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

[ADP02]

You forgot to mention that the next word is OR

That right away proves that you are wrong.

Furthermore, you blatantly ducked the part where the TUE language says the method should not give the athlete an unfair advantage, and this language was not mentioned under the retroactive TUE section. Does that mean a retroactive TUE can be used for a condition that gives an unfair advantage?

When you answer that honestly, then we can proceed. Don't duck this question.

Don't duck the question? I have been answering ALL your questions! I'm still waiting for an honest explanation from you as to how Floyd was severely dehydrated if his weight was relatively stable when he was given the IV?

146 at weigh in and ~2lbs of drinking fluids ~ 148lbs

Floyd came in at 149 and said to be at that weight he ate a lot, drank more of course and had that IV. Yet only weighed 149. BUT was he feeling weak at 149? No Floyd was boasting that he was "physically extremely strong" WOW, just WOW!!!!!


back to your post: Apples and oranges.

There are situations for which TUEs may be granted retroactively. They are just stating when this can occur. There are even other criteria that may apply that are not written in this section that is specific for each substance and method.


"An Athlete may only be granted retroactive approval for his/her The****utic
Use of a Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method (i.e., a retroactive TUE) if:"

[Zaroku]

Don't duck the question? I have been answering ALL your questions! I'm still waiting for an honest explanation from you as to how Floyd was severely dehydrated if his weight was relatively stable when he was given the IV?

146 at weigh in and ~2lbs of drinking fluids ~ 148lbs

Floyd came in at 149 and said to be at that weight he ate a lot, drank more of course and had that IV. Yet only weighed 149. BUT was he feeling weak at 149? No Floyd was boasting that he was "physically extremely strong" WOW, just WOW!!!!!


back to your post: Apples and oranges.

There are situations for which TUEs may be granted retroactively. They are just stating when this can occur. There are even other criteria that may apply that are not written in this section that is specific for each substance and method.


"An Athlete may only be granted retroactive approval for his/her The****utic
Use of a Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method (i.e., a retroactive TUE) if:"

I just dumped a massive Mohammed in the toilet & pee'd like a race horse, I feel like I want an IV.

The prophet stunk up the place like a bad comedian!!!

Ay dios mio!!

[Lester Tutor]

Don't duck the question? I have been answering ALL your questions! I'm still waiting for an honest explanation from you as to how Floyd was severely dehydrated if his weight was relatively stable when he was given the IV?

146 at weigh in and ~2lbs of drinking fluids ~ 148lbs

Floyd came in at 149 and said to be at that weight he ate a lot, drank more of course and had that IV. