Here's a fact, Morales tested positive four times under USADA and was still allowed to fight. When the CEO of the company was questioned during a three-way telephone conversation, he stated that "The licensing body was aware of the positive test prior to the fight. What they did with it was their call."
A spokesperson for the NYSAC disputed those claims in writing, "There is no indication in the Commission files that it was notified of this matter prior to October 18, 2012."
USADA was willing to fabricate a lie in order to absolve themselves of responsibility or future blame. This case adds credibility to the rumors of Floyd having failed three drug tests under USADA.
http://www.examiner.com/article/floy...ve-three-times
http://www.maxboxing.com/news/max-bo...-mess-part-one
Can USADA truly be trusted? History has proven otherwise.
A spokesperson for the NYSAC disputed those claims in writing, "There is no indication in the Commission files that it was notified of this matter prior to October 18, 2012."
USADA was willing to fabricate a lie in order to absolve themselves of responsibility or future blame. This case adds credibility to the rumors of Floyd having failed three drug tests under USADA.
http://www.examiner.com/article/floy...ve-three-times
http://www.maxboxing.com/news/max-bo...-mess-part-one
Mayweather's sample had tested positive on three occasions, and after each positive test, USADA had found exceptional circumstances in the form of inadvertent use and gave Floyd a waiver. This waiver negated the need for a test of Floyd's B sample. And because the B sample was never tested, a loophole in USADA's contract with Mayweather allowed the testing to proceed without the positive A sample results being reported to Mayweather's opponent or the Nevada State Athletic Commission (which had jurisdiction over the fights).
Comment