Mayweather's IV injection (Master thread)

[travestyny]

I knew that. That's why I called TravestyNY an idiot Lol His ******ity never ends lol

He has a comprehension disorder. I've been telling him to stop writing in NSB since he has been red since 2008. Shows how flawed his logic is. No one agrees with him. There should be a ruling not allowing red reps that lasted 8 years on wards. It's just cringe worthy to read.

Watch how he will try to talk to me again lol As I've told him several times I don't talk to dimwits who are in red. He is like a leech. He's got this mad crush on me.. The thing is I'll let him talk to the..

Yep. I won't miss an opportunity to make you feel like the coward you are.

Where is your proof? State it.

Instead, you bring up my name over and over, and then hide behind the karma system instead of talking about the merits of the subject.

Come on, try to stay on topic. I know it's hard for you when I've made you realize over and over that you have no idea what you are talking about.

It's easy to see that you avoid me because you have nothing intelligent to say. Carry on, mental midget.

[ADP02]

Provide proof please...
Links..
Slow motion videos
Interviews with homeless guys..

Wow, ...... that's a lot of work!

[Zaroku]

Wow, ...... that's a lot of work!

So shifting the burden of proof is easier.. Yes it is. All I ask is gather all your own evidence. Don't ask people to prove you wrong after making a statement. Prove yourselves correct with evidence. It really is that simple..

Burden of proof:

Quote:


The burden of proof (Latin: onus probandi) in the United States is the imperative on a party in a trial to produce the evidence that will shift the conclusion away from the default position to one's own position.

The burden of proof is often associated with the Latin maxim semper necessitas probandi incumbit ei qui agit, the best translation of which in this context is: "the necessity of proof always lies with the person who lays charges."[1]

She or he who does not carry the burden of proof carries the benefit of assumption, meaning (s)he needs no evidence to support her or his claim. Fulfilling the burden of proof effectively captures the benefit of assumption, passing the burden of proof off to another party.

[ADP02]

If you could provide some proof, I'd admit that I'm wrong. Keep in mind that even the "Quik Flush" products that are sold at GNC, which is much more than saline, only provide masking for up to 4 hours. Obviously saline won't last for nearly as long, and it clearly won't provide masking for blood and urine tests taken the following day.

Well then, I presented you with 2 possible scenarios.
1) Floyd was concerned with the unexpected May 1st test not the expected May 2nd after the fight test. Perhaps they were not sure that they can pass the May 1st test but they could have ~30-36 hours later.
2) They have May 1st as proof that DCO was there to witness an IV. So they can now do another IV hidden and even if tests show concentrations of IV by-products, well, they can say its from May 1st IV.

Only Floyd can tell you exactly the scenarios .....



This study showed that all subjects had stable HT levels 8 hours after the 500 ml of saline infused.


"..... 500 ml of saline were infused around 8 am and Hb, Ht, and %retics were measured before and every hour thereafter until 7 hours after infusion. In addition Ht was measured on a hematological analyzer as well as with a centrifuge. In a separate experiment the effect of tourniquet duration on Hb and Ht was studied in 9 of the subjects. The results show that Hb, Ht, and %retics are stable from 8 am to 4 pm, but that infusion of 500 ml of saline induces an acute decrease in Hb and Ht within one hour (Hb decreased from 15.2+/-0.9 g/dl to 14.5+/-1.0 g/dl, and Ht from 45.6+/-2.8 % to 44.0+/-2.5 %).

The decline in Hb and Ht was maintained during the 7-hour observation period. Ht values of the same samples measured with a hematological analyzer and a centrifuge were not different."

[ADP02]

So shifting the burden of proof is easier.. Yes it is. All I ask is gather all your own evidence. Don't ask people to prove you wrong after making a statement. Prove yourselves correct with evidence. It really is that simple..

Burden of proof:

Quote:


The burden of proof (Latin: onus probandi) in the United States is the imperative on a party in a trial to produce the evidence that will shift the conclusion away from the default position to one's own position.

The burden of proof is often associated with the Latin maxim semper necessitas probandi incumbit ei qui agit, the best translation of which in this context is: "the necessity of proof always lies with the person who lays charges."[1]

She or he who does not carry the burden of proof carries the benefit of assumption, meaning (s)he needs no evidence to support her or his claim. Fulfilling the burden of proof effectively captures the benefit of assumption, passing the burden of proof off to another party.

