Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Comments Thread For: Mayweather Under Hot Fire Over USADA/IV Scandal

Collapse
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #41
    Here's a question. Did USADA request a sample of what Floyd used in the IV? I'm guessing no, they must have just taken his word for it and gave him the TUE.

    Comment


    • #42
      Originally posted by -Hyperion- View Post
      And if USADA operated with transparency, no one would refute the claim that CIR was used. This is about drug testing being better regulated, but you guys need to defend floyd at all costs...
      I never argued anything about it being transparent enough or not. In fact my original point had nothing to do with that. If u don't trust USADA then don't trust them. That's a fair criticism. But that doesn't change the point that Hauser was reaching with plenty of his points in this article. If u omit stuff and then add unnecessary stuff to bolster points that don't rrally exist then it takes away from the message being relayed. It's that simple.

      Comment


      • #43
        Originally posted by Kagami Taiga View Post
        I never argued anything about it being transparent enough or not. In fact my original point had nothing to do with that. If u don't trust USADA then don't trust them. That's a fair criticism. But that doesn't change the point that Hauser was reaching with plenty of his points in this article. If u omit stuff and then add unnecessary stuff to bolster points that don't rrally exist then it takes away from the message being relayed. It's that simple.
        You say you didn't read, but criticise anyway...

        Read about how the IV was cleared and tell me that isn't shady as hell... Even the NSAC had to go on record condemning it and saying it can't happen again.

        Comment


        • #44
          Originally posted by jas View Post
          Another black eye for boxing
          Okay Larry Merchant.

          I can't envision most people giving enough of a f#ck about this for it to be the go to over utilized phase of a black eye for boxing.

          Comment


          • #45
            So was Floyd dehydrated on May 1st?

            Comment


            • #46
              Originally posted by -Hyperion- View Post
              You say you didn't read, but criticise anyway...

              Read about how the IV was cleared and tell me that isn't shady as hell... Even the NSAC had to go on record condemning it and saying it can't happen again.
              No I did not say I didn't read it. Smh. Learn to read bro.

              Comment


              • #47
                Originally posted by Kagami Taiga View Post

                No I did not say I didn't read it. Smh. Learn to read bro
                Originally posted by Kagami Taiga View Post
                Except for the fact that the USADA are already on record stating that they have used CIR testing in every floyd fight since before pacquiao. I don't have to read the article because I actually keep up on this stuff. And it still doesn't refute my point. Showing those two samples mean next to nothing.
                If you can't see how that can be interpreted as such, then you need to learn to write a little less ambiguosly. Bro. More importantly you went and ignored the IV deal. Is it shady or not?

                Comment


                • #48
                  Originally posted by -Hyperion- View Post
                  If you can't see how that can be interpreted as such, then you need to learn to write a little less ambiguosly. Bro. More importantly you went and ignored the IV deal. Is it shady or not?
                  It shouldn't be interpreted as anything besides whst I said. Which is "I didn't have to read it." If u then assumed I didn't then the fault blows with u and your reading comprehension skills. This isn't a logic game. If I didn't read it I would have said I didn't read it. But I clearly didn't say that. In fact in an earlier comment, I state that he made some good points.

                  Comment


                  • #49
                    Originally posted by Kagami Taiga View Post
                    It shouldn't be interpreted as anything besides whst I said. Which is "I didn't have to read it." If u then assumed I didn't then the fault blows with u and your reading comprehension skills. This isn't a logic game. If I didn't read it I would have said I didn't read it. But I clearly didn't say that. In fact in an earlier comment, I state that he made some good points.

                    Get off on semantics(ambiguous as they are), keep dodging the question. You're not his lawyer bro.

                    Comment


                    • #50
                      Another laughable article from hauser, he needs to try harder unfortunately as his credibility is quite low right now.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X
                      TOP