Comments Thread For: Manny Pacquiao 'Ready to Go' for Conor Benn Fight in Saudi Arabia in May/June

[IronDanHamza]

"His mind" could tell him he could jump off a skysc****r and fly like a bird.
Science would tell him otherwise.

"In my mind, it doesn't make sense to take blood out so close to fight night ."

I don't see your point?

Are you arguing that this is somehow any kind of evidence of PED use? Because it's not.

[BodyBagz]

I don't see your point?

Are you arguing that this is somehow any kind of evidence of PED use? Because it's not.

Proof was in the blood
Pac wanted no part of that unless he could control it.
Instead of fighting PBF and THEN suing him for defamation of character, he did shlt backwards .

"Sir, why would you want to speak to an attorney when all we want is your help finding your missing wife ????"

Chances are the husband is the cause for her being missing

[IronDanHamza]

The reason of refusal would be asked for under oath, the reason the question is circumstantial is because on face value his action of refusing infers guilt, it does not infer innocence especially when the rest of the circumstantial pieces come into play, his answers clarify or sink him as to why he refused. he has already offered reasons in videos and print and they contradict each other, I think Manny would be pulled to pieces in questioning under oath.

Circumstantial evidence doesn't prove guilt. Its a part of fact-finding to get to the truth; it is about an action that infers guilt; think on that for a bit, look up the definitions yourself every version fits the bill.

Right and if he was asked under oath and he said that it's because he doesn't like needles and because he feels weak when he takes a drug test, how is that not a legitimate reason? Both of them are and he could have 100 more. You aren't actually suggesting that this argument would stand up in court or any kind of legal situation, are you?

Contradict each other how? Where has he contradicted himself in regards to that? I don't see any.

I am aware of the definition, and I'm telling you why it's not that.

With May and the fluids there is factors such as the volume and that he gave negative tests before and after that actually rule out PED use, a heckler in the back of the court yelling out he paid off USADA and everybody else doesn't mean anything, only the known facts are questioned and judged.

How does that rule out PED use? It absolutely does not rule out PED use at all.

Well, yeah I'd imagine the volume of the IV would be a factor considering it was massively over the normal legal limit and it makes no real logical sense for someone like Mayweather who doesn't cut any weight to be taking that IV with that amount of fluid when we know that amount is used to mask PED use often. So yeah, I'm sure it would.

It still wouldn't hold up as evidence. Despite the glaringly obvious su****iousness of it.

[Roadblock]

Right and if he was asked under oath and he said that it's because he doesn't like needles and because he feels weak when he takes a drug test, how is that not a legitimate reason? Both of them are and he could have 100 more. You aren't actually suggesting that this argument would stand up in court or any kind of legal situation, are you?

Contradict each other how? Where has he contradicted himself in regards to that? I don't see any.

I am aware of the definition, and I'm telling you why it's not that.



How does that rule out PED use? It absolutely does not rule out PED use at all.

Well, yeah I'd imagine the volume of the IV would be a factor considering it was massively over the normal legal limit and it makes no real logical sense for someone like Mayweather who doesn't cut any weight to be taking that IV with that amount of fluid when we know that amount is used to mask PED use often. So yeah, I'm sure it would.

It still wouldn't hold up as evidence. Despite the glaringly obvious su****iousness of it.

That is the whole point of integration, every leading question and accusation has an answer, is it true or false and that often falls on other evidence such as in this instance forcing Rios to take the very same test he refused to take, which says he is not scared of needles, that it does not make him weak, which infers, not prove it adds to the final judgement he could have been on PEDS when he refused and off them when he had no issues with the testing in any way and he lied about being weak and scared, so yes he can say whatever he wants but under cross-examination to his actions his contradictions would shoot him down in flames, one thing the law really looks down on is changing your story, because the truth has only one account that is true.


If I was negative tested on Monday, had 700ml fluids on Tuesday, and was negative tested on Wednesday, how does that not prove you were not on PEDS, what could they put forward to prove the tests are invalid?

The volume is very low dose for 150lb male when reference dehydration as the reason, that's why the volume is relative because it would take a lot more to mask PEDS, and the test before says nothing was there at that point and again after the fluids, to think he had a blast of PEDS for one day is rediculous.

[IronDanHamza]

That is the whole point of integration, every leading question and accusation has an answer, is it true or false and that often falls on other evidence such as in this instance forcing Rios to take the very same test he refused to take, which says he is not scared of needles, that it does not make him weak, which infers, not prove it adds to the final judgement he could have been on PEDS when he refused and off them when he had no issues with the testing in any way, so yes he can say whatever he wants but under cross-examination to his actions his contradictions would shoot him down in flames, one thing the law really looks down on is changing your story, because the truth has only one account that is true.

You keep saying Pacquaio said he was scared of needles but he has never said that to my knowledge, so that one can get thrown out for starters.

In regards to blood tests making him weak, that's an objective fact. It does make you weaker for a time period after. All it means is as time went on he changed his mind on it being an issue, which he is allowed to do.

None of it is contradictory and none of this would hold up in any capacity what so ever in regards to proving his PED use. And it quite frankly doesn't prove PED use, at all.

[Roadblock]

You keep saying Pacquaio said he was scared of needles but he has never said that to my knowledge, so that one can get thrown out for starters.

