How many roid cycles has Fury done since the Ngannou fight?

[N/A]

He can correct me if I'm wrong but he said testing positive for Nandrolone means he had Nandrolone in his system, which is true.

In regards to the contaminated meat, we can't say that's it's scientifically proven that he tested positive due to that. Because there's no way to demonstrably test it. I'm not clued out on the specifics of the case, but from what I can gather I'm assuming that the trace amounts were consistent with contamination and therefore was deemed unintentional. That doesn't necessarily make it true that that is why he tested positive for it. That would be impossible to say.

Absolutely, contamination is a problem. Especially in over the counter supplements. That said, it's still incredibly difficult to prove for sure when someone has tested due to contamination. All we can use at that point is an educated guess. In Fury's case, we really don't know. The same goes for anyone who tests positive and blames contamination I.e 99% of fighters.

In regards to the Klitschko fight, just because he was clean for that doesn't mean he was clean before that. The half life of the drug itself can be manipulated by masking agents, mirco dosing etc. So I don't see anything wrong with that he said there.

I don't know if he does or doesn't know, but I just don't see anything from his post that would indicate otherwise in the sense I don't see anything he said that would be incorrect in regards to Nandrolone and how it works etc.

Let's not turn it into a game of words. He said: "Positive test means he took PEDs. Period." - taking PEDs is something intentional. What UKAD stated is: "Tyson and Hughie Fury's position is that they have never knowingly or deliberately committed any anti-doping rule violation." He also said: "You can't test positive without PEDs in your body." This is not true - you naturally produce nandrolone and your levels can be high due to wild boar consumption as well. So is Fury a cheater - in the sense this guy doesn't like - yes, he is - they all are. Is Fury a cheater in this particular case - only he knows, but wasn't proven, but rather disproved.

I talked about the Klitschko fight because keep in mind nandrolone can be detected in a man's urine up to 8 months and up to 18 in a man's blood. It is hard to mask, surely you are not micro-dosing it if you give adverse results. So Fury tested positive in February 2015 - what is weird is that he had two fights in 2014 and one of them was in November 2014 - was he tested in 2014 or not? Because if so, traces of nandrolone would have been found. Is he that reckless to risk his title fight against Wladimir - probably he is because he did many things to destroy a potentially great career. Because he was tested prior and after that fight.

That's all, the nandrolone case is weird. It's not defence, as I said - I don't think there is any top-level athlete who doesn't use PEDs. My initial point was let's not accuse him of something he didn't do. Some people have their reasons to dislike him, others to like him but polluting the forums with constant Fury-hating topics became infantile for the last 2-3 years. Especially after his last fight - who do you think looks more like a steroids abuser - Fury or Ngannou?

[IronDanHamza]

Let's not turn it into a game of words. He said: "Positive test means he took PEDs. Period." - taking PEDs is something intentional. What UKAD stated is: "Tyson and Hughie Fury's position is that they have never knowingly or deliberately committed any anti-doping rule violation." He also said: "You can't test positive without PEDs in your body." This is not true - you naturally produce nandrolone and your levels can be high due to wild boar consumption as well. So is Fury a cheater - in the sense this guy doesn't like - yes, he is - they all are. Is Fury a cheater in this particular case - only he knows, but wasn't proven, but rather disproved.

If his position is he took PED's intentionally then yes I agree with you we don't know that for certain. But we don't know he didn't for certain either. All we know is that he had them in his system.

You can't test positive without the compound in yout system to that level is what I'm assuming he meant, which is true.

I talked about the Klitschko fight because keep in mind nandrolone can be detected in a man's urine up to 8 months and up to 18 in a man's blood. It is hard to mask, surely you are not micro-dosing it if you give adverse results. So Fury tested positive in February 2015 - what is weird is that he had two fights in 2014 and one of them was in November 2014 - was he tested in 2014 or not? Because if so, traces of nandrolone would have been found. Is he that reckless to risk his title fight against Wladimir - probably he is because he did many things to destroy a potentially great career. Because he was tested prior and after that fight.

