Jannik Sinner’s doping case explained: What three-month ban and Italian Open comeback mean for tennis
May 5 2025: This story has been updated to reflect Jannik Sinner’s return from his anti-doping ban at the Italian Open in Rome.
Jannik Sinner’s doping case has been one of the biggest stories in tennis since shortly before the 2024 U.S. Open. On August 20 2024, the International Tennis Integrity Agency (ITIA) — the worldwide anti-doping agency for the sport — announced that Sinner, the men’s world No. 1, had twice tested positive for clostebol, a banned anabolic steroid, in March of that year.
It also announced that an independent hearing, convened by the ITIA, had found Sinner bore “no fault or negligence” for those positive tests, accepting his explanation that he had been contaminated by a healing spray purchased by his physio, Umberto Ferrara. Sinner’s physiotherapist, Giacomo Naldi, used the spray on a cut on his hand and then subsequently gave Sinner a massage on his back and applied treatments to his feet.
Sinner parted company with Ferrara and Naldi, part of the team that took him to world No. 1, on the eve of the U.S. Open, which Sinner won against Taylor Fritz.
Just over a month after the ITIA decision, the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) announced that it would appeal the “no fault or negligence” ruling at the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS). WADA, which sits above the ITIA as the worldwide authority in sports doping is seeking “a period of ineligibility of between one and two years,” in which the two-time Grand Slam champion would be banned from playing tennis.
A week later, CAS confirmed its receipt of WADA’s appeal.
Then, over three months later CAS set April 16 and 17 2025 as the date for the WADA appeal into Sinner’s case.
That appeal was never heard. Sinner and WADA entered into a case resolution agreement, in which he received a three-month ban. The ban ran February 9 to May 4, meaning that he did not miss any of the four Grand Slam tournaments before returning to competitive tennis at his home event: the Italian Open, in Rome.
GO DEEPER
World No. 1 Jannik Sinner penalized after twice testing positive for banned substance
When is Sinner’s first competitive match after the ban?
The world No. 1 has been drawn in the top half of the Italian Open. As a seeded player, he receives a bye in the first round, so he will play his opening match May 10. His opponent will be Mariano Navone of Argentina or another Italian, Federico Cinà.
What did Sinner say about his return to tennis?
Speaking at the Foro Italico in Rome ahead of the Italian Open, Sinner said that he was not scared of returning to competitive tennis, but that he would use the event to test his level.
He explained that he “did not want” to accept the case resolution agreement from WADA, because he “knew what really happened,” but accepted that doing so negated the possibility of a worse outcome at any CAS hearing.
When did WADA announce Sinner’s ban?
WADA confirmed that Sinner would be banned from tennis for three months the morning of Saturday Feb. 15.
“Under the Code and by virtue of CAS precedent, an athlete bears responsibility for the entourage’s negligence,” it said, deeming a three-month suspension applicable to the “unique set of facts in this case.”
Which tennis tournaments did Sinner miss?
Sinner had entered the ATP 500 tournament in Doha, Qatar, which begins February 17. He missed that event, as well as the Sunshine Double: the two prestigious ATP Masters 1,000 events in Indian Wells, Calif., and Miami, Fla., in March.
He then missed two more ATP 1,000s — the Monte Carlo Masters and the Madrid Open — as well as the 500-level Bavarian Open, held in Munich, in between.
How did the ban affect his world No. 1 ranking?
Sinner already lost his ranking points from last year’s Indian Wells event, as part of tennis anti-doping authorities’ initial sanction for his two positive tests.
He lost 1,000 points from Miami, which he won in 2024; 400 from Monte Carlo and 200 from Madrid, where he reached the semifinals and quarterfinals respectively. He also dropped 500 points from not defending his title in Rotterdam, the Netherlands, in February — but the decision to skip that event was not connected to his doping case.
His ranking points have dropped from 11,830 to 9,730, but nearest rivals Carlos Alcaraz or Alexander Zverev have not fully capitalized on his absence. Despite needing 2,500 points over the course of three months to overtake Sinner, Zverev, who only had 900 points to defend in that time, is 1,645 points behind Sinner as the Italian Open begins. The German won that tournament in 2024, so he needs to win it again just to maintain that gap. Sinner, who did not play the event last year, will gain points for every match that he wins in the Italian capital.
