-
-
Sure... very practical to say, son...I see, you're a believer in slow motion bouts being justified or salt water injuries, or Toradol being administered last minute because Koncz took the blame for Pac's first ever medical waiver..
Sure kid. Oscar be like.."but they never talk about my IV when I fought Pac, even though Sugar has the vid on youtube..."Comment
-
Floyd beat Pac but he was dirty and Pac wasn't (at least in that fight). Hell he didn't even let Pac alleviate his right shoulder.
Oscar was probably in on something because there's no way he naturally made 147 at that stage in his career, so the IV is no big surprise.Comment
-
Pac should've received Boxing Injury Of The Year 2015 for not showing any discomfort and an interesting output... clearly Pac is immune to severely torn rotator cuffs. of course any narrative is practical and believe when people can't accept that win. then you have post May 2nd Pac playing basketball when supposedly a severe torn rotator cuff had happened or the myth that salt water healed everything...
Apparently just swimming in sea water in general does the trick for such injuries...Comment
-
USADA made a clear statement that they weren't told of any injuries to justify any med you're referring to, and that's old debated news... refer back to the week of articles when industry or organizations are required to make a statement for such a case..
And as USADA stated, they are an Anti-Doping agency, not Medical Injury practitioners.. of course you must of have completely forgot the comedic notion that Top Rank never disclosed an injury...
I saysss a "yeeeehaaaaww!"Comment
-
So did his weight jumps.
It was strange that no one noticed there are 0 other filipino (relevant) WWs beside 48. Not at 140 or 135 either.
48 made the jump. Where the rest?
Seems like a complete PED creation. That country doesnt produce champions higher than flyweight/low weights - so they created one. one and only one. if they could box there would be tons of champs scattered through different weights - like Mexico or Puerto Rico or UK or USA. but no, just one guy.
When only one guy from the entire country is doing it, and no on else comes close - that should be the smoking gun for PED use.Comment
-
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 that their fighters agreed to a certain style of testing? Point is, it's not undisclosed information. Therefore, why didn't Manny explain to Larry Merchant at ring after losing to Morales? That the REASON he lost was because he felt weak from drawing blood on The Same Day, or rather, hours before? This is what Brian Kenny, from ESPN's interview, highlighted. Was it an editing error or narrative error that Kenny stated on ''The Day Of The Bout?'' Or rather, by convincing casual boxing 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 stated, blood drawn on the day of the bout from both fighters? Is that what Floyd wanted? On The Day Of The Bout? Either question you choose, ask yourselves, why did ESPN want a confirmation from Pac during the interview that 14-15 days was still not good enough under Pac's terms? Or rather, is that what Pacquiao was acknowledging, that 14-15 days before the bout still inhibits performance?! Which one was it, The Day Of The Bout, or 14-15 days? Again, Paquiao stated that 15 days still inhibited training. The video interview can be found here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XCa1-X7ey5Y
Moving forward. Why did Dan Rafael in a similar interview state that Floyd, as well as Pac, 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, as he states, ''special considerations.''
As if USADA or VADA are special considerations because they require more than just pissing in a cup. Rafael stated 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 was not your ORDINARY anti-doping protocol such as ''just pissing in a cup'' or blood drawn or oh let's just 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 did 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. Networks, conflicts of interest?
Later during that same interview with Brian Kenny and Dan Rafael, Teddy Atlas gets involved in the conversation moments later, stating, ''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 had 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 using PEDS - or rather tested positive - , what would the fine be?.... That's not just your walk in the park insinuation...
The thing is that when Pacquiao goes through questioning, usually after a loss, and it may be that he's just horrible at answering questions in general, but usually is not the case that a consistent lie would make more sense? Or the same answers or ''excuses'' would make more sense to doubt skepticism from an interviewee.
Larry Merchant, Brian Kenny, the Phillipino TV interview, Pac gave different reasons as to why he lost to Morales I... Anybody seeing any similarities towards the Mayweather Jr. loss?
Fast forward to May vs Pac, and the paradox or double standard of trollage begins again, so wouldn't it blow the heat from all the Floyd haters when Pacquiao lost? And so, instead of Pacquiao or Top Rank accusing Floyd of PED use, as Kevin Iole's facts about the fighters testing negative was is not good enough or objective? 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, it guess gives him the credibility as the godfather of knowing the sport of boxing, the best chance to discredit Floyd? Or rather, have everyone hate Floyd by providing cherry picked out of context material?
Revisiting to the Phillipino TV interview, Pacquiao 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. Which general ''hospital'' was he referring to that oversaw the drug testing? Pacquiao explains in the interview that it is unlikely for a computer to lose records, sidetracking the fact that the original sample(s) were still where? Were the actual viles lost? Were the PAPER results lost too? Where the records from the labs themselves that actually did the testing lose the records too. None of this was added by Pacquiao's reasoning. We can guess that labs just throw away client records to save space - were those lost as well?
I mean seriously... If nobody has seen this scandal or rather the inconsistent set of lies over the years by Top Rank, I don't know..
To conclude, Pacquiao stated that it was 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 did Pacquiao not state this to Brian Kenny? For the integrity of a PPV bout, surely Manny does not have to mention the lost records fiasco to Larry Merchant as to not hurt, again the integrity of an HBO broadcast. Manny stated 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 at the time, or perhaps the ''hospital'' or WHOEVER the context was about (lol) was paid off? So Pacquiao concludes that blood drawn on The Day Of The Fight was the reason why he couldn't destroy Morales and that he felt very 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, and nothing more.
its no coincidence
hell even roach admitted he didnt know what manny was drinking in his pre workout mix...hmmmmmComment
-
Assuming all boxers are capable of cheating, or rather, only the elites have the power with its promoter's cash to get away with things including the bookies, as everyone can get a piece of the pie from the non regulated sport, then why didn't Pac agree to 40 million? With your theorical approach, then ideally Pac is the bigger cheater because the cut off dates won't benefit him but the other cheater can because he's more skilled?
what's funnier is the further we go in boxing the more funny the initial Pac vs Floyd negotiations become and one day the "well he hit a woman" won't even be brought up in the context of PEDS.
but remember, Victor Conte said so himself that he had no doubt Pac was roiding in the Phillipines! What bliss. I'm still looking for Conte to make such a direct claim for Floyd without insinuating. Why be direct about Pac and not for Floyd?
the bliss of karma.Comment
Tweet
Comment