Can non-threshold susbtances have threshold type tests

[travestyny]

NICE TRY DEFLECTOR. What you are stating is that after 80+ pages, you still CANNOT get what this CHALLANGE is about!!! Talk about being DISHONEST!!! LOL



REMINDER ALERT ON THE CHALLENGE that TRAVESTYNY has yet to ACCEPT:






YOU WERE TRYING TO PROVE:

CAS panel is stating that EPO testing CANNOT have threshold type tests




Here is the argument from the past 2 months that is in scope of this CHALLENGE:










THE WILLY WANKER Challenge




CHALLENGE IS ON!!!!





Travestyny has been placed on DUCK ALERT!!!!





QUACK, QUACK, QUACK goes Travestyny!!!










.
.

You're still writing a lot and spamming, obviously because you're embarrassed that you backed down from that challenge.


So I'm asking you about your scope. Is it about the court case or not? Let me know.

[travestyny]

Your problem is you think you're putting on a show for someone, because you are already embarrassed and you want so badly to get back at me.

1. No one cares about what is happening here besides maybe Spoon and Vagisil, becuase they were embarrassed by me in the past, too.

2. You've already lost 4-0 to me and that won't change. You also ducked the rematch and ducked an opportunity to prove how I supposedly cheated to a different set of judges.

3. You also know deep down that you got caught in lie after lie after lie here.

4. I've accepted about 4 challenges here and you've declined ALL challenge.


I have no problem with how this plays out. If you want to keep saying I ducked, fine. You ducked and I have the link to prove it. That still doesn't change the fact that you lost 4-0 and refused to stand up for your claims of me cheating.


So I'm just asking you about this "willy wanker challenge" on your terms because in my opinion it would be just as easy to beat up on you again and get you permanently banned. So do you want to discuss it or not? Let me know

[ADP02]

NICE TRY DEFLECTOR. What you are stating is that after 80+ pages, you still CANNOT get what this CHALLANGE is about!!! Talk about being DISHONEST!!! LOL



REMINDER ALERT ON THE CHALLENGE that TRAVESTYNY has yet to ACCEPT:






YOU WERE TRYING TO PROVE:

CAS panel is stating that EPO testing CANNOT have threshold type tests




Here is the argument from the past 2 months that is in scope of this CHALLENGE:

ADP02

Just to refresh your memory:

Question: You said it is not a threshold type test.
a) Why did BOTH sides call it a threshold test in that case that you referenced?
b) In my post, even WADA expert Segura calls it a threshold test. Was the expert wrong?
c) Others called it that too! Are they all wrong?

Travestyny

Question A, B, and C:
THE COURT FOR ARBITRATION OF SPORT HAS CORRECTED ANYONE THAT HAS EVER CALLED THIS A THRESHOLD TEST A NUMBER OF TIMES....BECAUSE IT IS NOT A THRESHOLD TEST!!!!!




THE ONLY THING THAT WAS EVER REFERRED TO AS A THRESHOLD WAS THE OLD WAY OF TESTING: THE BAP. AND THE COURT EVEN SAID THAT IS NOT A THRESHOLD TEST.

THE WILLY WANKER Challenge




CHALLENGE IS ON!!!!





Travestyny has been placed on DUCK ALERT!!!!





QUACK, QUACK, QUACK goes Travestyny!!!










.
.

You're still writing a lot and spamming, obviously because you're embarrassed that you backed down from that challenge.


So I'm asking you about your scope.


Is it about the court case or not? Let me know.

See, by your questioning it is obvious that AFTER 80+ pages, YOU, Travestyny, have yet to ACCEPT the CHALLENGE as per this thread!!!!



Read YOUR OWN Quotes above. Are they NOT CLEAR ENOUGH for you? They are YOUR QUOTES!!!!


Your quotes were NOT meant for that case!
Your quotes couldn't be just for that case!
You even said it CLEARLY that is NOT about this one case.

Travestyny
ANYONE THAT HAS EVER

So DUCKard, did you find your BALLs yet? You had lost them for 81+ pages! I have said it for 81 pages now that I'm sure that you will NOT ACCEPT.


