Swiatek, Sinner, Halep & Moore – what are the differences and similarities in their doping cases?

Moore slipped 600 places in the world rankings during her case and, as players serving a doping suspension cannot enter official tennis facilities, ultimately earned money by coaching beginners on public courts in the US.

Moore told The Times in July, external she believes the total cost of the case will be £200,000, and she has crowdfunded to cover her training and ongoing fees.

Her case, too, was complex.

Twenty-one players were tested in Bogota, and Moore was one of three to return an adverse analytical finding for boldenone – something the independent experts described as “striking” because of how unusual it was.

The panel ruled contaminated meat was the source of Moore’s failed test. The written reasons show how difficult it was for Moore to prove when and where she had ingested the contaminated meat. She had eaten meat in different restaurants in Bogota seven days before the positive test, so it was hard to pin down the source.

Moore did provide evidence showing cattle are administered with nandrolone metabolites and boldenone in Colombia, which the tribunal described as “interesting and powerful”.

The ITIA, however, argued that even if Moore had eaten contaminated meat, she should have been aware of the risk.

The tribunal “firmly rejected” that, by eating meat, Moore had acted with fault or negligence. It added players had received no warnings about the risks, and none were given until “well after” this event.