Alcaraz, who was defending 1,000 points at Indian Wells, lost in the semifinals there. Despite winning the Monte Carlo Masters and reaching the final of the Barcelona Open, he also remains behind Sinner in the world rankings.
| # | Player | Ranking Points | Minimum points after Italian Open | Projected ranking after Italian Open |
|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | Jannik Sinner | 9,730 | 9,730 | 1 |
2 | Alexander Zverev | 8,085 | 7,095 | 3 |
3 | Carlos Alcaraz | 7,850 | 7,850 | 2 |
What is a case resolution agreement?
A case resolution agreement is part of the WADA World Anti-Doping Code, and can only be considered if an athlete admits to an anti-doping rule violation or violations. The mechanism, under Article 10.8.2, allows for cases to be completed if the athlete accepts “Consequences” acceptable to the anti-doping authority (in this case the ITIA) and to WADA for the violations admitted. The athlete does not have any say in what constitutes those consequences, but they are agreed between the athlete and the doping authorities.
A WADA spokesperson said: “This provision 10.8.2 was introduced to the Code in 2021. Since then it has been used dozens of times for cases with exceptional circumstances such as this one.
“Given there are many thousands of cases, it is not used that often and is the exception rather than the rule but there has been plenty of precedent for this. Ultimately in this case three months represents a fair outcome under the specific circumstances.” The spokesperson described the exceptional circumstances as the “full body of facts and evidence” in Sinner’s case.
When did Sinner test positive?
Both of Sinner’s positive tests came in March 2024. The first was an in-competition test on March 10 at the BNP Paribas Open held in Indian Wells, California. The second was an out-of-competition test on March 18.
What is clostebol?
Clostebol is an anabolic steroid. It is best known for its role in East Germany’s state-sponsored doping programs of the 1970s and 1980s. It shortens recovery times following intense workouts and allows for the expedited production of muscle mass, in a similar manner to testosterone. Its potential legitimate uses have included treating muscle-wasting disease and osteoporosis. It’s also an ingredient in certain healing creams and sprays that are readily available in Italy, though not in many other countries.
Sinner’s test samples contained 86 picograms/litre on 10 March, and 76pg/litre on 18 March, when adjusted for the application of a normal specific gravity.
“Even if the administration had been intentional, the minute amounts likely to have been administered would not have had any relevant doping, or performance enhancing, effect upon the player,” said Professor David Cowan, a member of the ITIA tribunal for its final ruling on the case.
What did the ITIA charge Sinner with?
The ITIA charged Sinner with violating Article 2.1 and Article 2.2 of the Tennis Anti-Doping Programme (TADP). Those articles govern “the presence of a prohibited substance or any of its metabolites or markers in a player’s sample,” and “use or attempted use by a player of a prohibited substance or a prohibited method.”
Both Articles are subject to Article 2.1.1, which states that it is “each player’s personal duty to ensure that no prohibited substance enters their body.”
What explanation did Sinner give?
Sinner stated that his fitness coach, Umberto Ferrara, had brought an over-the-counter healing spray containing clostebol to Indian Wells (under the brand name Trofodermin, the spray is available over the counter in Italy). Sinner’s physiotherapist, Giacomo Naldi, cut his hand and then used the spray on that cut. Naldi then conducted massages on Sinner, which led to transdermal contamination with the clostebol from the healing spray.
GO DEEPER
Jannik Sinner built the team that made him world No. 1. Then he blew it up
What did the ITIA investigation find?
The ITIA’s investigation concluded with an independent panel, overseen by arbitrator Sport Resolutions, on August 15. At that hearing, the panel ruled that Sinner bore “no fault or negligence” for the two violations of the (TADP), but nevertheless found him to have committed the two violations.
The tribunal accepted Sinner’s version of events as outlined above and, as such, ruled that he should not be banned but should lose his prize money, results and ranking points from Indian Wells.
What does ‘no fault or negligence’ actually mean?
