Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

NOBODY was concerned before

Collapse
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by S.G. View Post
    Since Margarito, Cotto and Arum decided your all mighty Nevada State Athletic Commission were wrong.

    But, but... I thought the commission were above and more important than mere fighters and their promoters!? Their infallible wisdom immune to the intervention of the little people!?
    So everyone involved agreed? That seems much different than trying to enforce your rules on an opponent who disagrees with you.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by AKATheMack View Post
      Everybody in this discussion has an agenda
      Many of which said agendas providing more substantial point of views than simply "I don't care about anything; just fight each other!!!"

      Originally posted by AKATheMack View Post
      if you first priority isnt yourself you're an idiot.
      Great, I agree. But I'm not gonna get into lengthy debates about it considering that stance offers nothing at all in the way of discovering the truth of a situation or even finding potential resolutions.

      Originally posted by AKATheMack View Post
      Id much rather my personal needs be fulfilled than to try and justify another mans actions.
      Well, personally, understanding how the world works is something I find relevent to myself.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by TortillaWarrior View Post
        But is that the rule for one fight or fighter?

        Or,

        is it standard across the board?


        Thanks for trying.


        Chess, not checkers.
        At the time of it's implementation it was for one fight, dummy. I referenced that particular case of the NSAC bending their own rules so you maybe you could understand that they are not the one and only official rule makers, as you misguidedly seem to think they are. (Well you probably don't, but that seems to be one of your main trolling devices of late).

        Originally posted by AKATheMack View Post
        So everyone involved agreed? That seems much different than trying to enforce your rules on an opponent who disagrees with you.
        See above for my reason for mentioning it - not as a parallel but simply an example of the NSAC being superceded.

        Why does Pacquiao disagree with OST anyway, by the way?

        Comment


        • Originally posted by AKATheMack View Post
          So everyone involved agreed? That seems much different than trying to enforce your rules on an opponent who disagrees with you.

          Its also much different when it becomes standard across the board for everyone,

          not just one fighter or his fights.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by S.G. View Post
            Many of which said agendas providing more substantial point of views than simply "I don't care about anything; just fight each other!!!"

            Not my stance at all, but I am more interested in my entertainment than proving it was ok for a fighter to walk away from a fight for rules that aren't in place.

            Great, I agree. But I'm not gonna get into lengthy debates about it considering that stance offers nothing at all in the way of discovering the truth of a situation or even finding potential resolutions.

            The truth is NSAC has rules in place for boxers to follow. The resolution to the problem is then following the rules in place, its actually very simple.

            Well, personally, understanding how the world works is something I find relevent to myself.
            Deciding rules need to be in place and the expecting everyone to agree with you is most definitely NOT how the world works.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by S.G. View Post
              At the time of it's implementation it was for one fight, dummy. I referenced that particular case of the NSAC bending their own rules so you maybe you could understand that they are not the one and only official rule makers, as you misguidedly seem to think they are. (Well you probably don't, but that seems to be one of your main trolling devices of late).


              See above for my reason for mentioning it - not as a parallel but simply an example of the NSAC being superceded.

              Why does Pacquiao disagree with OST anyway, by the way?

              ***** talk, "it has to start somewhere".

              Well, in this instance, it started with that particular fight and became the standard for everyone who fights in Nevada under 147 but above 135.

              Its not the rule for just one guy or his fights.

              Thats where the problem starts with Floyd and his "cleaning up the sport" talk.

              If you want to ask questions about Pac, I have a question for you.

              Why didn't Floyd start this crusade as his professional career began? According to him, his father and uncle, they know the ins and outs of the sport since they've been involved with it for over 4 decades. Why not spearhead the movement with his entire career as a showcase for how its to be done in the proper manner? Why wait until someone just as good, or better physically, with better achievements ,comes along to start this whole, "the sport is dirty and we're going to clean it up"?

              Comment


              • Originally posted by S.G. View Post
                At the time of it's implementation it was for one fight, dummy. I referenced that particular case of the NSAC bending their own rules so you maybe you could understand that they are not the one and only official rule makers, as you misguidedly seem to think they are. (Well you probably don't, but that seems to be one of your main trolling devices of late).


                See above for my reason for mentioning it - not as a parallel but simply an example of the NSAC being superceded.

                Why does Pacquiao disagree with OST anyway, by the way?
                I have no idea, he should just shut up and take the tests. You also fail to understand that if the different rules are agreed upon by all parties then I have no problem with changing them. Floyd doesnt want rules everyone agrees to he wants what he wants and refuses to fight unless he gets it. Much different.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by AKATheMack View Post
                  Not my stance at all, but I am more interested in my entertainment than proving it was ok for a fighter to walk away from a fight for rules that aren't in place.
                  So why are you in this thread? And actually it was Pacquiao who walked away from the fight and my whole argument of these past few pages are that he is accountable for that; and that it implies he probably is on illegal PEDs.

                  If you don't care about the rules why are you investing so much into defending the NSAC's? I'd just like to know why you consider them to be infallible and ununsurpassable when it comes to this?
                  Originally posted by AKATheMack View Post
                  The truth is NSAC has rules in place for boxers to follow. The resolution to the problem is then following the rules in place, its actually very simple.
                  That resolves the possibility that Pacquiao and other boxers are on PEDs how again?

                  Yes see, as has been explained to you many times by many different people, it is actually not very simple.

                  Originally posted by AKATheMack View Post
                  Deciding rules need to be in place and the expecting everyone to agree with you is most definitely NOT how the world works.
                  I know, walking away from drug testing and still having people believe you're clean is. The world sucks huh?

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by AKATheMack View Post
                    Deciding rules need to be in place and the expecting everyone to agree with you is most definitely NOT how the world works.

                    Are you sure?

                    You mean, I can't just walk into work and say that I'm going to take longer breaks, but everyone has to take the same ones?

                    I'll say that I'm doing it to show that longer rest periods make for safer work environments.

                    Nobody would agree with that?


                    Or would it be better for me to bring up the issue to the people in charge, maybe get signatures from other workers explaining how the existing conditions are a bit of a hazard to our health?

                    Did I also mention I'm just two months away from retirement?

                    Comment


                    • You will be concerned if you feel threatened, that was floyd and his fans feel now. Look at burner he's more of p.will fan than floyd but he's not concerned about if their is a test or not because he knew his opponent isn't a threat to him, p.will size alone will make his opponent be intimidated.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X
                      TOP