Tweet
Originally posted by SugarKaineHook
View Post
So now, thanks to Hauser, educating a new generation of trollers, has ''helped'' people understand, I hope, about the rules and differences from commissions or anti-doping agencies such as VADA or USADA and how they adhere to WADA codes, so let's pose the obvious questions:
Pacquiao is on record for stating that the REASON he lost to Morales was because he drew blood on the day of the bout. Do we ever undisclose information about drug testing for bouts? Isn't this beneficial news when boxing fans know what their fighters agree to? Point is, it's not undisclosed information. Therefore, why didn't Manny explain to Larry Merchant at ring after his loss in Morales I, that the REASON he lost was because he felt weak from drawing blood on that day? This is what Brian Kenny from ESPN's interview highlighted. Was it an editing error or narrative error that Kenny highlighted on ''the day of the bout?'' Or rather, trying to convince casual fans that drawing blood on the day of the bout was the reason why he didn't agree to Floyd's terms? In other words, Floyd's contract specifically wanted blood drawn on the day of the bout? Is that what Floyd wanted, on the day of the bout? Either question you choose, why does ESPN further the information that 14-15 days is still not good enough for Pac, or rather that's what Pacquiao is acknowledging?! In that same interview, Paquiao states that 15 days still ''inhibits'' training. He specifically uses the word ''inhibit.''
Moving forward. Why does Dan Rafael in another similar interview state that Floyd as well as Pac have used the same (NSAC) commission's rule, but when Floyd wanted WADA or shall we say ''Olympic Style,'' Dan Rafael chooses to have a fit as if Floyd created WADA's code. Rafael then goes on to state that Pacquiao was not required to draw blood under the RULES of the NSAC.. or rather, ''special considerations,'' as if USADA or VADA are special considerations because they require more than just pissing in a cup. Rafael says that Floyd ''wants to change'' the rules of the commission. So choosing USADA or VADA changes the rules of a ''commission'' or more specifically that of NSAC?
Commission's aren't the only en****** that provide I guess an ''insurance'' to fighters regarding anti-dope testing. That's up to the promoters. Again, even Margaret Goodman, the CEO of VADA, stated that not all commissions choose WADA accredited labs due to the costs of testing, whereas the magnitude of May vs Pac and is not your ORDINARY anti-doping protocol such as ''just pissing in a cup'' or drawn blood just oh let's say 3 times. Therefore, why doesn't May or Pac get any credit for such rigorous testing for their fight after both tested negative from WADA accredited labs? Why does Dan Rafael believe that 24 days is good enough for Pac for Floyd's terms? Wouldn't that defeat the purpose of rigorous testing? Common sense.
When Teddy Atlas gets involved with the conversation, he states, ''why would you walk away from 30 million dollars on the table just not to take some blood?'' He then goes on to saying that Pacquiao wouldn't be afraid of needles considering he has tats. He also said from his sources, in which he stated he trusted, that Pacquiao's team had asked Floyd's camp about the repercussions if any fighter were caught on PEDS or rather tested positive, and what would've been the fine.... That's not just your walk in the park insinuation...
My thing is that when Pacquiao goes through questioning, and it may be that he's horrible in answering questions in general, but usually consistent or the same answers or ''excuses'' would make more sense. Larry Merchant, Brian Kenny, Phillipino TV interview, all different reasons as to why he lost to Morales I... Anybody seeing any similarities towards Mayweather Jr. Wouldn't it blow the heat from all the Floyd haters that he beat Pacquiao. And so, instead of Pacquiao or Top Rank accusing Floyd of PED use, for instance Kevin Iole's facts about the fighters testing negative, wouldn't it be more ideal to hire a writer who has been after Floyd for years, and who has written about Ali - which of course I guess gives him the credibility or godfather of knowing the sport of boxing - the best chance to discredit Floyd, or rather have everyone hate him with out of context cherry picking?
Going back to the Phillipino TV interview, he states that the commission demanded ''another'' blood sample, that the ''hospital'' lost his ''records.'' I'm more than sure Pacquiao knows the difference between a lab and a hospital, or rather, who is this ''hospital'' that is overseeing what out of context anti-doping oversight? Pacquiao states that how is it possible that ''computer'' records could be lost, sidetracking the fact of the original sample(s) were still where? Were the actual viles lost? Were the PAPER results lost? Where the records from lab themselves - because labs throw away client records to save space - where does lost as well? I mean seriously... If nobody has seen this scandal or rather inconsistent set of lies over the years by Top Rank I don't know..
Furthermore, Pacquiao states that it's the hospital's fault that they had lost the records, and that Pacquiao's team didn't want to pursue the case because the fight was near. Why wasn't this said to Brian Kenny? He doesn't have to mention to Larry Merchant as to not hurt the integrity of HBO's broadcast or the ''sport.'' Manny states that it was a ''tactic against him.'' By who? The NSAC? Golden Boy, or both? Surely not the NSAC because their protocols are way less rigorous than WADA style accredited lab testing, or perhaps the ''hospital'' or WHOEVER the context is about (lol) was paid off? So Pacquiao concludes that because of the blood drawn on the day of the fight is the reason why he couldn't destroy Morales, that he felt so weak... hmmmmm
Again all these video testimonials are online. A good documentary would convey this comprehensibly.
