Originally posted by MindBat
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Comments Thread For: Conte: Mayweather Justified To Test "Su****ious" Pacquiao
Collapse
-
-
Originally posted by Clayton Bigsby View Postthose are not the only boxers who moved up in weight & became successful. mosley admitted to steroid use to a grand jury, roy, holyfield, & toney failed drug tests. what does pacquiao have to do with them? he aint never failed a drug test & has no association with victor conte or steroids.
is pac using better steroids than them? why because floyd says the philippines have the best peds? no that would be america. philippines havent even won a gold medal.
we should look at floyd. both pac & floyd started at 106. floyd went all the way to 154 while pac at 147.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Dominicano Soy! View PostExactly what I've been saying for a while now. This in itself was enough for Mayweather to warrant the test.
how is it warranted?
i thought pac chose the weakest & sorriest 135 pounder in david diaz?
i thought oscar was a shot old weight drained zombie?
i thought miguel cotto was a catch weight drained damaged by margarito fighter?
i thought the ricky hatton win was vs a past prime chin cracked & blue print showed by floyd?
yet he's doing something out of this world so he must be a steroid user?
GTFO.
Comment
-
There is no real hard evidence which can be used to accuse Pacquaio in the first place. He takes the default position of being a clean athlete. Positive real hard evidence has to be provided to put is default position in doubt.
It's up to the accusers to provide positive proof, not for the accused to bend to the accusers demands.
You don't ask pacquiao to prove that he's NOT on steroids, you as the accuser has to provide postive evidence to create reasonable doubts. Negative proofs are cannot be used.
Nowhere in Victor Conte's rambling did I see this evidence being presented. All he could come up with is circumstantial; evidence which is much less credible.
real hard evidence >> circumstantial evidenceLast edited by Vadrigar.; 06-25-2010, 02:36 AM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Clayton Bigsby View Posthow is it warranted?
i thought pac chose the weakest & sorriest 135 pounder in david diaz?
i thought oscar was a shot old weight drained zombie?
i thought miguel cotto was a catch weight drained damaged by margarito fighter?
i thought the ricky hatton win was vs a past prime chin cracked & blue print showed by floyd?
yet he's doing something out of this world so he must be a steroid user?
GTFO.
Comment
-
Conte is very knowledgeable in his field, but he knows nothing about boxing I suppose.
"Moving up five or six weight classes and becoming faster." Who is he talking about? It's definately not Pacquiao.
Comment
-
Originally posted by mmuhammadm View Postthere is no real hard evidence which can be used to accuse pacquaio in the first place. He takes the default position of being a clean athlete. Positive real hard evidence has to be provided to put is default position in doubt.
It's up to the accusers to provide positive proof, not for the accused to bend to the accusers demands.
You don't ask pacquiao to prove that he's not on steroids, you as the accuser has to provide postive evidence to create reasonable doubts. Negative proofs are cannot be used.
Nowhere in victor conte's rambling did i see this evidence being presented. All he could come up with is circumstantial; evidence which is much less credible.
real hard evidence >> circumstantial evidence
Comment
-
Originally posted by MindBat View PostFunnily, Mosley begged and pleaded with the Pacquiao camp for a crack at the #1 P4P fighter and was even willing to come in at a lighter weight.
Manny chose "Clottey with the runs".
Shane took and passed the tests.
so pac can dominate & make more money vs the guy that beat shane mosley.
shane took & passed the test but that wasnt gonna make him NOT BE 39 years old & 1 year & 5 months inactive when he faced floyd.
Comment
Comment