Regarding Pre-Fight PED Testing, Has Anyone Considered...

From speaking with one top heavyweight who I believe to be clean, he acknowledges that he has fought fighters that were on steroids or some other PED but says he never put thought into it. He says he felt that he was always going to fight his fight and that his fight would be good enough. Usually it was, sometimes it wasn't. I don't think Oscar de la Hoya, Ray Leonard, Marvin Hagler, Lennox Lewis or Julio Cesar Chavez Sr. sat in the dressing room getting their hands wrapped worrying if they're fighting a guy who is taking steroids. A fighter can chose to go on with the fight, even with his opponent having an unfair advantage, but if he lost would it simply be because his opponent was a better fighter or because he was able to push himself harder and heal quicker? You original post brought up a lot of stuff to think about, but how about the opposite end of it; What about the day a promotion company puts on a fight where they know one fighter is dirty, and the other fighter is clean & the clean fighter ends up suffering career ending, or life ending injuries? Who will pay then? I'm certain that it would be much more then a lost event.

I don't see having been an admitted user or getting caught as being a prerequesite to undergo more stringent testing particularly given the poor standards currently in place. One guy asked. It should be a simple yes or no from the other guy.....not a bunch of drawn out bullshit! Oh, I agree. And bullsh*t is what it is. I just feel the media is looking at the wrong guy. But I see many are starting to come around. How can you not? Take the tests and let's get it on.

I wouldn't put Oscar in that category - he did, after all sue Mosley. And Leonard knows all about steroid accusations since Hearns and Steward accused him many times prior to their rematch. But PED usage wasn't as big a deal as it is now. The bottom line is that this is the era we live in. And if you suspect someone of cheating, there is nothing wrong with taking better tests, whether other fighters did or didn't ask before doesn't really matter. I don't see having been an admitted user or getting caught as being a prerequesite to undergo more stringent testing particularly given the poor standards currently in place. One guy asked. It should be a simple yes or no from the other guy.....not a bunch of drawn out bullshit!

From speaking with one top heavyweight who I believe to be clean, he acknowledges that he has fought fighters that were on steroids or some other PED but says he never put thought into it. He says he felt that he was always going to fight his fight and that his fight would be good enough. Usually it was, sometimes it wasn't. I don't think Oscar de la Hoya, Ray Leonard, Marvin Hagler, Lennox Lewis or Julio Cesar Chavez Sr. sat in the dressing room getting their hands wrapped worrying if they're fighting a guy who is taking steroids. I wouldn't put Oscar in that category - he did, after all sue Mosley. And Leonard knows all about steroid accusations since Hearns and Steward accused him many times prior to their rematch. But PED usage wasn't as big a deal as it is now. The bottom line is that this is the era we live in. And if you suspect someone of cheating, there is nothing wrong with taking better tests, whether other fighters did or didn't ask before doesn't really matter.

From speaking with one top heavyweight who I believe to be clean, he acknowledges that he has fought fighters that were on steroids or some other PED but says he never put thought into it. He says he felt that he was always going to fight his fight and that his fight would be good enough. Usually it was, sometimes it wasn't. I don't think Oscar de la Hoya, Ray Leonard, Marvin Hagler, Lennox Lewis or Julio Cesar Chavez Sr. sat in the dressing room getting their hands wrapped worrying if they're fighting a guy who is taking steroids. for sure its in floyd mind while hes getting his hands wrapped if his opponent didnt have his blood drawn past 14 days

Yeah, now imagine you're the opponent fighting clean. From speaking with one top heavyweight who I believe to be clean, he acknowledges that he has fought fighters that were on steroids or some other PED but says he never put thought into it. He says he felt that he was always going to fight his fight and that his fight would be good enough. Usually it was, sometimes it wasn't. I don't think Oscar de la Hoya, Ray Leonard, Marvin Hagler, Lennox Lewis or Julio Cesar Chavez Sr. sat in the dressing room getting their hands wrapped worrying if they're fighting a guy who is taking steroids.