YOU HAVE PROVED ME RIGHT!!!!

[travestyny]

NICE TRY DEFLECTOR. What you are stating is that after 80+ pages, you still CANNOT get what this CHALLANGE is about!!! Talk about being DISHONEST!!! LOL



REMINDER ALERT ON THE CHALLENGE that TRAVESTYNY has yet to ACCEPT:






YOU WERE TRYING TO PROVE:

CAS panel is stating that EPO testing CANNOT have threshold type tests




Here is the argument from the past 2 months that is in scope of this CHALLENGE:










THE WILLY WANKER Challenge




CHALLENGE IS ON!!!!





Travestyny has been placed on DUCK ALERT!!!!





QUACK, QUACK, QUACK goes Travestyny!!!










.
.




See, by your questioning it is obvious that AFTER 80+ pages, YOU, Travestyny, have yet to ACCEPT the CHALLENGE as per this thread!!!!



Read YOUR OWN Quotes above. Are they NOT CLEAR ENOUGH for you? They are YOUR QUOTES!!!!


Your quotes were NOT meant for that case!
Your quotes couldn't be just for that case!
You even said it CLEARLY that is NOT about this one case.




So DUCKard, did you find your BALLs yet? You had lost them for 81+ pages! I have said it for 81 pages now that I'm sure that you will NOT ACCEPT.


YOU HAVE PROVED ME RIGHT!!!!

Yo, chill with all of the big font and colors. Shows over, genius. no one cares about this shlt.


I'm asking you if you want to make a deal or not. yes or no? I'm not combing through all of that bullshlt. Half the time when you write like that, honestly, I don't even read it.

So it's up to you.

[ADP02]

Yo, chill with all of the big font and colors. Shows over, genius. no one cares about this shlt.


I'm asking you if you want to make a deal or not. yes or no? I'm not combing through all of that bullshlt. Half the time when you write like that, honestly, I don't even read it.

So it's up to you.

This is a new one. Small fonts is desired by Travestyny!!!!


I WORKED with YOU.
I removed 2 items (ABP testing and other non-threshold substances)

I provided to you the quotes that we have argued about. It is clear as day that you are stating that everyone was WRONG. I am disagreeing with you.


My challenge is on you repeating and believing that the CAS panel corrected everyone that said that EPO can have threshold type test.


THIS IS NOT ABOUT GOT YOU GAMEs. We both need to be CLEAR about the TOPIC and SCOPE.


Do you accept this CLEAR CHALLENGE?


YES/NO

[travestyny]

This is a new one. Small fonts is desired by Travestyny!!!!


I WORKED with YOU.
I removed 2 items (ABP testing and other non-threshold substances)

I provided to you the quotes that we have argued about. It is clear as day that you are stating that everyone was WRONG. I am disagreeing with you.


My challenge is on you repeating and believing that the CAS panel corrected everyone that said that EPO can have threshold type test.


THIS IS NOT ABOUT GOT YOU GAMEs. We both need to be CLEAR about the TOPIC and SCOPE.


Do you accept this CLEAR CHALLENGE?


YES/NO

No you didn't work with me. You are still stuck on "can" when I said it wasn't about that. Sounds familiar?


During our debate, you kept saying it wasn't about threshold substances. I PROVED THAT I ASKED OU 14 TIMES ABOUT THRESHOLD SUBSTANCES AND YOU REFUSED TO ANSWER. I PROVED THAT I ASKED YOU IF YOU WANTED TO GO TO THE DEBTE OVER THRESHOLD SUBSTANCES. YOU SAID YES. WE GOT THERE, AND YOU SAID..."What are we talking about?"

That can be verified.

Sure I was pissed, but I WORKED WITH YOU and said, you know what, let's get it done. You want to say it's actually about threshold criteria? Let's go there.


CAN is to vague. Can I spit on the floor and see if that reveals EPO? Sure I CAN...but it's ridiculous. CAN it have a threshold. It CAN if someone gives it a damn threshold, but that's not the issue. DOES it have a threshold.