That phrase is part of the ITIA’s framework for assessing and prosecuting anti-doping violations and comes into consideration when a player has successfully shown that they did not intentionally dope.
The usual sanction for Sinner’s violations, if proven that he intended to dope, would be a four-year ban. That drops to two years when a player can prove they did not intentionally dope.
“No fault or negligence” governs the possibility of reducing that two-year ban further, or to nothing, under Article 10.5 of the TADP.
The TADP requires that a player “did not know or suspect, and could not reasonably have known or suspected even with the exercise of utmost caution, that they had used or been administered the prohibited substance.”
One level below this is “no significant fault or negligence,” which requires the player “establishing that their fault or negligence, when viewed in totality of the circumstances and taking into account the criteria for no fault or negligence, was not significant in relation to the anti-doping rule violation.”
This is significant because the distinction is at the center of WADA’s appeal against the initial ruling in Sinner’s case.
Why was Sinner allowed to continue to play?
As soon as athletes test positive for a performance-enhancing drug that fits the criteria of what that anti-doping world refers to as an “adverse analytical finding,” they are subject to a provisional suspension while an investigation takes place.
Sinner received a provisional suspension following each positive test for clostebol. However, athletes have the right to appeal these provisional suspensions. Separate tribunals convened by the ITIA heard those appeals quickly and in each case accepted his explanation, which he was able to back up with testimony from his support team and receipts showing that his trainer had purchased the healing spray with clostebol in it.
Those decisions allowed Sinner to keep playing while authorities pursued a full investigation. Under these circumstances, ITIA rules allow for the test results and the investigation to remain confidential until the final hearing adjudication. That occurred on August 15, after which the ITIA publicized the case.
What has Sinner said about the case?
During the U.S. Open, Sinner answered numerous questions about the positive tests and the process he has been through. He has replaced his trainer and physiotherapist. He spoke openly about how the case weighed on him the past six months and the relief the end of the process brought. After WADA announced that it was appealing the ruling to CAS, he released the following statement:
“I am disappointed to hear that WADA have chosen to appeal the result of my ITIA hearing after the independent judges had exonerated me and deemed me to be innocent.
“Over the past few months and throughout this process, there have been three separate hearings in each case confirming my innocence. Several months of interviews and investigations culminated in three senior judges scrutinizing every detail through a formal hearing. They issued an in-depth judgement explaining why they determined me not at fault, with clear evidence provided and my cooperation throughout.
“On the back of such a robust process, both the ITIA and the Italian anti-doping authority accepted it and waived their rights to appeal. I understand these things need to be thoroughly investigated to maintain the integrity of the sport we all love.
“However, it is difficult to see what will be gained by asking a different set of three judges to look at the same facts and documentation all over again. This being said, I have nothing to hide, and as I have done throughout the summer, I will cooperate fully with the appeal process and provide whatever may be needed to prove my innocence once again.”
Speaking at the 2025 Australian Open just before CAS confirmed the date for the appeal hearing — at which point Sinner did not know when it would be — he admitted that waiting to know when the appeal would happen had weighed on him.
“I would lie if I would tell you I forget,” he said.
What do other tennis players think about the case?
Player reaction has run the gamut.
Nick Kyrgios, the outspoken Australian, said Sinner should have automatically been banned for two years. Others have questioned whether, as the world No. 1, Sinner received special treatment.
It can take months for players to have their appeals on their provisional suspensions heard. Sinner’s appeals were heard and adjudicated within weeks, so quickly that he didn’t have to miss any tournaments.
“Different rules for different players,” Denis Shapovalov tweeted after news of the positive tests broke.
Shapovalov later told the website Tennis Majors that his comment wasn’t directed at Sinner, but at an anti-doping process that has not given other players the same benefit of the doubt and quick attention that players saw the ITIA granting to Sinner. The British player Tara Moore, who was charged with an anti-doping violation later shown to be caused by contamination that took far longer to wind its way through, joined the chorus, as did her compatriot Liam Broady.
“Whether Sinner was doping or not, this is not right,” Broady wrote on social media. “Plenty of players go through the same thing and have to wait months or years for their innocence to be declared. Not a good look.”
