Comments Thread For: Peterson Scandal: VADA's Goodman Responds to Schaefer

[edgarg]

Why give peterson the benefit of the doubt?

The first sample was taken on march 19. The 2nd test was taken immediately after sample B tested positive, which was on May 2nd.

So 45 days passed between his first test and his 2nd test. 45 days. No wonder it came back negative

A good point. but since the final results of these tests are not deemed "positive" until they show that BOTH samples have the same positive result, it doesn't make sense to have another test before the second sample is found to also be positive. The report said that on receipt of the second sample positive result, he "immediately" had a second test which showed negative. Maybe he'd been watching too many ****ographic movies.......??

I expect he assumed that the first sample result was an anomaly, and was expecting the second to be negative. Sounds logical to me. Unless I'm missing something. I don't think the fight will be called off, although I wouldn't like to bet real money on it, except as a sporting gesture.

[edgarg]

Since the final results of these tests are not deemed "positive" until they show that BOTH samples have the same positive result, it doesn't make sense to have another test before the second sample is found to also be positive. The report said that on receipt of the second sample positive result, he "immediately" had a second test which showed negative. Maybe he'd been watching too many ****ographic movies.......??

I expect he assumed that the first sample result was an anomaly, and was expecting the second to be negative. Sounds logical to me. Unless I'm missing something. I don't think the fight will be called off, although I wouldn't like to bet real money on it, except as a sporting gesture.

I see a real rarity, part of a legitimate, standard word in MY post has been asterisked out. How prudish, considering the outright filth which is allowed through by slightly mis-spelling the words. I suppose we're dealing here with a computer scrutiny.

[Russian Crushin]

Since the final results of these tests are not deemed "positive" until they show that BOTH samples have the same positive result, it doesn't make sense to have another test before the second sample is found to also be positive. The report said that on receipt of the second sample positive result, he "immediately" had a second test which showed negative. Maybe he'd been watching too many ****ographic movies.......??

I expect he assumed that the first sample result was an anomaly, and was expecting the second to be negative. Sounds logical to me. Unless I'm missing something. I don't think the fight will be called off, although I wouldn't like to bet real money on it, except as a sporting gesture.

What? Both sample A and sample B tested positive. When a piss test is given, 2 cups are taken, labeled A and B. B serves as a backup to the A sample if it tests positive. So after the A was tested positive, the B also tested positive, making it a positive test.

Then May 2nd another test was given, which he tested negative but that doesnt really matter because he tested positive on his first test.

[QballLobo]

They did this right. You start sending out emails to Khan, Golden boy, and others and it probably gets out before Peterson has a right to have the B sample tested and possibly be exonerated. Shaefer should have done a better job protecting his interest instead of crying after the fact.

[golden247]

peterson's case is more than that actually...he was the one who demanded the extra testing and khan agreed to it. it's an eye opener to everybody...even criminals can wear police uniforms but doesn't mean they're law enforcers.

**** on the money!! Perfect quote!

Why is nobody actually stating that this lying cheating muthafùckër could've done some long lasting damage to another human being. It's like Floyd said about Barry bonds he only hits baseballs, boxers hit people! They better come down hard on this piece of dog shït!

[edgarg]

**** on the money!! Perfect quote!

Why is nobody actually stating that this lying cheating muthafùckër could've done some long lasting damage to another human being. It's like Floyd said about Barry bonds he only hits baseballs, boxers hit people! They better come down hard on this piece of dog shït!

This is a silly post. No need to particularise, it's obvious.

[edgarg]

What? Both sample A and sample B tested positive. When a piss test is given, 2 cups are taken, labeled A and B. B serves as a backup to the A sample if it tests positive. So after the A was tested positive, the B also tested positive, making it a positive test.

Then May 2nd another test was given, which he tested negative but that doesnt really matter because he tested positive on his first test.

I agree with your position. My reading of the report seemed that he took the second test (perhaps not with VADA), on his own initiative. Not because it was demanded by his contract, but because he was shaken by getting TWO positive results, and wanted more confirmation with different urine. Figured it was an error, because the tests were done on urine given at the same time.

[Russian Crushin]

I don't agree with your position. My reading of the report seemed that he took the second test (perhaps not with VADA), on his own initiative. Not because it was demanded by his contract, but because he was shaken by getting TWO positive results, and wanted more conformation with different urine. Figured it was an error, because the tests were done on urine given at the same time.

What position? Those are facts and how it happened

And what error? You're just making stuff up in an attempt to justify a failed test

[Corelone]

Darn it all. Where are these drug dealing MFs at? Anybody have an address? I want to give them a piece of my mind...and grow some pecs.

[rckdees]

not saying peterson didn't test positive but where and why did this vada come from? and what are they doing so different from the osta? who formed them? and is about competition, because we all know the best way to get your name out there is to cause controversy.