You are harping on that court case, correct? You say that there are thresholds present in the case, right? I'm saying that there is not.

Do you want to battle about whether there are thresholds in that case?

[ADP02]

No you didn't work with me. You are still stuck on "can" when I said it wasn't about that. Sounds familiar?


During our debate, you kept saying it wasn't about threshold substances. I PROVED THAT I ASKED OU 14 TIMES ABOUT THRESHOLD SUBSTANCES AND YOU REFUSED TO ANSWER. I PROVED THAT I ASKED YOU IF YOU WANTED TO GO TO THE DEBTE OVER THRESHOLD SUBSTANCES. YOU SAID YES. WE GOT THERE, AND YOU SAID..."What are we talking about?"

That can be verified.

Sure I was pissed, but I WORKED WITH YOU and said, you know what, let's get it done. You want to say it's actually about threshold criteria? Let's go there.


CAN is to vague. Can I spit on the floor and see if that reveals EPO? Sure I CAN...but it's ridiculous. CAN it have a threshold. It CAN if someone gives it a damn threshold, but that's not the issue. DOES it have a threshold.

You are harping on that court case, correct? You say that there are thresholds present in the case, right? I'm saying that there is not.

Do you want to battle about whether there are thresholds in that case?

There are a few big differences.

1) I never meant that it was as per WADA list. You really think that I would be going to a debate on that? Even now that you actually read the documents and cases on EPO testing?


2) I actually said that EPO is NOT a threshold substance.


3) You said those statements and it was CLEAR what you meant! You doubled down on that for 2+ months.


4) You cannot take those statements back because that will show what type of person you are.


So that is why we need to stick to this challenge as is. You said that a BILLION times CLEARLY. So there is no confusion.

[travestyny]

There are a few big differences.

1) I never meant that it was as per WADA list. You really think that I would be going to a debate on that? Even now that you actually read the documents and cases on EPO testing?

THEN THAT MEANS THE ENTIRE DEBATE SHOULDN'T HAVE HAPPENED. All you had to say is, ok, it's not a threshold substance. I am wrong. Booom. And there would have been no problem. YOU NEVER ANSWERED UNTIL I CHALLENGED YOU ABOUT IT AND THEN YOU PRETENDED THAT IT WASN'T WHAT WE WERE DISCUSSING. You have a problem just stating that you are wrong. All you had to say was that you were wrong. Just like you are wrong about the TD2014EPO doc having threshold criteria, but you won't admit it. You just keep going with the lie. Dude. It doesn't. It was proven. You accused me of cheating and lying. That shlt was UNNECESSARY. I know you hate Mayweather but that's no reason for you to keep going with the lies.

2) I actually said that EPO is NOT a threshold substance.

Ohhhhhh boy. When. You probably can't find the quotation (i'd appreciate it if you could), but WHEN did you say that? Was it DURING the debate? Yes or no?

3) You said those statements and it was CLEAR what you meant! You doubled down on that for 2+ months.

Doubled down on what? That the BAP is not a threshold? IT'S NOT! If you want to add a threshold to it, it can be used that way. IT IS INHERENTLY NOT A THRESHOLD, AND THAT'S WHAT WE ARE DISAGREEING ABOUT. You are saying that it is still a threshold no matter what. In the old days when they didn't know so much about this stuff, they were using it as a threshold and saying it was a threshold. It doesn't concern me if they kept referring to it that way or not because the court makes it clear that IT IS NOT A THRESHOLD. It says it in plain English.

Think about it. You went on record saying it is an 80% threshold.

TEST #1: BAP 80% threshold test
Results: 79.5 - Just under

With the BAP test alone the athlete is just below the threshold.

Dude....THAT IS NOT TRUE. You also seemed to say that the threshold magically becomes whatever they test it as later. DUDE...THE THRESHOLD DOESN'T CHANGE EVERYTIME YOU TAKE THE DAMN TEST. THAT'S ASININE. It does NOT REPRESENT A THRESHOLD.

That's what I keep telling you is the crux of this argument. And if you want to argue that, I'm fine with it.

4) You cannot take those statements back because that will show what type of person you are.

