who among suspected PED user got away the most: Pacquaio, Mayweather or Marquez?

[GTTofAK]

I'm not sure why you keep posting that youtube video. It wasn't funny nor meaningful the first time. If anyone is "bleeding," it's you who already admit that you were wrong.

Should I summarize? You said:

1. UEFA is not a tested league
Then, when proven WRONG, you said...
2. UEFA didn't start testing until 2014
then when proven WRONG, you said...
3. UEFA didn't test for anabolic steroids until 2014
then when proven WRONG, you said...
4. It doesn't matter because they aren't testing for testosterone.

And? I admitted that in their original press release they made it sound like they were not testing prior to 2014. Now it does look like they did urine test for easily detectable synthetic steroids like d-bol but were not checking for TRT prior to 2014.

Do you notice the trail of blood?

Hardly a trail of blood. I admit I was wrong that they didn't' test for AAS at all prior to 2014 but its immaterial to the point because they were still not testing for TRT.

[What the study shows is that the T/E ratios were all over the place, between .02 and 8.6 in a TESTED LEAGUE (you got that now???) and these guys were not shown to be abusing steroids. It casts serious doubt on Hauser's T/E theory.

See the problem here is you are ******. You dont understand that there is a difference between testosterone and d-bol. D-bol and other such synthetic steroids, once identified, are easily detected in urine because they leave metabolites in the urine. Testosterone however is harder to detect because testosterone is supposed to be in your body as opposed to a d-bol metabolite which is not.

The study results make it rather clear that since the UAEF was not testing for testosterone that athletes were using it.

Do you now understand the reason this study was mentioned?

Yes you tried to claim it as a control of what are normal testosterone levels and T/E ratios. But since the leage was not testing for TRT it is anything but. A quick google search of 'UEFA study testosterone' yields dozens of objective analysis concluding that the UEFA has a major doping problem based on the study results.

"Furthermore, in January of this year, Jon Jones and Daniel Cormier met at UFC 182. The results of the drug tests carried out by the NSAC in the lead up to this fight make interesting reading. Jones posted three T/E ratios; 0.35, 0.29 and 0.19. Cormier posted T/E ratios of 0.4 and 0.48. If Mayweather’s results are “abnormally low,” I’m not sure what Hauser would call these far, far lower results."

Well it is a sign of either suppression of natural testosterone production after concluding a cycle of AAS and or taking exogenous epitestosterone to lower the T/E ratio below the positive threshold.

By the way, both guys were cleared by negative results of their drug tests.

And those tests can be beaten. That is what the whole point of taking exogenous epitestosterone.

Yea, um, I think that whole "abnormal" T/E ratio = definitively cheating has gone out the window.

No. It is simply proof that other athletes beat the test the same way. Its no secret how to beat a T/E test. You take epitestosterone to drop the T/E ratio.

The big problem here is you are ****** and don't know what the **** you are talking about.

[ADP02]

Im not "ignoring" the facts, but I contextualize them in regards to more pertinent information. A concept you have not yet demonstrated.



The dco officer was present.

and that is supposed to mean something? So that is all Lance Armstrong had to do back then? Make the DCO monitor Lance using an IV and it was all good? Thanks for the good laugh!

A partial sample was given prior to adminstration of the iv.

- Was it included in Sample A and B? Was it discarded? USADA left it all open ended.

- Also, was it just before the IV after a 5 hour delay?
- In those 6+ hours delay in getting the urine, nothing could have gone wrong?
- Who was in control of the "prior" sample? The athlete? The DCO?
- Prior sample was insufficient. It could have been a drop or much more than that.

- What would have happened or actually happened is that they would combine prior with after IV samples. This makes a big difference!!!

- When someone is severely dehydrated, it makes their HT level go up. So if USADA came back with a fluctuation, this may be used as an excuse.

The tue application has confidential medical details such as physician diagnosis.

Actually the details should have been in the pre-fight examination form. Also, there was actually a NSAC doctor who examined Floyd!!! NSAC physician showed no signs of significant dehydration. Geez!

The tuec approved the tue.

There has been no review of the tue by wada.

Hello, this is what is in question!

Was Floyd's pre-fight form presented? You know. Where Floyd didn't state that he had a problem. It would be nice to show conflicts, if any? If not how come???????????????????????????????????

The NSAC physician who examined Floyd didn't find Floyd significantly dehydrated. Was the NSAC report included in this to show conflicts, if any? If not how come???????????????????????????????????

If you have the before, during and after weight of Floyd, was this important information discussed? There is definite conflict here. If not how come???????????????????????????????????



So you agree that WADA didn't review it? Hmmm ... but actually, they usually get involved only when the TUE gets rejected. This was not the case here. Right?

Nsac has no say in this particular matter because they do not specifically ban intravenous infusions.

