Urine TKOs blood in Nevada boxing drug testing debate

[check hook]

Damn that only means 2 things that 99.9% of athletes that undergo there testing are clean(wow what a shocker) or they suck balls at catching them.

Well actually it means they only just synthesised a test capable of detecting HGH recently......and also they suck balls at catching them------> that's because it clears the system in 24-48 hrs......so RANDOMLY testing is the only way you can catch anyone using HGH. So whilst USADA sucks balls with it's chances...........the NSAC has no chance.

[Vasyl’s dad]

Damn that only means 2 things that 99.9% of athletes that undergo there testing are clean(wow what a shocker) or they suck balls at catching them.

[JAB5239]

Oh look it's JAB5239 i'm all for improved PED testing in boxing, but __________________________________________________ ________________________________________ <-----------insert excuse here!

What Im for and what is relevant are two different things. OST is not relevant to make this fight. And even if it were there appears to be many divided experts on how good OST really is. One cheater in 8 years speaks volumes no matter what side of the fence you choose to be on. Now stop being so butt hurt.

[check hook]

What Im for and what is relevant are two different things. OST is not relevant to make this fight. And even if it were there appears to be many divided experts on how good OST really is. One cheater in 8 years speaks volumes no matter what side of the fence you choose to be on. Now stop being so butt hurt.

recently synthesised test + small clearance time = small window of opportunity. Give it a few years. They weren't catching the guys on EPO before either.

And how about EPO------>which the NSAC does not test for????


- So which testing method is better the NSAC or USADA????


- oh that's right you don't care

I say again.........you are all for OST, but ________________________<---------inserts silly excuse here.

[check hook]

It's really simple..........if a cyclist in the Tour de France, an Olympic sprinter or swimmer declined to undergo OST and gave the reasons Manny did, he would be universally derided and laughed at.

the reason Manny isn't is because:

1. He has fanatical fans who apply double standards and ill though out reasoning so that nothing he ever does is criticised.

2. The dirt was slung by Floyd Mayweather Jr.

3. Boxing is a sport rooted in corruption. The mob used to run this sport......and mob mentality still exists. It's what people would term "organisational resistance to change." Many of the major stakeholders like the status quo.

[mikemurni]

recently synthesised test + small clearance time = small window of opportunity. Give it a few years. They weren't catching the guys on EPO before either.

And how about EPO------>which the NSAC does not test for????


- So which testing method is better the NSAC or USADA????


- oh that's right you don't care

I say again.........you are all for OST, but ________________________<---------inserts silly excuse here.

The board meeting was not suppose to be a debate between NSAC and USADA about drug testing, but more of a discussion. Unfortunately USADA sent in an unqualified representative to speak for them.

[Vasyl’s dad]

It's really simple..........if a cyclist in the Tour de France, an Olympic sprinter or swimmer declined to undergo OST and gave the reasons Manny did, he would be universally derided and laughed at.

the reason Manny isn't is because:

1. He has fanatical fans who apply double standards and ill though out reasoning so that nothing he ever does is criticised.

2. The dirt was slung by Floyd Mayweather Jr.

3. Boxing is a sport rooted in corruption. The mob used to run this sport......and mob mentality still exists. It's what people would term "organisational resistance to change." Many of the major stakeholders like the status quo.

You're omitting one glaring fact,

in all of the examples you brought up,

cyclist, runner and swimmer,


every cyclist, runner and swimmer has to test.

Not just who one of them chooses.

[brick wall]

he's talking about ways for boxing to finance testing...........USADA is a non-profit organiasation.......just thought i would point that out....again.

so? why do you think tygart wants to branch out in pro boxing? in olympic games they rely on government funding whereas in pro boxing it's all business/profit.

[check hook]

The board meeting was not suppose to be a debate between NSAC and USADA about drug testing, but more of a discussion. Unfortunately USADA sent in an unqualified representative to speak for them.

fair enough......but that doesn't address my question??

Whose testing protocols are superior? The NSAC or USADA?


Let me help you out:


USADA:

- Random/unnanounced blood and urine testing day or night, where the athletes must make thier movements known to USADA. A comprehensive list (sourced from WADA) of banned substances is tested for, and B samples are stored legally for 8 years. This means cheaters on previously undetectable substances can be exposed in the future.


NSAC

- Announced urine testing and no blood testing. No blood testing automatically precludes the NSAC from detecting athletes using HGH, blood transfusion and other HBOC's. No B sample taken for storage. They take urine, but don't test it for EPO.

-------> SSM used EPO, Modanofil, The Cream and The Clear. He was not caught by any state commission ever.

[check hook]

You're omitting one glaring fact,

in all of the examples you brought up,

cyclist, runner and swimmer,


every cyclist, runner and swimmer has to test.

Not just who one of them chooses.

2 boxers fight. Both boxers must submit to USADA testing protocol. Therefore 100% of the athletes participating will be tested. Floyd will be tested just like Manny.