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

[travestyny]

Anddd....he ducked it again...Defelction count: 9

ADP, STOP BRINGING UP YOUR 2003 BAP CRITERIA UNLESS YOU ANSWER THE QUESTION YOU KEEP DUCKING AND DEFLECTING FROM. I'M WAITING!!!! I WONDER WHY YOU WON'T JUST ANSWER!!!!

1.

SHOW ME THAT OLD BAP CRITERIA THAT YOU KEEP BRINGING UP IN THE TD2014EPO DOCUMENT!!!!!!

2.

IS THE BAP IN THE TD2014 EPO DOCUMENT? YES OR NO, ADP? WATCH YOU IGNORE THIS!

3.

ANSWER THIS FUVCCKING QUESTION: DOES THE BAP CRITERIA EVEN EXIST IN THE TD2014 DOCUMENT?

4.

DOES THE BAP CRITERIA EXIST IN THE WADA TD2014EPO DOCUMENT OR NOT ADP??????

5.

How long are you going to duck this? Is the BAP in the WADA TD2014EPO document?????? Yes or no?

6.

IS THE BAP CRITERIA IN THE WADA TD2014EPO DOCUMENT? YES OR NO?????

7.

IS THAT CRITERIA IN THE WADA TD2014EPO DOCUMENT OR NOT? YES OR NO?

8.

THAT IS NOT AN ANSWER. DOES THE WADA TD2014EPO DOCUMENT HAVE THE CRITERIA THAT YOU ARE REFERRING TO, ADP? WHY WON'T YOU ANSWER?????

9.

is the criteria that you claim the wada experts are rightly referring to as a threshold a part of the wada td2014epo document???????? Answer the question, adp!!!

A Deflecting PIECE OF SHlT AT IT AGAIN!!!!!

[ADP02]

Oh reallyyyyyy???? Then let's get that rematch popping, son. You down?


Don't you want to make this official? I know you aint gonna go out with that 4-0, right ADP? WE CAN ADD ANOTHER PART TO IT. YOU PROVE THAT THE THREAD WAS ABOUT AN INDIRECT TEST. GOOD LUCK AFTER SAYING THE SCOPE WAS THE WADATD2014EPO DOCUMENT WHICH IS ABOUT TARGET TESTING AND NEVER EVER MENTIONS THE ABP USED ALONE!!!!
LMAOOOOOOO!!!!

Go check out in that thread in the thunderdome if you ever got yourself to stop DEFLECTING about ABP testing by way of thresholds. Did you say yes? NO you did not because you kept on DEFLECTING every time I asked you that question!!!!

but that is all OK.


Because YOU FINALLY got to say that ABP testing has threshold type tests.

ABP testing approach is for EPO testing. I provided several quotes on that .....


It was about EPO testing and whether there are threshold type tests. You do not want to agree with ABP testing is used BUT we BOTH know that it is and you and DoSumptin have said so on multiple occasions.

DoSumptin and Travestyny: "How could Floyd Mayweather have gotten away with using EPO when there is this thing called ABP?"



THANK YOU for FINALLY agreeing with me!!!

[ADP02]

Game over DEFLECTOR?

(YOU) Misinterpreting a statement and claiming it means what you think does not make you right.


I have WADA experts stating that there are threshold type tests.


How are those WADA EXPERTs WRONG?????

You have NEVER EVER ANSWERED THIS QUESTION DEFLECTOR!!!!



.

i did answer your question. They were corrected clearly by the court.


Why do you keep talking about them being right about something that doesn't even exist. I'm going to keep adding to my list.


is the criteria that you claim the wada experts are rightly referring to as a threshold a part of the wada td2014epo document???????? Answer the question, adp!!!

You misinterpreted that buddy!

Where is the quote from the panel stating that the WADA expert is wrong? I want to see this DIRECT quote to them.

BTW - It is going to be quite hard since there are some quotes from the WADA experts and others that came AFTER that case and what I mean is years later!!!


Why did the WADA EXPERTs still say it years later?



Man, you are stuck and this is too funny!!!!

This was EASY. All you had to do is admit to your mistake but you cannot!!!! This is proof of what type of person you are!!!!




.