Floyd volunteered for more. USADA agrees with me on this point!

These are facts as well.


Given these additional facts, it makes your arguments about the severity of dehydration seem ,not only irrelevant ,but ****** as well.

You don't like the decision by usada, and ultimately WADA, to grant the tue. We get it. But your opinion doesn't matter because you do not have access to the application or the reasoning behind the tuec or wada review.

Check my points. They counter every point you made.

We already have Floyd's and Ellerbe's statement on why he was dehydrated. Plus it was a lie. Why would someone lie unless they are trying to hides something?

- We have Floyd's weight for 30 days out, 2 weeks out, 1 week out, just before the IV. This is already enough evidence.

- Vital signs normal.

- Pre-fight form makes no mention of any condition. Yet you want to see another document in which you know that you will never see? How convenient!

- NSAC doctor said Floyd was not significantly dehydrated.

Usually a doctor does not have the patient's weight prior to his condition occurring(dehydration). So they are left with just monitoring the clinical signs which is less accurate. Fortunately in Floyd's case, we have multiple weigh-in before and Floyd's weight just before the IV. Floyd we saw was orally hydrating afterwards. So Floyd's weight was 146 + orally hydrating intake weight.

Floyd's fluctuation was about 2% after the weigh in. Maybe it was 1% after orally rehydrating. Maybe even less. Either way, it was well under the limit for when one would be considered severely dehydrated. In fact it means that Floyd was at most, mildly dehydrated.



Its all there.
We have Floyd's side of the argument and facts. You just do not want to face the truth that Floyd was not severely dehydrated. Floyd's weight is the smoking gun. You just cannot get around that.

[Lester Tutor]

Michael Phelps was scared to give blood at the Olympics. how much Gold did he win in how many Olympics? Was he sacred of needles?

hmmm. Doesn't WADA style testing have anything to do with the Olympics? Was Floyd ever an Olympian? Did Floyd ever say he was scared to give blood during the Olympics? hmmm

[ADP02]

Manny was concerned that giving blood would have affected his training and fight. Example, DCO shows up, Manny gives blood then needs to train. For Manny it was a concern. So I believe you are saying that its a lie?

Also remember this factor. At one point, Floyd and company accused Manny of PEDs. So Manny who was already concerned about giving blood would affect him and at the time hotter than Floyd who just came back from retirement, felt no need to bend over backwards for Floyd's rules.


Now fast forward to May 1, 2015.
Floyd's excuse was giving blood 10 days before the fight. If you are saying that Manny being hesitant was enough for you, how about what Floyd said?

Since you are calling Manny a liar, then Floyd is certainly a liar and a cheat. since he lied and used an IV. Right?

I know you're feeling the heat! What's surprising are all the inconsistencies from Top Rank (yes that includes anything coming out of Pac or Roach's mouth), articles, contradictions... Top Rank been SUSPECT for the longest. The fact that Floyd, and however Arum convinced a court of libel, wouldn't matter. I'm sure Haymon even approved for what Floyd said because HE said it and they could easily pay a fee. Still makes Pac suspect. We don't even need to review Pac's history and excuses and SUSPECT power moving up, let alone that the general world and sports acknowledges PEDS in general.

So again, read the question from the thread title? It's day and night. As if Usain Bolt told the world he was scared of needles or said any blood giving would deter his victories. cmon...

DEFLECTION CITY!!!

I bolded it for you. If you think that Manny was using PEDs because of his concern that giving blood would affect him, what about Floyd using it as excuse so that he can use a banned method? One just talked about a concern. The other (FLOYD) guy actually went as far as to use illegal ways on the same thing that you are calling BS.

So you must believe that Floyd should have been found guilty, right?

[The Big Dunn]

DEFLECTION CITY!!!

I bolded it for you. If you think that Manny was using PEDs because of his concern that giving blood would affect him, what about Floyd using it as excuse so that he can use a banned method? One just talked about a concern. The other (FLOYD) guy actually went as far as to use illegal ways on the same thing that you are calling BS.

So you must believe that Floyd should have been found guilty, right?

the same could be asked of you. You always said Manny wsn't guilty because he never tested positive. Niether has Floyd, yet you think he is guilty.

NO matter what you post, Floyd won the fight with Manny on May 2, 2015. You can't change that fact.

[Lester Tutor]

the same could be asked of you. You always said Manny wsn't guilty because he never tested positive. Niether has Floyd, yet you think he is guilty.

NO matter what you post, Floyd won the fight with Manny on May 2, 2015. You can't change that fact.

Ask what he thinks about Victor Conte LITERALLY stating Manny was roiding moving up, and detailing who knows what regulatory standards there are in the Philippines. I've post it many many times yet no Pac fan brings it up, the same guys that brought up Conte...

interesting innit?!

