Pac/Floyd investigation, documented punches (disputed rounds) blow by blow

[ADP02]

I’m gonna give him all my points,.l.,

You didn't answer my question.


Are you OK if you found out that the judges were duped?


That is who you are giving your points to.



I would never do that.




.

[ShoulderRoll]

WRONG answer.

The question was, do you care what the topic was about and if any of the judges were duped?

Yes or no?

All 4 judges were duped? Naw, I'm not buying it.

Plus it's not for you to say if the judges were duped or not. You're not exactly an unbiased observer, are you?

But if you feel like you can present your points more clearly and in a more organized fashion then you should ask for a rematch. Travestyny seems down for it.

[Zaroku]

You didn't answer my question.


Are you OK if you found out that the judges were duped?


That is who you are giving your points to.



I would never do that.




.

I often disagree with judges... but I abide by there decision...


You might to Wong/right... i gave my opinion... I watched the fight in slow mo....pac lost..lmayweather beat him..we can see the same thing and interpret it differently....on that day, ployd beat pac in a lac luster fight...

[ADP02]

I often disagree with judges... but I abide by there decision...


You might to Wong/right... i gave my opinion... I watched the fight in slow mo....pac lost..lmayweather beat him..we can see the same thing and interpret it differently....on that day, ployd beat pac in a lac luster fight...

Here is the question AGAIN!

My question was if the judges were duped, you would still then give the guy who duped them the points?


I have principles. No way I would be giving my points.


WTF - Those people in my books deserve a spit in the face not a reward!!!

[ADP02]

All 4 judges were duped? Naw, I'm not buying it.

Plus it's not for you to say if the judges were duped or not. You're not exactly an unbiased observer, are you?

But if you feel like you can present your points more clearly and in a more organized fashion then you should ask for a rematch. Travestyny seems down for it.

Not all.

Mayweather Mafia judge just gave him the points because Trav was there 24/7, I couldn't nor would.

It was not based on the evidence presented. So it showed bias or that he didn't care. Either way, not what we were looking for in a judge.

[ADP02]

Did he just admit to pu$$ying out? LMFAO yes he did.

He pu$$ied out.

The biatch pu$$ied out.

It's over.

Flawless victory.





















[img]https://media3.*****.com/media/oe33xf3B50fsc/200.gif[/img]

KABOOM!

Looks like history may repeat itself.

I challenged Travestyny the other day. Still waiting for him to accept.


Travestyny is attempting to find any excuse in the book to PU$$Y OUT of a challenge!!!



He was so confident that he would win but it was just a bluff, it appears. He lost all confidence!









.

[travestyny]

DEFLECTOR


Why don't you tell everyone what you told me during the last few months?

You said that: Those same statements that you keep posting is irrelevant to our discussion from 2017.

You said that over and over again so you must have meant, it right? Are you lying then in 2017 or now or BOTH!!!

The case was following UCI rules NOT WADA rules.

The statements was about BAP testing. What did you say about that. Relevant or not?

You confused the judges and in fact, did not even state the truth in that they were applying UCI rules!!!!

Lastly, was what was mentioned was it about 2014 WADA? NO, it was 2003-2004 time period! So even today, you cannot state the truth.

YOU SIR are a LIAR and CHEATER!

Simple as that!!!!!


.

I said the court case was irrelevant? Stop your lying. You're a fvvcking scumbag.


If you believe that, why not accept the rematch and show the judges where I supposedly said that. You down?


Of course not you lying deflecting bltch. Now shut the fvvck up. I've caught you in so many damn lies and squirming around. You truly have no honor. I hope you enjoyed that 4-0 asswhoopin, bltch.


IT WASN'T ABOUT WADA RULES??????? WHAT'S THIS, ADP???

5.1.6.5 The third additional criterion is the WADA Standard, effective 1 January 2005. This criterion has been set forth in a WADA Technical Document TD2004EPO and is entitled; Harmonization of the Method for the Identification of Epoetin Alfa and Bèta (EPO) and Darbepoietin Alfa (NESP) by lEF-Double Bhtting and Chemiluminescent Deteotion. The WADA Standard sets forth three criteria that must be met in order to find a sample positive for rEPO. The Respondent's samples satisfied these criteria. Thus, the WADA criteria for interpreting the resulting test procedure image would also indicate rEPO as the analytical result. Of course, the WADA Standard did not apply at the time of the urine sample being given and analyzed by the UCLA Laboratory. While the Panel cannot rely upon this result to be comfortably satisfied that a doping offense occurred it can and does examine the criterion to collaborate the results derived by other criteria in use by accredited laboratories at the time of the giving of the urine sample.