That's not true. It's actually relatively easy to mask.

Positive tests from athletes who are using and masking are always running the risk when it comes to the timing of random tests, that could be what happened. Just because he tested positive for one fight and not others round it doesn't prove anything in regards to potential PED use.

That's all, the nandrolone case is weird. It's not defence, as I said - I don't think there is any top-level athlete who doesn't use PEDs. My initial point was let's not accuse him of something he didn't do. Some people have their reasons to dislike him, others to like him but polluting the forums with constant Fury-hating topics became infantile for the last 2-3 years. Especially after his last fight - who do you think looks more like a steroids abuser - Fury or Ngannou?

My opinon would be both Fury and Ngannou likely use some form of PED. In Fury's case we have the positive tests to have some kind of data, in Ngannou's, we don't. But I'd say likely both are. But that's just a guess.

I think Fury from 2015, the shape he was in then, probably PED use. I don't know though.

When someone tests positive, the quesiton is always going to linger no matter what their excuse/reason is.

[crimsonfalcon07]

There's no need to dig into the details of drugs because that's just obfuscation of the point.

I called fifth_root out for saying that people were being inequitable for being su****ious of Fury but not Usyk. Fury has a past history including positive tests for banned substances. Usyk doesn't. Period. If you can't see the difference there, and that there's 100% verified proof that one has used banned substances and that there's no evidence that the other has, then there's a high likelihood that you're not being "objective," to use the term fifth_root decided to pull out.

Getting into which substances and why isn't really germane because no matter what they were, it doesn't change the fact that he tested positive for banned substances. It doesn't change the fact that you don't test positive for banned substances without having some in your body.

Is it possible that he got them unknowingly? Sure. But it's also FACT that he was never cleared for it. In fact, the settlement led to a (post-dated) two year ban and invalidation of the fight results for the relevant fights. Which, let's point out, in Tyson's case, was NOT the Wlad fight, which begs the question why fifth_root decided to introduce that fight when I didn't even mention it. That's not really the kind of settlement that you see when someone was proven sufficiently innocent to be cleared, as fifth_root claimed. It was never PROVEN one way or another, when it comes to nandrolone.

*******, on the other hand, he admitted to. It's still a banned substance, and he's got a long history of substance abuse. And that's absolutely relevant to whether or not people have justification in questioning whether Fury has something in his system that would prevent him from passing a VADA test and getting the fight called off yet again.

Getting into the specifics of 19-nortestosterone is just obfuscation. That's a classic logical fallacy, by the way. Fifth_root manufactured an argument that I didn't make and didn't respond to the actual one, which is that people have an evidence-based reason to be more su****ious of Fury than of Usyk.

And that's all leaving aside the fact that Fury has said in the past that his family tends to obesity. It's been about 6 months since the Ngannou fight, when we know he weighed in at 277.7. It's not unreasonable for the average person to lose 10% of their body weight in that period of time, let alone a professional athlete in training camp. But he's also not demonstrated this kind of drop in weight in his previous training camps over a similar time period, and the averages are a lot worse for people with a family history of obesity, especially in terms of reducing abdominal fat. So, from a training perspective, it's not impossible, but it's also not extremely likely, for him to have lost the weight he has in the time period he has.

None of that is necessary to my point, however.

And the hypocrisy comes from a person claiming to value good argument completely ignoring the argument being made, manufacturing things that I didn't say, and then responding to that instead of the actual point. Both straw man and red herring logical fallacies at play here.

Oh, and now he's throwing in Ngannou, who wasn't part of the discussion at all, and ALSO has never tested positive either. Objective, my @$$.

[IronDanHamza]

There's no need to dig into the details of drugs because that's just obfuscation of the point.

I called fifth_root out for saying that people were being inequitable for being su****ious of Fury but not Usyk. Fury has a past history including positive tests for banned substances. Usyk doesn't. Period. If you can't see the difference there, and that there's 100% verified proof that one has used banned substances and that there's no evidence that the other has, then there's a high likelihood that you're not being "objective," to use the term fifth_root decided to pull out.