[ADP02]

the same could be asked of you. You always said Manny wsn't guilty because he never tested positive. Niether has Floyd, yet you think he is guilty.

NO matter what you post, Floyd won the fight with Manny on May 2, 2015. You can't change that fact.

WRONG!

He said he thinks it was all BS for Manny not to agree back then but the reason is the same reason that Floyd used as an excuse. Furthermore, Floyd is saying that what he did 10 days before (giving a spoon of blood) affected him. So its actually a worse excuse because Manny just had a concern. He never actually did that type of testing before. Floyd has been doing it since 2010. He knows better., Right?

The point is if he thinks Manny was on PEDs then he must definitely think Floyd was using illegal stuff because this poster does not agree that giving blood affects the athlete.


My views: I said this before and stayed consistent. Giving blood affects some more than others. I and many Manny fans agreed with a poll that Manny should have fought for the sake of getting the fight on back then. So I do not think that giving blood affects you more than a day or two. A spoon full shouldn't affect much but everyone is different. I know someone who faints and no its not due to the site of blood but because he lost blood.

So if Floyd had just gave blood, I would have given him the benefit of the doubt. BUT not 10 days out, NOT after 5+ years of saying that it will not affect you. That is what you Floyd fans have said. Why the change?????

So you are wrong!

[Lester Tutor]

the same could be asked of you. You always said Manny wsn't guilty because he never tested positive. Niether has Floyd, yet you think he is guilty.

NO matter what you post, Floyd won the fight with Manny on May 2, 2015. You can't change that fact.

Ask him what he thinks about Victor Conte himself stating Manny was roiding moving up along with poor regulatory standards in the Philippines which had no interest in the American highlight, yet common sense started to creep up with ESPN themselves going on emergency alert to stage ''deflecting'' dialogue to point towards Floyd, all when it was obvious they were defending Pac about blood testing, and Dan Rafael saying that Manny wasn't obligated to give blood under the rules and regulations of the NSAC.

All they state are a couple of sentences that Pac felt weak yet thousands of pages about an IV and rehydration. It's funny. When I get the time I will recreate the videos for the Youtube masses, just need a new editing platform. First I will start with Pac's initial bouts side by side with Floyd flip screen all the way up to the late bouts. Empirical side by side analysis of offense and defense and which skills actually pay the bills.

But ask them what they think of Conte stating Pac was roiding. Doesn't get any better than that. Wait for replies to flood as usual avoiding what was just written...as usual and typical from the same dudes

[The Big Dunn]

WRONG!

He said he thinks it was all BS for Manny not to agree back then but the reason is the same reason that Floyd used as an excuse. Furthermore, Floyd is saying that what he did 10 days before (giving a spoon of blood) affected him. So its actually a worse excuse because Manny just had a concern. He never actually did that type of testing before. Floyd has been doing it since 2010. He knows better., Right?

The point is if he thinks Manny was on PEDs then he must definitely think Floyd was using illegal stuff because this poster does not agree that giving blood affects the athlete.


My views: I said this before and stayed consistent. Giving blood affects some more than others. I and many Manny fans agreed with a poll that Manny should have fought for the sake of getting the fight on back then. So I do not think that giving blood affects you more than a day or two. A spoon full shouldn't affect much but everyone is different. I know someone who faints and no its not due to the site of blood but because he lost blood.

So if Floyd had just gave blood, I would have given him the benefit of the doubt. BUT not 10 days out, NOT after 5+ years of saying that it will not affect you. That is what you Floyd fans have said. Why the change?????

So you are wrong!

Yeah, right. You can't even be honest about what you said.

Dude, I guess in your mind you will die trying to discredit Floyd defeating Manny rather than give him credit. Is what it is.

[The Big Dunn]

Ask him what he thinks about Victor Conte himself stating Manny was roiding moving up along with poor regulatory standards in the Philippines which had no interest in the American highlight, yet common sense started to creep up with ESPN themselves going on emergency alert to stage ''deflecting'' dialogue to point towards Floyd, all when it was obvious they were defending Pac about blood testing, and Dan Rafael saying that Manny wasn't obligated to give blood under the rules and regulations of the NSAC.

All they state are a couple of sentences that Pac felt weak yet thousands of pages about an IV and rehydration. It's funny. When I get the time I will recreate the videos for the Youtube masses, just need a new editing platform. First I will start with Pac's initial bouts side by side with Floyd flip screen all the way up to the late bouts. Empirical side by side analysis of offense and defense and which skills actually pay the bills.

But ask them what they think of Conte stating Pac was roiding. Doesn't get any better than that. Wait for replies to flood as usual avoiding what was just written...as usual and typical from the same dudes

yeah dude. it is what it is with some of these guys. They will go to their grave still mad Floyd beat Manny and letting the bitterness of the loss drive everything they post.