Jannik Sinner reluctantly agreed to a three-month suspension after “tricky” conversations with the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA).

The world No. 1, who lifted the Australian Open title last month, has been banned until May 4 after two positive drug tests in 2024.

He was found to have banned substance clostebol in his system in March, as WADA sought a two-year suspension, after the International Tennis Integrity Agency (ITIA) opted not to punish Sinner.

WADA had previously accepted that the three-time Major winner “did not intend to cheat and the drug did not provide any performance-enhancing benefit” but was still seeking to punish the 23-year-old Italian.

However, having reached an agreement with Sinner for a three-month suspension that expires before the French Open, an appeal to the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) will no longer go ahead.

The decision was reached on Valentine’s Day (February 14) when Sinner’s lawyer was in a lengthy phone call with WADA’s most senior law representative.

"It all happened unbelievably quickly," Singer told BBC Sport. "In a matter of a couple of days, really."

WADA had been seeking a resolution with Sinner for several months, having made two approaches that were promptly turned down by his team.

Sinner’s lawyer, Jamie Singer, admitted that it was “tricky” to convince his client to agree to a ban.

"When I was saying 'well, look, maybe we should settle for three months', he was saying 'well, why would we do that if the first independent tribunal found it was no ban at all, why would I accept three months now?'" Singer said.

"My advice was 'one never knows what's going to happen at a hearing, we know that WADA are pushing for a year, if we don't accept their offer then they will go to court looking for a year and who knows what those three judges could do'.

"So the possibility of three months, in my view, was a good possibility."

Had the case been sent to CAS, the only outcomes were a year-plus suspension or Sinner being cleared.

And though WADA agreed that Sinner “was a million miles away from doping”, they were able to strike a 67th agreement despite the backlash that the player would not miss a single Grand Slam.

"This was a case that was a million miles away from doping," WADA’s general counsel Ross Wanzel added.

"The scientific feedback that we received was that this could not be a case of intentional doping, including micro-dosing.

"I'm not sure that a sanction of 12 months in this case - if we'd have forced the tribunal into that position - or a case of 'no fault' would have been a good outcome.

"One would have compromised an important principle under the code. The other one, in our view, would have been an unduly harsh sanction."