Tennis star suspended since October Verdict soon in Halep doping case
According to ARD information, a decision in probably the biggest doping case in tennis history is imminent. The handling of the Romanian Simona Halep could have consequences in the worldwide fight for clean sport.
In May, Nicolae Ciucă got carried away. The then-Romanian Prime Minister put his foot down and summarily declared tennis star Simona Halep innocent in her doping case. "We all have to support her,” Ciucă was quoted as saying in response to new accusations against his national sports ambassador. Halep, a kind of saint in Romania and already banned for seven months at the time, would have appreciated such backing from the highest level.
In October 2022, the former world number one had been suspended for a positive doping test at the US Open. Yet the discovery of the banned kidney drug Roxadustat was only the first stage and, in May, it became the biggest case in tennis history. That was when the International Tennis Integrity Agency (ITIA) accused the 31-year-old of another violation. According to the agency, suspicious values in Halep's blood passport indicated long-term doping.
A hearing on both cases has taken place since then. A verdict, taking into account the overall situation, could be announced any time. Halep would still have other options thereafter, such as appealing to the International Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) in Lausanne.
Much support for Halep
Despite all the accusations, Halep continues to receive much support in and beyond her home country, where only gymnastics legend Nadia Comaneci enjoys greater sporting cult status. Great rivals like the Australian Ashleigh Barty or Poland’s world number one Iga Świątek expressed sympathy and support. The athletes' representative body PTPA, founded by record champion Novak Djokovic, was quick to offer help.
The worldwide tennis community gave the impression it was closing ranks because of a supposedly unjustified attack on one of its figureheads. But much of the discussion about the case remains superficial and there has been less focus on the substantive accusations. It is no coincidence that the drug Roxadustat is on the banned list. Like the doping classic EPO, it increases the production of red blood cells and thus endurance performance.
Error by the manufacturer?
Halep's defence strategy focused on unintentional contamination. After months of silence, the former French Open and Wimbledon winner declared in an April interview with the website Tennis Majors that a nutritional supplement had been contaminated. The manufacturer had made a mistake, it was claimed.
Referring to contamination is an increasingly common defence for doping offenders, but it is difficult for athletes to prove it, something mandatory for exoneration. Halep’s team did not make further details of the alleged contamination public. "I am not aware of any preparation so far that has shown contamination with Roxadustat," Mario Thevis, head of the renowned Cologne doping control laboratory, told the ARD Doping Editorial Team: "But that does not mean that these preparations cannot exist."
Halep's frustration and anger grew because of repeated delays over the date for a hearing. In May it became clear why: the ITIA made public the second doping case against Halep due to suspicious values in the athlete's blood passport (ABP). As in the legendary first major blood passport case involving speed skating icon Claudia Pechstein, the prosecutors again cited indirect evidence of doping. In other words, there was no further positive test. The accusation of long-term doping, however, weighed even more heavily than the one made after the isolated Roxadustat finding.
Halep speaks of "harassment"
Halep was fuming. She is living her "worst nightmare", feeling "helpless in the face of such harassment". In a detailed statement, Halep said that "three world-renowned experts who have examined my blood have made it extremely clear that it is completely normal". However, these experts were commissioned to work for her defence. The experts of the anti-doping authority took an opposite view.
But the lack of a positive test as evidence also makes it difficult for the prosecutors. Not least because of five-time Olympic champion Pechstein's still ongoing fight against her allegedly "unjust ban" from 2010, world federations and anti-doping institutions are reluctant to use indirect evidence. In Germany, for example, the National Anti-Doping Agency has never conducted a case based solely on the ABP.
New momentum for ABP cases?
Compared to cases opened after positive doping findings, the proportion of ABP-only proceedings is still very small. When the first blood passport guidelines were introduced in 2009, the sport had high hopes for the new system. It was supposed to help finally close the gap between doping offenders and doping hunters.
In practice, irregularities in the blood passport nowadays usually trigger targeted checks on the athletes concerned - in the hope of finding an illegal substance in blood or urine after all. Expert Thevis points to the value of the ABP in detecting illegal blood transfusions.
The Halep case and its consequences could now give new impetus to the indirect detection method - or bring another bitter setback. The fans of the tennis star, however, will not care either way.