[travestyny]

Go check out in that thread in the thunderdome if you ever got yourself to stop DEFLECTING about ABP testing by way of thresholds. Did you say yes? NO you did not because you kept on DEFLECTING every time I asked you that question!!!!

Dude, I just answered this question above. Stop crying. You know damn well this wasn't about ABP. This was about testing specifically for EPO. You lost, dude. It's time for you to accept that and stop trying to duck, deflect, and claw your way back. You are just making yourself look more ridiculous. You started going hard on ABP after you were already down 2-0. It was a desperation move, and everyone who is familiar with this topic knows it.

Plus, the entire reason we did that debate was because you deflected. You were talking about threshold substances, I asked you a billion times if EPO was a threshold substance, you deflected 999,999,999 times and then you said I was WRONG.

I said do you want to take it to the dome? You said yes.

We got there, you said: Wait...what are we arguing about. PROVE ME WRONG!!!

YOU ARE A DEFLECTOR.

but that is all OK.


Because YOU FINALLY got to say that ABP testing has threshold type tests.

ABP testing approach is for EPO testing. I provided several quotes on that .....

What did you find in the relevant document? Your deflections don't work, fool. People are not as ****** as you think. I told you from the beginning that's your problem. You think you are smarter than everyone else. You even stated it outright that others don't know more about this shlt than you do. Then you said the judges cheated or were too ****** to understand.

They saw right through your deflection to the ABP. No one was even worried about that shlt, including me, because it's obviously a deflection when you came up with NOTHING regarding EPO testing.

It was about EPO testing and whether there are threshold type tests. You do not want to agree with ABP testing is used BUT we BOTH know that it is and you and DoSumptin have said so on multiple occasions.

Again, your deflection won't work. It is NOT used to detect EPO, and you know that was our topic. If not, you wouldn't have said that the relevant document is the TD2014EPO document which is specifically about target testing EPO. You then got desperate and tried to say the passport is mentioned there, but it's mentioned at the bottom with one little blurb that only says that target testing data can be added to it. You tried your best to be sneaky, but no one in that thread was ******. Besides maybe you for thinking that everyone else was ******.

DoSumptin and Travestyny: "How could Floyd Mayweather have gotten away with using EPO when there is this thing called ABP?"

THANK YOU for FINALLY agreeing with me!!!

Do you think I'm speaking against the ABP? You are now trying to champion it after saying that it wouldn't help. How ironic. My stance has never changed.

It is a tool that can be used. It damn sure doesn't detect EPO, and it damn sure doesn't say that in the EPO document.



Do you accept rematch challenge? Yes or No? That's What I want you to answer, and about the BAP. STOP DUCKING AND HIDING AND FUVVCKING ANSWER A QUESTION, ADP.

[travestyny]

You misinterpreted that buddy!

Where is the quote from the panel stating that the WADA expert is wrong? I want to see this DIRECT quote to them.

WERE THE WADA EXPERTS ON TRIAL? YOU MORON. YOU KEEP TAKING ABOUT THE BAP. HERE THEY STATE CLEARLY THAT IT IS NOT A THRESHOLD.

The fact is that the BAP and the other interpretative criteria are used to declare not a threshold of human body production but rather an image from the electropherogram as indicating the presence of non-human EPO.



BTW - It is going to be quite hard since there are some quotes from the WADA experts and others that came AFTER that case and what I mean is years later!!!

Why did the WADA EXPERTs still say it years later?



Man, you are stuck and this is too funny!!!!

This was EASY. All you had to do is admit to your mistake but you cannot!!!! This is proof of what type of person you are!!!!

.

For arguments sake, let's say the BAP is a threshold. Ok. Now pay attention.


Is the BAP in the TD2014EPO document. I forgot how many times I asked you this, but I'll update the list.

ANSWER PLEASE!

[travestyny]

Anddd....he ducked it again...Defelction count: 10. This is becoming EPIC!


ADP, STOP BRINGING UP YOUR 2003 BAP CRITERIA UNLESS YOU ANSWER THE QUESTION YOU KEEP DUCKING AND DEFLECTING FROM. I'M WAITING!!!! I WONDER WHY YOU WON'T JUST ANSWER!!!!

1.

SHOW ME THAT OLD BAP CRITERIA THAT YOU KEEP BRINGING UP IN THE TD2014EPO DOCUMENT!!!!!!

