Comments Thread For: Mayweather-Pacquiao: Roach Has a Drug Testing Solution

[brick wall]

Why is OST unfair? because other people havent done it? Is it fair that Pacquiao gets 90% of a purse? What kind of nonsense are you spewing here?

lol read my post again smartass...did i say ost is unfair? ost is fair in itself but when you do it selectively it becomes unfair.

[IMDAZED]

Because that is the natural evolution of high level negotiations. Fighters ask for certain things and based on certain factors like PPV numbers and marketability, those requests are widdled down and eventually compromised on.

No. That's being general. We are discussing a SPECIFIC case.

Here we have two fighters who agreed to testing using the protocol as provided by the USADA.

Now...what was the issue?

[IMDAZED]

lol read my post again smartass...did i say ost is unfair? ost is fair in itself but when you do it selectively it becomes unfair.

Thats nonsense. A contract by nature involves only a certain number of parties. You're all over the place.

[switchsouthpaw]

Do you recall the negotiations between Manny and Miguel Cotto?

Read my entire post where I cited SRL/Hagler as an example. Manny was in a better position to negotiate terms, the gap between his recent PPV buys and that of Miguel, put Miguel in an unfavorable spot as far as negotiating power.

[switchsouthpaw]

No. That's being general. We are discussing a SPECIFIC case.

Here we have two fighters who agreed to testing using the protocol as provided by the USADA.

Now...what was the issue?

That testing protocol was a request, as part of a negotiation and not mandated by any governing body or commission, as such it's subject to negotiation until Nevada adopts those testing policies.

[IMDAZED]

That testing protocol was a request, as part of a negotiation and not mandated by any governing body or commission, as such it's subject to negotiation until Nevada adopts those policy guidelines.

No kidding. And?

Again, it was introduced in the bout agreement. The two parties acquiesced.

Soo...what was the issue?

[brick wall]

Thats nonsense. A contract by nature involves only a certain number of parties. You're all over the place.

lol it's you who's not making sense. what contract are talking about...there was never a perfected contract because they can't agree on some points.

[IMDAZED]

lol it's you who's not making sense. what contract are talking about...there was never a perfected contract because they can't agree on some points.

So in other words, your initial post about OST being fair is irrelevant?

[switchsouthpaw]

No kidding. And?

Again, it was introduced in the bout agreement. The two parties acquiesced.

Soo...what was the issue?

I didn't say that there was an issue, that is for the two parties who engage in negotiations to come to a determination. I am stating as fact that the last know position of the Mayweather camp was a 14 day cutoff, now Pac has countered with 17 days, so I ask you...WHAT'S THE ISSUE?

[IMDAZED]

I didn't say that there was an issue, that is for the two parties who engage in negotiations to come to a determination. I am stating as fact that the last know position of the Mayweather camp was a 14 day cutoff, now Pac has countered with 17 days, so I ask you...WHAT'S THE ISSUE?

The issue is that there shouldn't be a cutoff in the first place.

Why did Pacquiao backtrack on what he agreed to?