The original post is basically an explanation as to why the promoters, fighters, sanctioning bodies and commissions don't want a real testing program. A fight gets cancelled and they lose money. What they should do is put better cards together, so if one fight gets changed, there's a reason for people to show up. Also, the clean guy can go ahead and fight someone on a fill in. There are always good fighters waiting for their chance. The problem with that, I guess, is the promoters. None of them will let one of their good fighters step in at the last minute. It would be easier to do something like that in UFC.

affliction went bankrupt after josh barnett tested positive, although he contested that it was contamination at the manufacturer, but once the main event tested positive and no real replacement was in place, the promotional company folded...... that is why the test after fights so a positive test wont kibosh the show.......... yep.....and maybe if we are lucky it won't kibosh the guy fighting without an advantage.

which is why pacquiao dont want to have the ost and why is is again?

What happens if a fighter tests positive? Of course that would invalidate the fight, right? So what happens to the promotional companies that were publicizing and booking venues, hotels, plane tickets, paying commission fees to promote the fight? Surely one positive test could conceivably cost a promoter millions of dollars, as well as any big-time network that had invested in the fight. I could see this being an ugly situation with lots of lawsuits. promotional companies could always cover it up, money always comes first before boxing's integrity.

affliction went bankrupt after josh barnett tested positive, although he contested that it was contamination at the manufacturer, but once the main event tested positive and no real replacement was in place, the promotional company folded...... that is why the test after fights so a positive test wont kibosh the show..........

Did you even read what he wrote? Or you just don't understand it? I read what he wrote. I wanted clarification of the purpose of his thread. I understood clearly also. Do u understand now?

Maybe we're reading to far into this, wouldn't having random OST be enough for a fighter to say, hey i better not ****ing cheat or i'm going to be in deep shit.

that's where the lawsuits would come into play. You can't get money from a stone, what good is a lawsuit against a disgraced fighter. At that point it is better to just charge it to the game and move on and get any fight ASAP.

It is messed up no doubt, what is worse is it even would penalize the clean fighter as the clean guy will have already paid for their camp and shit then the fights doesn't happean so they don't get paid. Surely the clean fighter would be able to line something up but that is messed up. It needs to happean (better testing) but with better testing does come the black eyes that uncovering cheaters brings. that's where the lawsuits would come into play.

It is messed up no doubt, what is worse is it even would penalize the clean fighter as the clean guy will have already paid for their camp and shit then the fights doesn't happean so they don't get paid. Surely the clean fighter would be able to line something up but that is messed up. It needs to happean (better testing) but with better testing does come the black eyes that uncovering cheaters brings.

as a fan, i dont mind too if the fight will be cancelled because the other fighter is caught cheating. however, the point of the TS is what will the promoters, fighters and other involved would do, when millions of $$$$$$ are already spent in promoting the fight. would they hold a gag order between the parties to continue the fight regardless of other fighter being a ped user? promoters would have already thought about this scenario, so they could include in the contract that the cheater could be sued to pay the promoter's loss, in case the fight is cancelled. however, whta the TS said about those fans, who travelled across countries and spend huge $$$, being dismayed by the outcome of OST? are these fans same as we think? also, how bout those sponsors, who only cares about earning millions? do they care about clean fights? if that happens, would they still spend millions to support a fight (requiring ost) knowing that the fight coulb called off? I would imagine that the USADA wouldn't want the fight to continue and both fighters should have the right to know if they're stepping in the ring with a cheat, if they chose to continue then so be it. My point is simply that all the negative consiquences and all the money lost would make all those involved more interested in being sure their fighters are clean, rather then put together a fight and have it be a complete waste because they allowed a fighter in their stable, or on their network without looking into wether they are doing something wrong..

Which is why it's perfect to deter fighters from cheating. They, among the countless of those involved financially, lose a fortune because of their shady tactics. The risk of losing money shouldn't be the reason why there shouldn't be testing.

lets be clear. ur stance is that osts r bad for the sport? this is puzzling. Did you even read what he wrote? Or you just don't understand it?

Mosley became assosiated with balco after the forrest losses. He was on roids for the Winky and Oscar fights. I really can't go by speculation and say how do we not know _______ was on roids without proof. I know Mosley used it for Oscar the second time and Vargas did so against Oscar as well. However, its useless saying how do we not know someone used it when there is no proof. Either way Mayweather beats him. I know when he became associated with BALCO - that doesn't stop him or clear him of any time before then. It sure looked like both were on some sort of enhancer in that first bout. But as you said - speculation, which is exactly what I was referring to with regards to Toney. Anyway, it's possible Mayweather beats him but that doesn't matter. In a sport where fighters put their life on the line, he's well within reason to ask for tougher tests - even if they don't make you "superman" (whatever that means).