1. I'm not taking anything back.
2. This can thing is just your own bullshlt. I can't possibly know what every testing agency does with EPO. SO that right away tells you it's too vague. I can tell you that the BAP is NOT inherently a threshold test.
3. The way you are trying to run this debate (which by the way you shouldn't be acting like I owe you anything anyway because you are the one who owes me. You are not the A-side here, so to speak, and you know that) you are trying to pigoeon hole me to something I've said over and over wasn't the case.

I ASKED YOU TO PROVE WHERE I SAID CAN. I SHOWED ONE INSTANCE AND SAID I'M FINE WITH GOING TO DEBATE OVER IT. YOU SHOWED ONE INSTANCE, AND I ALSO SAID I'M FINE WITH GOING TO DEBATE OVER IT. But then you backed out again and went with...NO IT'S NOT JUST ABOUT THAT CASE...IT'S ABOUT EVERY TESTING FROM ANYTIME USING ALL TESTING AGENCIES. Stop with the bullshlt. If you want to debate about whether BAP is inherently a threshold test, then just say so. You've said it multiple times:

But the BAP test is what? It is a threshold test!!!

INCORRECT. It is not a threshold test, especially when the labs don't place a threshold on it!!!!!!!

So that is why we need to stick to this challenge as is. You said that a BILLION times CLEARLY. So there is no confusion.

I'm telling you that you are purposely giving a vague statement about can and you're still trying to hold me to it. I guess I should have held you to threshold substances and argued 90 pages without a debate, huh? Because the evidence shows definitively that you thought it was a threshold substance. Do you admit that or not? Please answer.

And you are also lying about us arguing for 2 months over "can." We argued about the rematch. If you want me to prove that, I can post you asking for a recount and I can post ShoulderRoll asking you about a rematch and I can post me over and over asking you about a rematch and I can post me over and over asking you why the actual fvvck are you still talking about the BAP when it is out of scope of our debate. You know the truth but you are hiding from it.

[travestyny]

And also, since we are talking honestly here....


Man up to all the lies you been telling in here. For real. And man up to you accusing me of cheating when you know damn well there was no cheating. That's fvvcked up for you to lose and then say the judges cheated, I cheated, bullshlt.

AND MOST OF ALL, WHY DON'T YOU GIVE THE POINTS THAT YOU OWE??? AND LIKE I SAID, IT'S NOT EVEN ABOUT THE POINTS. I DONT USE THEM FOR SHlT EXCEPT TO FVVCK WITH VAGISIL'S AVATAR WHEN HE SPAMS THE SAME MESSAGE HE HAS BEEN SPAMMING SINCE FEBRUARY AFTER I EXPOSED HIM, BUT IT'S THE PRINDIPLE OF IT. IN THE BEGINNING I WANTED SIG CONTROL, YOU WANTED NONE OF IT, SO WE AGREED ON A SMALL AMOUNT OF POINTS. I WORKED WITH YOU QUITE A BIT. YOU SHOULD PAY YOUR DEBT!

[ADP02]

THEN THAT MEANS THE ENTIRE DEBATE SHOULDN'T HAVE HAPPENED. All you had to say is, ok, it's not a threshold substance. I am wrong. Booom. And there would have been no problem. YOU NEVER ANSWERED UNTIL I CHALLENGED YOU ABOUT IT AND THEN YOU PRETENDED THAT IT WASN'T WHAT WE WERE DISCUSSING. You have a problem just stating that you are wrong. All you had to say was that you were wrong. Just like you are wrong about the TD2014EPO doc having threshold criteria, but you won't admit it. You just keep going with the lie. Dude. It doesn't. It was proven. You accused me of cheating and lying. That shlt was UNNECESSARY. I know you hate Mayweather but that's no reason for you to keep going with the lies.





Ohhhhhh boy. When. You probably can't find the quotation (i'd appreciate it if you could), but WHEN did you say that? Was it DURING the debate? Yes or no?