2.

IS THE BAP IN THE TD2014 EPO DOCUMENT? YES OR NO, ADP? WATCH YOU IGNORE THIS!

3.

ANSWER THIS FUVCCKING QUESTION: DOES THE BAP CRITERIA EVEN EXIST IN THE TD2014 DOCUMENT?

4.

DOES THE BAP CRITERIA EXIST IN THE WADA TD2014EPO DOCUMENT OR NOT ADP??????

5.

How long are you going to duck this? Is the BAP in the WADA TD2014EPO document?????? Yes or no?

6.

IS THE BAP CRITERIA IN THE WADA TD2014EPO DOCUMENT? YES OR NO?????

7.

IS THAT CRITERIA IN THE WADA TD2014EPO DOCUMENT OR NOT? YES OR NO?

8.

THAT IS NOT AN ANSWER. DOES THE WADA TD2014EPO DOCUMENT HAVE THE CRITERIA THAT YOU ARE REFERRING TO, ADP? WHY WON'T YOU ANSWER?????

9.

is the criteria that you claim the wada experts are rightly referring to as a threshold a part of the wada td2014epo document???????? Answer the question, adp!!!

10.

Is the BAP in the TD2014EPO document. I forgot how many times I asked you this, but I'll update the list.
ANSWER PLEASE!

A Deflecting PIECE OF SHlT AT IT AGAIN!!!!!

[ADP02]

Dude, I just answered this question above. Stop crying. You know damn well this wasn't about ABP. This was about testing specifically for EPO. You lost, dude. It's time for you to accept that and stop trying to duck, deflect, and claw your way back. You are just making yourself look more ridiculous. You started going hard on ABP after you were already down 2-0. It was a desperation move, and everyone who is familiar with this topic knows it.

Plus, the entire reason we did that debate was because you deflected. You were talking about threshold substances, I asked you a billion times if EPO was a threshold substance, you deflected 999,999,999 times and then you said I was WRONG.

I said do you want to take it to the dome? You said yes.

We got there, you said: Wait...what are we arguing about. PROVE ME WRONG!!!

YOU ARE A DEFLECTOR.

What did you find in the relevant document? Your deflections don't work, fool. People are not as ****** as you think. I told you from the beginning that's your problem. You think you are smarter than everyone else. You even stated it outright that others don't know more about this shlt than you do. Then you said the judges cheated or were too ****** to understand.

They saw right through your deflection to the ABP. No one was even worried about that shlt, including me, because it's obviously a deflection when you came up with NOTHING regarding EPO testing.




Again, your deflection won't work. It is NOT used to detect EPO, and you know that was our topic. If not, you wouldn't have said that the relevant document is the TD2014EPO document which is specifically about target testing EPO. You then got desperate and tried to say the passport is mentioned there, but it's mentioned at the bottom with one little blurb that only says that target testing data can be added to it. You tried your best to be sneaky, but no one in that thread was ******. Besides maybe you for thinking that everyone else was ******.




Do you think I'm speaking against the ABP? You are now trying to champion it after saying that it wouldn't help. How ironic. My stance has never changed.

It is a tool that can be used. It damn sure doesn't detect EPO, and it damn sure doesn't say that in the EPO document.



Do you accept rematch challenge? Yes or No? That's What I want you to answer, and about the BAP. STOP DUCKING AND HIDING AND FUVVCKING ANSWER A QUESTION, ADP.

ABP

What? You couldn't even admit to ABP having thresholds until now because you slipped!
I get it. It's hard to keep up with all your DEFLECTIONs and you forgot about all that. Well too bad! Now YOU TOLD us ALL.

ABP has Thresholds and as WADA points out, there is an ABP module that is geared for EPO testing!

and if you remember back then and you continued now, you said this and Boy were YOU WRONG!!!

IT NEVER SAYS THAT THEY USE THE ABP FOR EPO TESTING YOU MORON
Travestyny

Really? Read below

"Biological Passport approach to EPO detection is to count the number of immature red cells in the blood. This rises in a characteristic way with EPO supplementation and the effect is detectable for several weeks. It is also possible to look at iron metabolism. HB contains iron and the body has well-developed transport and storage systems for iron so that enough is available to constantly produce the red cells we need. If EPO stimulates red cell production then the levels of the iron storage protein, ferritin, fall."