Getting into which substances and why isn't really germane because no matter what they were, it doesn't change the fact that he tested positive for banned substances. It doesn't change the fact that you don't test positive for banned substances without having some in your body.

Is it possible that he got them unknowingly? Sure. But it's also FACT that he was never cleared for it. In fact, the settlement led to a (post-dated) two year ban and invalidation of the fight results for the relevant fights. Which, let's point out, in Tyson's case, was NOT the Wlad fight, which begs the question why fifth_root decided to introduce that fight when I didn't even mention it. That's not really the kind of settlement that you see when someone was proven sufficiently innocent to be cleared, as fifth_root claimed. It was never PROVEN one way or another, when it comes to nandrolone.

*******, on the other hand, he admitted to. It's still a banned substance, and he's got a long history of substance abuse. And that's absolutely relevant to whether or not people have justification in questioning whether Fury has something in his system that would prevent him from passing a VADA test and getting the fight called off yet again.

Getting into the specifics of 19-nortestosterone is just obfuscation. That's a classic logical fallacy, by the way. Fifth_root manufactured an argument that I didn't make and didn't respond to the actual one, which is that people have an evidence-based reason to be more su****ious of Fury than of Usyk.

And that's all leaving aside the fact that Fury has said in the past that his family tends to obesity. It's been about 6 months since the Ngannou fight, when we know he weighed in at 277.7. It's not unreasonable for the average person to lose 10% of their body weight in that period of time, let alone a professional athlete in training camp. But he's also not demonstrated this kind of drop in weight in his previous training camps over a similar time period, and the averages are a lot worse for people with a family history of obesity, especially in terms of reducing abdominal fat. So, from a training perspective, it's not impossible, but it's also not extremely likely, for him to have lost the weight he has in the time period he has.

None of that is necessary to my point, however.

And the hypocrisy comes from a person claiming to value good argument completely ignoring the argument being made, manufacturing things that I didn't say, and then responding to that instead of the actual point. Both straw man and red herring logical fallacies at play here.

That's true.

There is more reason to suspect Fury of PED use than Usyk, that can't be denied just on the basis he's tested positive before.

[crimsonfalcon07]

That's true.

There is more reason to suspect Fury of PED use than Usyk, that can't be denied just on the basis he's tested positive before.

That is literally the entire point I was making. No more, no less. Not trying to dig into the chemical composition of nandrolone. I'm just saying that people are justified in thinking there is more reason to be su****ious of Fury than Usyk.

That's why it's so obnoxious to have someone who claims to value good arguments making up all this other stuff and talking about how I don't know anything about nandrolone, bringing up Wlad and Ngannou, etc. He's just trying to divert to avoid that one very simple point.

[Atypicalbrit]

Fury's been proven a drugs cheat in the past, however I still firmly belive he was only caught for political reasons at that time. He was talking bad about LGBT and stuff and the entire British establishment wanted him silenced and then BAM failed Ped test, job done.

If they want to catch you they will, if they don't want to catch you they won't.

Usyk is more su****ious to me as another one of these eastern European fighters who has the same stamina deep into his late 30s as he did in his early 20s, there's more and more of these eastern Europeans turning up lately with that ability, they all come from a neck of the woods that is profuse with PED usage and to me it's mighty su****ious.

We have gone from boxers being FINISHED at 36 to that being an age where these guys are still in their absoloute physical prime, and we have gotten there in the space of like 10-20 years.

To me that does not come down to "modern nutrition and training" and human evolution doesn't work that fast.

When I see a 36-37 year old man who is bouncing around the ring in the championship rounds throwing record numbers of shots despite being the best part of 25lbs heavier and a decade past his natural physical prime I call bull****.

But that's just me.

