, the US Anti Doping Agency tested Odesnik 10 times, compared to three for Madison Keys (nothing against you Madison, take it as a compliment) It doesn’t suggest a man to trust in a crisis, with the career of other players at stake.
FINALLY….BIOGENESIS
Odesnik’s name also surfaced in papers on the US Biogenesis doping scandal, mainly focused on major league baseball. For the record, Odesnik denies involvement. This is a convenient overview.
Now with Odesnik banned, will the ITF continue to see if there is anything they can learn from the Biogenesis papers, and tell us? Or will they close the book in the knowledge the one tennis name, the pinata pariah, has now been dispatched from the sport. It may tell us about their appetite for intelligence, a weapon as vital as testing.
So don’t whitewash Odesnik from history. Make the best of a bad job and learn from the case. The ITF may need to.