The Professional Tennis Players Association (PTPA) labelled the ITIA’s processes as “broken” in a letter sent to the body, as well as the ATP and WTA Tours and four Grand Slams.
The ITIA said that “it is currently our belief that ITIA investigators work according to the rules, with respect and reflecting our values.”
GO DEEPER
Tennis player association led by Novak Djokovic calls anti-doping processes 'broken' in letter
The ITIA and Sinner’s team have said that Sinner’s case was heard quickly because everyone knew immediately the source of the clostebol contamination and had the ability to back up their statements with the necessary hard evidence. That Sinner, as world No. 1, could mobilize more effective legal resources more quickly than another player in this situation is not in doubt, but the process by which he did so does not fall outside of normal ITIA protocol.
In its quarterly report into anti-doping and anti-corruption processes released October 17 2024, the ITIA said that “the case management process for anti-doping cases is complex, and we appreciate that it can be confusing to understand the differences in outcome, or perceived inconsistencies in the process.
“The way we manage cases does not change, irrespective of the profile of the player involved. The way a case unfolds is determined by its unique circumstances, facts and science.”
Why did WADA appeal?
WADA sees things differently to the independent tribunal that settled on a verdict of “no fault or negligence” for the two violations.
“It is WADA’s view that the finding of ‘no fault or negligence’ was not correct under the applicable rules,” it said in a statement on Saturday. As such, the organization is pushing for a ban of one or two years — though not a disqualification of any results, beyond Indian Wells as per the original verdict.
This shows that WADA, like the ITIA, accepts that Sinner did not intentionally dope. A one or two-year ban would result in a change in the final ruling from “no fault or negligence” to “no significant fault or negligence,” as outlined above.
This summer saw a bitter dispute between the U.S. and China over allegations surrounding doping by Chinese swimmers before the 2021 Tokyo Olympics and suggestions from the United States Anti-Doping Agency (USADA) that WADA had not been strong enough in enforcing its rules. WADA has rebutted these claims, but it would be understandable if the organization wished to show itself to be weighing in on Sinner’s case.
WADA retains the right to appeal any judgement by any anti-doping authority across the globe, as it has done here.
GO DEEPER
What is the WADA appeal of Jannik Sinner's doping case really about?
What would have happened to Sinner if WADA’s appeal had been successful?
He will not be able to compete in a professional tennis event for up to two years, depriving him of the chance to earn millions of dollars in prize money. A suspension would likely do significant damage to his reputation. Sinner is 23, so he would have time to prosper after the suspension, but it’s hard to overestimate the damage that missing two prime years of his career would exact.
What does this mean for tennis?
Whichever way you cut it, this has not been a great look for tennis — the world’s best male player being under investigation for doping offences. There will be some who follow tennis who will lose trust in what they are seeing. Likewise, there will be many who won’t feel this is such a big deal given there’s no real suggestion that the amount of clostebol Sinner had in his system would have given him much of a competitive advantage.
But the longer it drags on the more damage it will do to tennis, with everyone wanting a swift resolution to end all talks of asterisks and relitigation.
The resolution reached, however, in which Sinner is banned but during a period of the tennis calendar that does little harm to his fortunes at the top of the sport, will only reopen wounds of players who feel there are disparities in treatment, even though the process is in accordance with anti-doping regulations.
(Top photo: Tim Clayton / Corbis via Getty Images)
What did you think of this story?
MEH
SOLID
AWESOME
Sort By:
K
· Oct 1, 2024
Given the minute amounts of substance found in Sinner, amounts which experts say would not have increased his competitiveness, I'm wondering if this is a political move by WADA? Specifically, is WADA saying that they (not ITIA) call the shots? It looks that way to me.
D
· Oct 1, 2024
What levels of this substance would you expect to find if an athlete was using it to gain a physical advantage? Surely this needs to be compared to what level was actually found.
· Oct 3, 2024
The very idea is preposterous: that a player can be suspended for the presence in their system of a minute amount of a banned substance, so small that it could not possibly effect their performance in any way, when coupled with an explanation everyone accepts about how it happened, and most especially with a perfect history of clean tests before & after. Such a suspension is obviously unfair and unreasonable on its face.
73