Nevada Commissions:
"The Commission need not follow the rules of evidence that a court must follow. All evidence that the Commission determines to be relevant and submitted in accordance with the requirements of this chapter is admissible. If the Commission determines that the evidence is the sort of evidence on which responsible persons are accustomed to rely in the conduct of serious affairs, the Commission may use that evidence alone to support a finding of fact."

[Zaroku]

[B]Nevada Commissions:[/B]
"The Commission need not follow the rules of evidence that a court must follow. All evidence that the Commission determines to be relevant and submitted in accordance with the requirements of this chapter is admissible. If the Commission determines that the evidence is the sort of evidence on which responsible persons are accustomed to rely in the conduct of serious affairs, the Commission may use that evidence alone to support a finding of fact."

Game, set & Match!!!

Thanks!!!

The NSAC laid it out perfectly.
The NSAC already decided Floyd did nothing wrong..

End of Story
End of this Thread

Bingo!! You really helped a lot!!
Thanks for that post!!! It sealed the deal for me, and many other boxing fans.. You proved that the NSAC can use any evidence or ignore any evidence it decides is irrelevant.
Great find

[original zero]

If only Floyd can tell us the real scenario, why should we believe Spoonrath when he invents these crazy conspiracy theory scenarios?

You can list any hypothetical you want, but the actual facts are that IV was a perfectly acceptable way to rehydrate in Nevada and 100% within the rules. If you think the rule should be changed, write a letter to the NSAC.

Because unrestricted IV use could be used to attempt some sort of masking, Floyd & Manny voluntarily agreed that even though IV rehydration was legal under NSAC for any reason whatsoever, that they would hire USADA to determine if any IV use was for legitimate medical reasons.

And they determined that there was no problem.

So there is no actual controversy here. You can create fantasy controversies if you want. You can concoct hypothetical controversies if you want. Lord knows Spoonrath has tried.

But if you're going to consider all of these complicated nonsense scenarios that people are inventing out of thin air (while lying about the rules and the facts in the process), you should also consider that the truth may be very simple and uncomplicated. Floyd may have had trouble keeping fluids down, may have had a stomach bug, may have had a lot of things. It's really none of our business. Every single televised boxing card in Nevada features fighters that rehydrated via IV after the weigh in. Very common and legal practice. If you don't like it, write a letter.

[ADP02]

[/B]

Game, set & Match!!!

Thanks!!!

The NSAC laid it out perfectly.
The NSAC already decided Floyd did nothing wrong..

End of Story
End of this Thread

Bingo!! You really helped a lot!!
Thanks for that post!!! It sealed the deal for me, and many other boxing fans.. You proved that the NSAC can use any evidence or ignore any evidence it decides is irrelevant.
Great find

Not really.

Floyd/USADA found a loop hole so they can hide all that .... either intentionally or not, the NSAC had that loop hole since the wording in their rules missed some of this, Floyd/USADA took advantage of it.

but it can also be that NSAC was waiting for Floyd to leave then close it up.

[Zaroku]

Not really.

Floyd/USADA found a loop hole so they can hide all that .... either intentionally or not, the NSAC had that loop hole since the wording in their rules missed some of this, Floyd/USADA took advantage of it.

but it can also be that NSAC was waiting for Floyd to leave then close it up.

So, it can accurately be stated that the NSAC can decide what constitutes actual evidence!! If that is true, they can also decide what isn't evidence..

Are you with me??
Do you agree??

That being said, no matter how sad certain "true boxing" fans are about their decisions... They do have authority to make decisions in the state of Nevada.

Now.. Maybe an appeal to the NSAC might be a better use of energies??

[ADP02]

Holy crap!!!

I just found a draft but it looks like the Floyd/USADA did find a loop hole in the NSAC's rules. Either it was intentional or not, it looks like the NSAC is using Floyd's IV scandal to close up the loopholes!!!


So here is proof that the NSAC determined that what Floyd/USADA did was not acceptable!!! They are amending their rules to make it clear.



467.0030 “Program of drug testing” defined
NAC 467.0030 “Program of drug testing” defined (NRS 467.030) A “program of drug testing” means a Commission approved and administered program.