This post is based on empirical observation from the testimonials on video, recorded, nothing more.
Pacquiao is on record for stating that the REASON he lost to Morales was because he drew blood on the day of the bout. Do we ever undisclose information about drug testing for bouts? Isn't this beneficial news when boxing fans know what their fighters agree to? Point is, it's not undisclosed information. Therefore, why didn't Manny explain to Larry Merchant at ring after his loss in Morales I, that the REASON he lost was because he felt weak from drawing blood on that day? This is what Brian Kenny from ESPN's interview highlighted. Was it an editing error or narrative error that Kenny highlighted on ''the day of the bout?'' Or rather, trying to convince casual fans that drawing blood on the day of the bout was the reason why he didn't agree to Floyd's terms? In other words, Floyd's contract specifically wanted blood drawn on the day of the bout? Is that what Floyd wanted, on the day of the bout? Either question you choose, why does ESPN further the information that 14-15 days is still not good enough for Pac, or rather that's what Pacquiao is acknowledging?! In that same interview, Paquiao states that 15 days still ''inhibits'' training. He specifically uses the word ''inhibit.''
Moving forward. Why does Dan Rafael in another similar interview state that Floyd as well as Pac have used the same (NSAC) commission's rule, but when Floyd wanted WADA or shall we say ''Olympic Style,'' Dan Rafael chooses to have a fit as if Floyd created WADA's code. Rafael then goes on to state that Pacquiao was not required to draw blood under the RULES of the NSAC.. or rather, ''special considerations,'' as if USADA or VADA are special considerations because they require more than just pissing in a cup. Rafael says that Floyd ''wants to change'' the rules of the commission. So choosing USADA or VADA changes the rules of a ''commission'' or more specifically that of NSAC?
Commission's aren't the only en****** that provide I guess an ''insurance'' to fighters regarding anti-dope testing. That's up to the promoters. Again, even Margaret Goodman, the CEO of VADA, stated that not all commissions choose WADA accredited labs due to the costs of testing, whereas the magnitude of May vs Pac and is not your ORDINARY anti-doping protocol such as ''just pissing in a cup'' or drawn blood just oh let's say 3 times. Therefore, why doesn't May or Pac get any credit for such rigorous testing for their fight after both tested negative from WADA accredited labs? Why does Dan Rafael believe that 24 days is good enough for Pac for Floyd's terms? Wouldn't that defeat the purpose of rigorous testing? Common sense.
When Teddy Atlas gets involved with the conversation, he states, ''why would you walk away from 30 million dollars on the table just not to take some blood?'' He then goes on to saying that Pacquiao wouldn't be afraid of needles considering he has tats. He also said from his sources, in which he stated he trusted, that Pacquiao's team had asked Floyd's camp about the repercussions if any fighter were caught on PEDS or rather tested positive, and what would've been the fine.... That's not just your walk in the park insinuation...
My thing is that when Pacquiao goes through questioning, and it may be that he's horrible in answering questions in general, but usually consistent or the same answers or ''excuses'' would make more sense. Larry Merchant, Brian Kenny, Phillipino TV interview, all different reasons as to why he lost to Morales I... Anybody seeing any similarities towards Mayweather Jr. Wouldn't it blow the heat from all the Floyd haters that he beat Pacquiao. And so, instead of Pacquiao or Top Rank accusing Floyd of PED use, for instance Kevin Iole's facts about the fighters testing negative, wouldn't it be more ideal to hire a writer who has been after Floyd for years, and who has written about Ali - which of course I guess gives him the credibility or godfather of knowing the sport of boxing - the best chance to discredit Floyd, or rather have everyone hate him with out of context cherry picking?
Going back to the Phillipino TV interview, he states that the commission demanded ''another'' blood sample, that the ''hospital'' lost his ''records.'' I'm more than sure Pacquiao knows the difference between a lab and a hospital, or rather, who is this ''hospital'' that is overseeing what out of context anti-doping oversight? Pacquiao states that how is it possible that ''computer'' records could be lost, sidetracking the fact of the original sample(s) were still where? Were the actual viles lost? Were the PAPER results lost? Where the records from lab themselves - because labs throw away client records to save space - where does lost as well? I mean seriously... If nobody has seen this scandal or rather inconsistent set of lies over the years by Top Rank I don't know..
Furthermore, Pacquiao states that it's the hospital's fault that they had lost the records, and that Pacquiao's team didn't want to pursue the case because the fight was near. Why wasn't this said to Brian Kenny? He doesn't have to mention to Larry Merchant as to not hurt the integrity of HBO's broadcast or the ''sport.'' Manny states that it was a ''tactic against him.'' By who? The NSAC? Golden Boy, or both? Surely not the NSAC because their protocols are way less rigorous than WADA style accredited lab testing, or perhaps the ''hospital'' or WHOEVER the context is about (lol) was paid off? So Pacquiao concludes that because of the blood drawn on the day of the fight is the reason why he couldn't destroy Morales, that he felt so weak... hmmmmm
Again all these video testimonials are online. A good documentary would convey this comprehensibly.
This post is based on empirical observation from the testimonials on video, recorded, nothing more.
Comment