Even the case goes on to point out ABP strategy for EPO detection. If you remember, you said this never has happened. Well this case points to YOU BEING WRONG!!!!

"See, e.g., IAAF v SEGAS & Kokkinariou, CAS 2012/A/2773, award dated 30 November 2012
(http://jurisprudence.tas-cas.org/sit...ments/2773.pdf), para 114 ('association of high haemoglobin with low reticulocytes is a strong evidence of artificial inhibition of reticulocyte formation caused by the suspension of an ESA (or, less likely, by reinfusion of multiple blood bags). It is an indicator of the so-called OFF phase, which is seen when an ESA has been suspended one to three weeks before, such as is observed in doped athletes before important competitions. When the ESA is stopped, hemoglobin remains high for at least two to three weeks, depending on the dosage, while reticulocytes are reduced because the high hemoglobin inhibits endogenous EPO production')."

So Travestyny, As stated in the quote above, why is ABP a type of threshold test for EPO detection YET NOT on that list of substances that you showed us on Threshold Substances? What gives? According to you, it had to be in that list even if its a threshold type test criteria??? FAIL Travestyny!!!

EPO is a special case that has it's own test criteria!!!

[ADP02]

WERE THE WADA EXPERTS ON TRIAL? YOU MORON. YOU KEEP TAKING ABOUT THE BAP. HERE THEY STATE CLEARLY THAT IT IS NOT A THRESHOLD.

The fact is that the BAP and the other interpretative criteria are used to declare not a threshold of human body production but rather an image from the electropherogram as indicating the presence of non-human EPO.



BTW - It is going to be quite hard since there are some quotes from the WADA experts and others that came AFTER that case and what I mean is years later!!!




For arguments sake, let's say the BAP is a threshold. Ok. Now pay attention.


Is the BAP in the TD2014EPO document. I forgot how many times I asked you this, but I'll update the list.

ANSWER PLEASE!

For arguments sake?

If I go back and look, I'm sure that I can find quotes from you Travestyny stating that it is a threshold type test!!!!

But it's OK, continue with this charade!!!! It's just too funny!!!!!


Sorry but you do this all the time. You do not want to admit the truth and DEFLECT to something else.

It's too funny. You have admitted in the past BUT as I keep on telling you, WADA EXPERTs are clearly stating that there are threshold tests. Yet you cannot let yourself to state the obvious.



YOU WERE WRONG!!!! You misinterpreted what the panel stated.

They were discussing threshold substances not a simple threshold type test. Of course it is a threshold type test. BOTH SIDEs called it that!!!!!!

The panel is also stating the obvious. You are not calculating the concentration of human EPO substance and checking to see if there is "more" or higher amount of the substance EPO. So that type of threshold there is NOT.

The test criteria for EPO testing is different. For one test, it verifies the intensity of the bands. If the bands are more intense than those bands for the endogenous then that would be an indication of synthetic EPO. This is still a ratio test and therefore a threshold test since the intensity ratio is being verified against a threshold ratio as stated in the criteria.


The result is to see if there is abuse of EPO not to check for a threshold above which a human produces which is what the panel states and you repeat BUT YOU are very confused!!!!!



.

[Dosumpthin]

Actually, that is what we were arguing all along in the Thunderdome ... threshold type test NOT threshold substance ......

Don't worry, even Travestyny keeps on going back to his list of Threshold substances to confuse you guys but I see that he is confused too!!!. He did the same when he responded to you.

So no problem!

I'm not confused. You said EPO is a threshold substance.

Now you're harping on ABP blood screening to support your "dco ran out of cups" diluted urine conspiracy theory.

Idiot. rEPO is still detected in dilute samples - let alone providing a partial sample pre IV and the presence of 2 SPG test.





You're confused and its amusingly entertaining watching you learn about the ABP "passport thingy".
I'm the one who told you how it's used in conjunction with CIR testing. REMEMBER? Wait did you ever figure out the info I gave you in that thread?

Nevertheless, I just have one question:


How does your "10 mins and a Whizzinator" theory beat ABP blood and urine matrix again?

[Vadrigar.]

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!