NAC 467.032 Applicant for unarmed combatant’s license must demonstrate understanding of anti-doping policy. (NRS 467.030, 467.100)
Before a license application or license renewal can be approved the applicant must show his or her understanding of the rules, regulations and potential penalties of the Commission’s anti-doping policies. The Commission may require the applicant to pass a written or on-line examination.




NAC 467.462 Unarmed combatant required to submit to drug testing both in and out of competition (NRS 467.030, NRS 467.---(A.B.467 Section 1))1.
An unarmed combatant shall submit to drug testing at any time, in or out of competition as directed by a representative of the Commission, except a blood sample may not be required within 7 days of competition.
2.
The cost and expenses for testing shall be the responsibility of the promoter who is promoting the event in which the
unarmed combatant is scheduled to compete or with whom the promoter has contracted.
3.
Pre and post-fight drug testing may be performed by a person designated by the Executive Director or the Commission’s representative.
NAC 467.465 Contracts to perform drug testing must be approved by the Commission (NRS 467.030)
1.
The Commission must approve, in advance, any contract between a promoter and third party to perform drug testing. The Commission is authorized to reject any or all third party contracts. The Commission is authorized to reject any third party contract for drug testing that is or may be performed by the Commission pursuant to NAC 467.462.
2.
The Commission shall be provided complete results of all tests performed by any approved third party.
3.
All contracts and test results may become public records pursuant to NRS Chapter 239.
.
NAC 467.467 Credits against license fees (NRS 467.030, NRS 467.---(A.B.467 Section 1))
1.
Any credits will be issued against the full licensing fee as defined in A.B.476 Section 1.
2.
Any credit against the license fees paid by the promoter for a program of drug testing must be pre-approved







NAC 467.528 Physical examination required at weigh-in. (NRS 467.030)
1.
A physician designated by the Commission shall give each unarmed combatant a thorough physical examination at the time of his or her weighing in before a contest or exhibition., which will include completion of a written pre-fight medical questionnaire. Each unarmed combatant shall complete the pre-fight medical questionnaire and attest to the accuracy of its contents under threat of penalty of perjury.



BELOW IS A HINT OF WHEN FLOYD USED HIS IV!!!
************************************************** ********

2.
An unarmed combatant must report to the Commission or Executive Director any infusions, medical treatment, outpatient treatment, or hospital admission that takes place after the weigh-in and prior to the contest.



************************************************** ********

NAC 467.558 The****utic use exemptions must be approved by the Commission (NRS 467.030)
1.
All applications for a the****utic use exemption must be submitted and approved by the Commission at least 7 days in advance of any contest if practicable or immediately upon prescribed need before the contest.
2.
The Commission may request any additional medical information as necessary in determining whether to grant a the****utic use exemption.
3.
The Commission will not grant a retroactive the****utic use exemption.
4.
The Commission will not grant a the****utic use exemption for testosterone replacement therapy (TRT) or any other similar therapy designed to induce or simulate testosterone replacement.
5.
The****utic use exemptions must be renewed annually.
6.
The****utic use exemptions may become public records pursuant to NRS Chapter 239




PROHIBITED ACTS; DISCIPLINARY ACTIONS

"NAC 467.850 Administration or use of alcohol, stimulants, drugs or injections; urinalysis or chemical tests; disciplinary action. (NRS 467.030)
1. The administration of or use of any:
(a) Alcohol;
(b) Stimulant; or
(c) Drug or injection or methodology that has not been
approved by the Commission, including, but not limited to, the drugs or injections or methods listed in subsection 2,
 in any part of the body, either before or during a contest or exhibition, to or by any unarmed combatant, is prohibited.
2. The following types of drugs, injections or stimulants, or methods are prohibited pursuant to subsection 1:
(a) Afrinol or any other product that is pharmaceutically

f) With the exception of stimulants listed in section S-5 and S-6 of the World Anti-Doping Agency’s Prohibited List, which are to be prohibited at all times, any prohibited substance or method drug identified on the most current edition of the Prohibited List published by the World Anti-Doping Agency (“WADA”), which is hereby adopted by reference. The most current edition of the Prohibited List may be obtained, free of charge, at the Internet address www.wada-ama.org. WADA’s definitions, prohibited lists, prohibited methodologies and tolerance levels will be used in interpreting violations of NAC 467.850 et.seq.


e. Avoiding testing/detection/ urine sample adulterated, not from athlete or not of human origin, adulterants, drugs (including
diuretics) used as masking agents: