Jannik Sinner case divides tennis players because of lack of transparency at its core | Jannik Sinner

Jannik Sinner took his first steps on clay at the Madrid Open on Saturday, April 20. By then, although the rankings didn’t yet reflect it, Sinner was undoubtedly the best player in the world. He had won his first Grand Slam title at the Australian Open in January before embarking on a remarkable and consistent run. His pre-tournament interviews over the following days were dominated by his budding rivalry with Carlos Alcaraz, a match many believe will define the next generation of men’s tennis.

But what Sinner, his team and the anti-doping authorities knew only then was that until the day of his first training session in Madrid, he was banned from the tournament grounds or any other official courts or venues due to the automatic provisional suspension he received following his two positive tests for the banned substance clostebol.

None of this information was revealed until this week, when the International Tennis Integrity Agency and Sinner’s team jointly revealed that the 23-year-old had been found not guilty or negligent in the presence of clostebol in two anti-doping test samples taken from him in March. It is significant that the world’s No. 1 men’s tennis player has tested positive for a banned substance twice, but the situation is all the more remarkable because of the silence that led up to the revelation.

Most doping cases end with the athlete receiving notice that he has failed a test, then being temporarily suspended until an independent tribunal issues its ruling on the case at the end of a lengthy and public process.

In Sinner’s case, he was notified of his first positive test on April 4, just four days after winning the Miami Open. Sinner immediately filed an urgent request to have the provisional suspension lifted and his request was granted a day later, meaning the suspension was not publicly announced.

Sinner received notification of the second positive test on April 17 and the immediate provisional suspension was lifted on April 20. Given that his ban fell at the start of the busiest period of the season, Sinner was extremely fortunate that neither of these two provisional bans fell during the week of the tournament.

Although lifting a provisional ban is rare, it can be appealed at an urgent hearing if the athlete alleges contamination or if the offending substance is involved, with the hearing deciding whether it is likely to prove that the athlete has done nothing wrong at the end of the process.

A notable attempt to overturn the provisional ban came when Ukraine’s Diana Yastremska was provisionally suspended in January 2021 after testing positive for mesterolone.

Yastremska travelled to the Australian Open, which was held under strict coronavirus restrictions, while still awaiting the outcome of her appeal to have the ban lifted, but the request and subsequent appeal to the Court of Arbitration for Sport were both rejected. An independent tribunal eventually found Yastremska not guilty of any wrongdoing or negligence five months later.

Among the many positive cases of clostebol among Italian athletes, the recent case of Marco Bortolotti, a 33-year-old who had a career-high ranking of 355, bears some similarities to Sinner. Bortolotti was notified of the test on 30 January 2024 after testing positive for clostebol the previous October. He immediately provided an explanation, which the ITIA accepted after seeking scientific advice and it took only eight days for the agency to conclude on 7 February that he was not guilty of any fault or negligence. The nature of Bortolotti’s explanation was edited out in the ITIA’s final decision.

With Sinner allowed to compete, two different stories have played out over the past five months. On the one hand, Sinner has had a fantastic season that has seen him rise to No. 1 in the ATP rankings and back up his maiden Grand Slam win in Melbourne with a very consistent season.

Meanwhile, the case has continued to progress in a special way and has intersected with several important events. For example, during his run to the semi-finals at the French Open, Sinner’s defense team responded to the official notification from the World Anti-Doping Authority regarding the negative analytical results and won his third-round match against Pavel Kotov the day after he was formally charged with an anti-doping rule violation. Sinner’s independent tribunal was held the day after his first-round win at the Cincinnati Open last week. For some, the lack of transparency throughout his case has been disturbing.

Sinner’s coach, Darren Cahill, along with Simone Vagnozzi, told ESPN that Sinner was exhausted by the issue. “If you’re a Jannik fan, you’ll notice a big change in his body language, his physicality on the court, his enthusiasm to be on the court – he’s been struggling and I think it’s worn him down physically and mentally,” he said. “He had tonsillitis, which is why he missed the Olympics.

“I just want to stress that he is probably the most professional young man I have ever had the opportunity to work with. He would never do anything intentionally, and he is in a very unfortunate position.”

Sinner was a popular player on the tour, but since the announcement, some players have publicly objected to the case and what they see as favoritism towards the No. 1, especially given the lengthy temporary bans other players have been subjected to before their cases were resolved. It’s a sentiment summed up by world No. 54 Roberto Carballes Baena in a comment on his Instagram story: “Again. Different rules for different players.”