[crimsonfalcon07]

Fury's been proven a drugs cheat in the past, however I still firmly belive he was only caught for political reasons at that time. He was talking bad about LGBT and stuff and the entire British establishment wanted him silenced and then BAM failed Ped test, job done.

If they want to catch you they will, if they don't want to catch you they won't.

Usyk is more su****ious to me as another one of these eastern European fighters who has the same stamina deep into his late 30s as he did in his early 20s, there's more and more of these eastern Europeans turning up lately with that ability, they all come from a neck of the woods that is profuse with PED usage and to me it's mighty su****ious.

We have gone from boxers being FINISHED at 36 to that being an age where these guys are still in their absoloute physical prime, and we have gotten there in the space of like 10-20 years.

To me that does not come down to "modern nutrition and training" and human evolution doesn't work that fast.

When I see a 36-37 year old man who is bouncing around the ring in the championship rounds throwing record numbers of shots despite being the best part of 25lbs heavier and a decade past his natural physical prime I call bull****.

But that's just me.

That's kinda like saying that a marathon runner won't be able to run a marathon in their 40's. Why wouldn't he still be able to maintain his style?

Usyk only threw 529 punches total vs AJ. Only 359 across 9 rounds vs Dubois. Vs Briedis, it was over 840. Nearly a 40% drop. It's only like 40 punches a round.

If he'd gone from a heavy footed plodder to bouncing all over the ring, that would be one thing. But he's in the gym all the time and he's still using his same style but his volume is down nearly 40%.

Just say you hate him and be done with it.

[Atypicalbrit]

That's kinda like saying that a marathon runner won't be able to run a marathon in their 40's. Why wouldn't he still be able to maintain his style?

Usyk only threw 529 punches total vs AJ. Only 359 across 9 rounds vs Dubois. Vs Briedis, it was over 840. Nearly a 40% drop. It's only like 40 punches a round.

If he'd gone from a heavy footed plodder to bouncing all over the ring, that would be one thing. But he's in the gym all the time and he's still using his same style but his volume is down nearly 40%.

Just say you hate him and be done with it.

Usyk threw over 200 punches in the final 3 rounds against AJ including 80 and 90 punches in rounds 10 and 11

712 punches, he pulled an extra 20% of volume out of himself at an age where he shouldn't naturally be getting any better.

Usyk almost DOUBLED Manny Pacquiaos average punch stats in his mid 30s LOL. No not su****ious at all.

It's su****ious, and as for marathon runner comparrison not the same, Usyk uses an explosive style with bursts more like a sprinter, that type of performance is one that usually doesn't age well. He's not Bernard Hopkins is he, flat footed and fiddling his way through rounds with veteran nous

No, no Usyk fights like a 25 year old.

[tonysoprano]

Probably just adjusted the amounts, they never really come off steroids, it’s just about manipulating the dosages to fit around fight timings.

[crimsonfalcon07]

Usyk threw over 200 punches in the final 3 rounds against AJ including 80 and 90 punches in rounds 10 and 11

712 punches, he pulled an extra 20% of volume out of himself at an age where he shouldn't naturally be getting any better.

Usyk almost DOUBLED Manny Pacquiaos average punch stats in his mid 30s LOL. No not su****ious at all.

It's su****ious, and as for marathon runner comparrison not the same, Usyk uses an explosive style with bursts more like a sprinter, that type of performance is one that usually doesn't age well. He's not Bernard Hopkins is he, flat footed and fiddling his way through rounds with veteran nous

No, no Usyk fights like a 25 year old.

My guy, I'm older than Usyk and I can still do 15+ rounds and throw over 200 punches per round. He's not sprinting either. His movement is greatly reduced from his cruiserweight days. You are just digging for fake reasons. Maybe try being honest. You don't have to like him, but it's not that hard if you've been training for it. I'm actually more efficient than I was when I was going in the ring as well, so I can do the same things I used to be able to do because it doesn't take as much energy. He doesn't even use the same mechanics he used to either. Foot feints are reduced, and he does more front hand fencing instead.