Doubled down on what? That the BAP is not a threshold? IT'S NOT! If you want to add a threshold to it, it can be used that way. IT IS INHERENTLY NOT A THRESHOLD, AND THAT'S WHAT WE ARE DISAGREEING ABOUT. You are saying that it is still a threshold no matter what. In the old days when they didn't know so much about this stuff, they were using it as a threshold and saying it was a threshold. It doesn't concern me if they kept referring to it that way or not because the court makes it clear that IT IS NOT A THRESHOLD. It says it in plain English.

Think about it. You went on record saying it is an 80% threshold.



Dude....THAT IS NOT TRUE. You also seemed to say that the threshold magically becomes whatever they test it as later. DUDE...THE THRESHOLD DOESN'T CHANGE EVERYTIME YOU TAKE THE DAMN TEST. THAT'S ASININE. It does NOT REPRESENT A THRESHOLD.

That's what I keep telling you is the crux of this argument. And if you want to argue that, I'm fine with it.



1. I'm not taking anything back.
2. This can thing is just your own bullshlt. I can't possibly know what every testing agency does with EPO. SO that right away tells you it's too vague. I can tell you that the BAP is NOT inherently a threshold test.
3. The way you are trying to run this debate (which by the way you shouldn't be acting like I owe you anything anyway because you are the one who owes me. You are not the A-side here, so to speak, and you know that) you are trying to pigoeon hole me to something I've said over and over wasn't the case.

I ASKED YOU TO PROVE WHERE I SAID CAN. I SHOWED ONE INSTANCE AND SAID I'M FINE WITH GOING TO DEBATE OVER IT. YOU SHOWED ONE INSTANCE, AND I ALSO SAID I'M FINE WITH GOING TO DEBATE OVER IT. But then you backed out again and went with...NO IT'S NOT JUST ABOUT THAT CASE...IT'S ABOUT EVER FROM ANYTIME USING ALL TESTING AGENCIES. Stop with the bullshlt. If you want to debate about whether BAP is inherently a threshold test, then just say so. You've said it multiple times:



INCORRECT. It is not a threshold test, especially when the labs don't place a threshold on it!!!!!!!



I'm telling you that you are purposely giving a vague statement about can and you're still trying to hold me to it. I guess I should have held you to threshold substances and argued 90 pages without a debate, huh? Because the evidence shows definitively that you thought it was a threshold substance. Do you admit that or not? Please answer.

And you are also lying about us arguing for 2 months over "can." We argued about the rematch. If you want me to prove that, I can post you asking for a recount and I can post ShoulderRoll asking you about a rematch and I can post me over and over asking you about a rematch and I can post me over and over asking you why the actual fvvck are you still talking about the BAP when it is out of scope of our debate. You know the truth but you are hiding from it.

ADP02

Just to refresh your memory:

Question: You said it is not a threshold type test.
a) Why did BOTH sides call it a threshold test in that case that you referenced?
b) In my post, even WADA expert Segura calls it a threshold test. Was the expert wrong?
c) Others called it that too! Are they all wrong?

Travestyny

Question A, B, and C:
THE COURT FOR ARBITRATION OF SPORT HAS CORRECTED ANYONE THAT HAS EVER CALLED THIS A THRESHOLD TEST A NUMBER OF TIMES....BECAUSE IT IS NOT A THRESHOLD TEST!!!!!




THE ONLY THING THAT WAS EVER REFERRED TO AS A THRESHOLD WAS THE OLD WAY OF TESTING: THE BAP. AND THE COURT EVEN SAID THAT IS NOT A THRESHOLD TEST.

Like I said, I know that you do not want to take your statement back because you cannot.

BUT

read your statements and how you responded to me.


You stated that the CAS panel stated that whenever EPO test criteria was referred to as a threshold type test, that was WRONG.

So you are saying that if a WADA EXPERT referred to it as the 80% BAP threshold then that EXPERT was WRONG. Why? Because your interpretations is that the CAS panel states so.


You said that the CAS panel was correcting the athlete and whoever else used the word "threshold" for EPO testing.



Is your own statement VAGUE? NO, you said it is CLEAR and you have said so a BILLION times that there has never been a threshold test for EPO testing.




.