In regards to blood tests making him weak, that's an objective fact. It does make you weaker for a time period after. All it means is as time went on he changed his mind on it being an issue, which he is allowed to do.

None of it is contradictory and none of this would hold up in any capacity what so ever in regards to proving his PED use. And it quite frankly doesn't prove PED use, at all.

Somebody from his team said it so they would be called out on why they said it, did he tell them that, or did he get the impression he was scared, you see where that goes.

It doesn't matter if it made him weak or not, the fact he says it made him weak in one instance, and then his actions with Rios contradict what he said that is another nail in the coffin, plenty of people get found guilty on a lot of circumstantial stuff because when question them and they start blubbering the jury adds it all up to make a verdict.

Nobody caught Manny with his hand in the cookie jar, so innocence or guilt would be about the questioning under oath all the circumstances, as I said the law does not like stories that change along the way, a good barrister would tear him sheds on the number of excuses that all appear null and void by him having the test with no issues, off course he can spin a story that his fears left, it no longer made him weak blah blah, people on the stand claim innocence all the time, what gets revealed gets to the bottom of it.

You seem to have a hard time realising a trial is a fact finding process, what happens during the questioning decides guilt or innocence, I believe I could tear Manny apart with his contradictions, none of which is guilt on its own but cumulative that's a different outcome.

[IronDanHamza]

Somebody from his team said it so they would be called out on why they said it, did he tell them that, or did he get the impression he was scared, you see where that goes.

So now it's even weaker. Who cares if someone from his team said it? It has absolutely nothing to do with Pacquaio what other people say and at no point to my knowledge did Pacquaio ever say he was scared of needles so that one is totally bogus and isn't an argument.

It doesn't matter if it made him weak or not, the fact he says it made him weak in one instance, and then his actions with Rios contradict what he said that is another nail in the coffin, plenty of people get found guilty on a lot of circumstantial stuff because when question them and they start blubbering the jury adds it all up to make a verdict.

It actually totally matters. And also matters that it's objectively true.

The fact he changed his mind 3 years later is totally irrelevant. He's allowed to do that and it's not a contradiction in any way.

There's literally 0% chance that would ever hold up. You're totally dreaming at the idea of it ever doing so.

Nobody caught Manny with his hand in the cookie jar, so innocence or guilt would be about the questioning under oath all the circumstances, as I said the law does not like stories that change along the way, a good barrister would tear him sheds on the number of excuses that all appear null and void by him having the test with no issues, off course he can spin a story that his fears left, it no longer made him weak blah blah, people on the stand claim innocence all the time, what gets revealed gets to the bottom of it.

Except he hasn't changed his story at any point, so that's not an argument.

You're just lying again there by reiterating that he said he's scared of needles when he's never said that and also that "it no longer makes him weak" that's not his argument, he's never changed his stance on that all he's changed is the fact that he's willing to go through with that making him weak and still fight. There's no contradiction there.

[BodyBagz]

You keep saying Pacquaio said he was scared of needles but he has never said that to my knowledge, so that one can get thrown out for starters.

In regards to blood tests making him weak, that's an objective fact. It does make you weaker for a time period after. All it means is as time went on he changed his mind on it being an issue, which he is allowed to do.

None of it is contradictory and none of this would hold up in any capacity what so ever in regards to proving his PED use. And it quite frankly doesn't prove PED use, at all.

He did mention he was afraid of needles and that he was superstitious.
Many people have shared this excuse among others that Pac has use.
Many boxing people have also said it was weak of him to pass up the fight of the century because of fear and superstitions.
Many people have, and still do, say Pac was on the juice.


We're supposed to believe that Manny Pacquiao is afraid of a little needle?

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/were-supposed-to-believe_b_401569

Its Official, Pacquiao Doesn't Want To Share the Ring with Mayweather

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/351772-its-official-pacquiao-doesnt-want-to-share-the-ring-with-mayweather

"He said testing was going to be to close to the fight and that he was afraid of needles."

[IronDanHamza]

He did mention he was afraid of needles and that he was superstitious.

When?

Neither of your articles provided show a quote of Pacquaio saying he's scared of needles.

Do you have a quote of Pacquaio saying he's scared of needles?

Many people have shared this excuse among others that Pac has use.
Many boxing people have also said it was weak of him to pass up the fight of the century because of fear and superstitions.
Many people have, and still do, say Pac was on the juice.


We're supposed to believe that Manny Pacquiao is afraid of a little needle?

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/were-supposed-to-believe_b_401569

Its Official, Pacquiao Doesn't Want To Share the Ring with Mayweather

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/351772-its-official-pacquiao-doesnt-want-to-share-the-ring-with-mayweather

"He said testing was going to be to close to the fight and that he was afraid of needles."

And? Many people can say what they want. That doesn't equate to evidence that he is. You're aware of that, right?

Many people say Floyd was on the juice. Is that evidence that Floyd took PEDs?

[BodyBagz]

When?

Neither of your articles provided show a quote of Pacquaio saying he's scared of needles.

Do you have a quote of Pacquaio saying he's scared of needles?




And? Many people can say what they want. That doesn't equate to evidence that he is. You're aware of that, right?

Many people say Floyd was on the juice. Is that evidence that Floyd took PEDs?

Of the 2, PBF/May was willing to roll up his sleeve.

''Why do you not want to help us find your wife who has been missing for at least 14 days ( ) ?!?!?!''
It's not proof, but.................