-
-
Roy Jones Jr. and Richard Hall both tested positive for the testosterone precursor androstenedione after Jones defeated Hall to retain his undisputed world light heavyweight championship in Indianapolis in 2000.
Did you cry when Jones got KTFO twice to turds? At least Hatton lost to the P4P #1 in many people's eyes.Comment
-
Roy Jones Jr. and Richard Hall both tested positive for the testosterone precursor androstenedione after Jones defeated Hall to retain his undisputed world light heavyweight championship in Indianapolis in 2000.
Did you cry when Jones got KTFO twice to turds? At least Hatton lost to the P4P #1 in many people's eyes.
Androstenedione was manufactured as a dietary supplement, often called andro (or andros) for short. Andro was in common use in Major League Baseball throughout the 1990s by record-breaking sluggers like Mark McGwire. The supplement is banned by the World Anti-Doping Agency, and hence from the Olympic Games.
On March 12, 2004, the Anabolic Steroid Control Act of 2004 was introduced into the United States Senate. It amended the Controlled Substance Act to place both anabolic steroids and prohormones on a list of controlled substances, making possession of the banned substances a federal crime. The law took effect on January 20, 2005. Surprisingly, andro was legally defined as an anabolic steroid, even though there is scant evidence that androstenedione itself is anabolic in nature.
On April 11, 2004, the United States Food and Drug Administration banned the sale of Andro, citing that the drug poses significant health risks commonly associated with steroids.
So it wasn't an anabolic, and it was legal and in ripped fuel. Idiot.
Last edited by bsrizpac; 06-01-2008, 07:36 PM.Comment
-
copy n paste..........
Androstenedione was manufactured as a dietary supplement, often called andro (or andros) for short. Andro was in common use in Major League Baseball throughout the 1990s by record-breaking sluggers like Mark McGwire. The supplement is banned by the World Anti-Doping Agency, and hence from the Olympic Games.
On March 12, 2004, the Anabolic Steroid Control Act of 2004 was introduced into the United States Senate. It amended the Controlled Substance Act to place both anabolic steroids and prohormones on a list of controlled substances, making possession of the banned substances a federal crime. The law took effect on January 20, 2005. Surprisingly, andro was legally defined as an anabolic steroid, even though there is scant evidence that androstenedione itself is anabolic in nature.
On April 11, 2004, the United States Food and Drug Administration banned the sale of Andro, citing that the drug poses significant health risks commonly associated with steroids.
So it wasn't an anabolic, and it was legal and in ripped fuel. Idiot.
http://www.nutros.com/nsr-07030.html
plagurism at its finest.Comment
-
History wont remember him too favourably; he never had a real defining fight.
The Lacy performance was undeniable prodigous. But Jeff Lacys name will be lost in history as he has never actually DONE ANYTHING OF NOTE. He was 80% hype, and nowadays he looks even more one-dimensional than pre-Calzaghe. At least back then he believed in himself. So although the wins good the opponent doesn't fit the nature of the victory. Ditto Hopkins. Though Bernard was coming off of two huge wins, he hadn't fought in nine months and history will remember him as a 43-year-old veteran in the twilight of his career (what will be his last fight, I'm certain which taints the victory further). And the nature of that victory doesn't make him look too good either. Dropped in round one, outboxed for rounds at a time, winning as Hopkins' legs began to tire, barely scraping a Split Decision victory..
If Kessler goes on to do big things history will regard that win as very significant. Calzaghe nuthuggers will overemphasize its significance right now, because its hard to argue with Mikkels 39-0 record but again I ask you, who has he beaten? Mikkel Kessler is a big, strong super-middleweight, he is a fair fighter, but that fight cannot be called definitive until he (Kessler) has done something to make it important (in HISTORICAL terms)..which I doubt very much he will do.Comment
-
It's inarguable. If its US to understand logic you may be right.Comment
-
Don't agree at all. Calzaghe is regarded in the UK as one of our greatest ever fighters and history will absolutely remember him well. Likewise, when the USA recovers from the peculiar bout of jealousy that is currently afflicting it, and gets round to evaluating Calzaghe's career in a fair and objective way, it too will realise that he was actually a pretty special fighter.
This whole notion that Calzaghe is somehow not 'great' is literally based upon modern day US fans not knowing the first thing about his career, his skills or his opponents. In contrast to other nations, you guys seem to take the position that 'if we don't know about it, it must be ****', and dismiss it, instead of admitting the gaps in your knowledge and embracing the opportunity to find out more, as I for one do with US fighters.Comment
Tweet
Comment