Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: BS mod-convention, Caracas.
Quoted: 629 Post(s)
Total Points: 269,255,705,406,821,856.00
(1) peds offer more than a shortcut. They take an athlete to a place that he or she might not be able to get to without them. When undertaken in conjunction with proper exercise and training, the use of peds creates a better athlete.
(2) ped use is often difficult to detect.sophisticated users evade detection in the face of rigorous testing. The more money an athlete spends, the less detectible ped use is. Also, in many instances, the testing is erratic, inadequate and even corrupt. Three years ago, victor conte declared, “boxing’s testing program is beyond a joke. It’s worthless. The loopholes are so big that you could drive a mack truck through them. Many of the people who are supposed to be regulating this don’t want to know.” now conte says, “in some respects, things have gotten worse.”
(3) ped use is more prevalent in boxing now than ever before, particularly at the elite level. For many fighters, the prevailing ethic seems to be, “if you’re not cheating, you’re not trying.”fighters are reconfiguring their bodies and, in some instances, look like totally different physical beings. In a clean world, fighters don’t get older, heavier and faster at the same time, but that’s what’s happening in boxing. Improved performances at an advanced age are becoming common. Fighters at age 35 are outperforming what they could do when they were 30. In some instances, fighters are starting to perform at an elite level at an age when they would normally be expected to be on a downward slide.
(4) the use of peds threatens the short term and long term health of the user. It’s illegal and gives an athlete who uses them an unfair competitive advantage. It also endangers fighters who are getting hit in the head harder than before by opponents.
Earlier this year, a handful of high-profile cases became part of boxing’s ped dialogue.
On may 4, 2012, wba/ibf 140-pound champion lamont peterson learned that his “a” and “b” urine samples had tested positive for the presence of an anabolic steroid. Peterson had been scheduled to defend his titles in a rematch against amir khan. The fight was canceled.
Two weeks later, the “a” and “b” urine samples of wbc 147-pound champion andre berto tested positive for norandrosterone (an anabolic steroid). Berto was slated to defend his belt against victor ortiz. That fight was also canceled.
On june 22nd, it was revealed that, subsequent to antonio tarver’s june 2nd fight in california against lateef kayode, tarver’s pre-fight urine sample had tested positive for the anabolic steroid drostanolone. On fight night, the bout had been declared a draw. The result was changed to “no contest.”
finally, on october 18th, two days before erik morales’s scheduled rematch against danny garcia for the latter’s wba and wbc titles, word leaked to the media that morales had tested positive for clenbuterol. Initially, the public was led to believe by the promotion that only morales’s “a” sample had tested positive and there was a need for his “b” sample to be tested (which couldn’t be done until after the fight). Then it was learned that morales had been tested on two occasions earlier in the month and, each time, both his “a” and “b” samples had tested positive. Despite that revelation, garcia vs. Morales ii was allowed to take place.
In seeking out the truth behind the aforementioned matters, this writer interviewed dozens of participants and observers. Two people of note declined to be interviewed.
Richard schaefer sent a november 1st email that read in part, “we are trying to do something positive and yet it seems that media and others are attacking us. It would be easy for us to do nothing just like all other promoters. But by trying to support the fighters’ desire for additional testing, we are getting criticized.”
beyond that, schaefer chose not to discuss the issues involved. Instead, his email referenced my relationships with dr. Margaret goodman and maxboxing’s own gabriel montoya and stated, “i consider you a friend and really don’t want this margaret goodman, gabriel montoya vs. Golden boy witch hunt to affect our relationship. I have my opinion about margaret and gabriel, and you have yours. I respect your opinion, and i hope you respect mine.”
dr. Goodman was once chief ringside physician for the nevada state athletic commission. She is now president and board chairperson of a drug-testing organization known as vada (voluntary anti-doping agency).the drug tests on lamont peterson and andre berto that came back positive were carried out under the supervision of vada.
Dr. Goodman is a friend. We’ve talked at length over the years about medical issues and boxing. She has been a valuable resource to me in my writing. We’ve also shared thoughts and offered advice to each other on a variety of subjects, both personal and professional.
Gabriel montoya has written a series of significant articles on the use of peds in boxing. Earlier this year, i spoke with schaefer on montoya’s behalf after gabriel was denied access and credentials for certain golden boy events. I also spoke with montoya about his problems with golden boy and what might be done to remedy the situation. Gabriel is a casual acquaintance.
I should add that, although i sometimes disagree with things that richard schaefer has done (just as he sometimes disagrees with what i write), i admire his skills and we’ve maintained a cordial relationship over the years.
Usada ceo travis tygart also declined to be interviewed for this article and instructed that questions be addressed to usada’s media relations manager, annie skinner. On november 2nd, this writer sent a series of preliminary questions to ms. Skinner. There was no response.
At this point, it makes sense to take a closer look at the recent positive drug tests referenced earlier in this article.
In march 2012, lamont peterson and amir khan submitted applications to vada pursuant to which their blood and urine were tested in conjunction with their scheduled may 19th fight. The first samples were taken on march 19th, the only day on which the fighters knew in advance that they would be tested.
On april 12th, vada was advised by the ucla olympic analytical laboratory that peterson’s “a” sample had tested positive consistent with the administration of an anabolic steroid. On april 13th, the peterson camp was notified of that fact by fedex and email. In keeping with vada’s protocols, peterson was given one week to challenge the “a” test result and ask for his “b” sample to be tested with one of his representatives present.
The rest of this article can be found in the link in the OP. It's revolting.
Last edited by BattlingNelson; 11-19-2012 at 09:17 AM.