5.1.6.6 Although this WADA standard is by the time of writing these reasons the criterion to determine a positive test, its application in this case is merely collaborative or supportive of the Panel's findings but not determinative of them, The Technical Document states that it is "required for analyses performed after December 31, 2004." The Respondent's sample was on 6 April 2004. Although this Panel cannot solely rely upon this criterion, it can definitely refer to the standard to serve as confirmatory evidence to support its decision,

[IMG]https://media.*****.com/media/TUHInIQM4bXBS/*****.gif[/IMG]

[travestyny]

Looks like history may repeat itself.

I challenged Travestyny the other day. Still waiting for him to accept.


Travestyny is attempting to find any excuse in the book to PU$$Y OUT of a challenge!!!



He was so confident that he would win but it was just a bluff, it appears. He lost all confidence!




.

Oh really? I challenged you to a rematch. You challenged me to some vague shlt that you claim we were arguing about for months, you lying sack of shlt.

Where were we arguing about "Can EPO have thresholds by some organization at some time in the past" for months. Show us that long conversation. The argument was about a rematch, and you trying to deflect to the BAP which I said was destroyed on two levels. The first being that it was irrelevant because it's not in the relevant document. The second was that the court stated that it was in fact NOT a threshold, both statements which I still stand by.


Suck a dlck. You got exposed and nothing is going to change that. History repeating itself from you ducking me repeatedly in the past, and not over no vague bullshlt, you lying and deflecting continuously, and you getting your ass kicked 4-0 if you ever step to that rematch.


YOU PVSSIED OUT OF YOUR OWN INITIAL STATEMENT CLAIMING THAT IT WASN'T REALLY YOURS....and most of all...YOU PVSSIED OUT BY TRYING TO SAY THIS WAS NEVER ABOUT MAYWEATHER VS. PACQUIAO....AS WE ARGUE ABOUT IT IN THIS THREAD. YOU DUMB BlTCH! YOUR LIES ARE ENDLESS!

[IMG]https://media.*****.com/media/TUHInIQM4bXBS/*****.gif[/IMG]

[travestyny]

Here is the question AGAIN!

My question was if the judges were duped, you would still then give the guy who duped them the points?


I have principles. No way I would be giving my points.


WTF - Those people in my books deserve a spit in the face not a reward!!!

DID YOU JUST SAY THE JUDGES DESERVE A SPIT IN THE FACE!!!!!! DUDE, FOR WHAT WE DID ASKING JUDGES TO SORT THROUGH A CONVERSATION ON EPO TESTING THAT WENT ON OVER 90 PAGES TO RENDER A VERDICT OVER NERDY SHlT, AND YOU HAVE THE NEVER TO SAY THEY DESERVE A SPlT IN THE FACE.


YO, I'M DONE WITH YOU. THE NEXT TIME YOU CONTACT ME, I'M SENDING A MESSAGE TO ALL OF THE JUDGES INVOLVED AND LETTING THEM KNOW EXACTLY WHAT YOU JUST SAID. I'M GOING TO EXPOSE TO EVERYONE HOW BIG OF A PIECE OF SHlT YOU ARE.

[ADP02]

DID YOU JUST SAY THE JUDGES DESERVE A SPIT IN THE FACE!!!!!! DUDE, FOR WHAT WE DID ASKING JUDGES TO SORT THROUGH A CONVERSATION ON EPO TESTING THAT WENT ON OVER 90 PAGES TO RENDER A VERDICT OVER NERDY SHlT, AND YOU HAVE THE NEVER TO SAY THEY DESERVE A SPlT IN THE FACE.


YO, I'M DONE WITH YOU. THE NEXT TIME YOU CONTACT ME, I'M SENDING A MESSAGE TO ALL OF THE JUDGES INVOLVED AND LETTING THEM KNOW EXACTLY WHAT YOU JUST SAID. I'M GOING TO EXPOSE TO EVERYONE HOW BIG OF A PIECE OF SHlT YOU ARE.

See, you did it AGAIN!!!!

You misinterpreted what I said, so I should know, that you GOOFED!!!!


Who duped who?

You presented a judge with a case that was circa 2003/2004 that was based on UCI rules not WADA rules.

Secondly, the quotes you kept on blasting until today was on BAP test criteria for EPO testing. Here you admittedly said that you considered it to be irrelevant to the bet.

The problem is that you presented that to the judges as though it was 100% relevant. You didn't explain that it was irrelevant as you are stating now and had done so for 2 months to me!!!

I tried to explain, if I remember correctly but you just took the point and stayed mum!

So that spit in the face was for YOU, Travestyny!!!



.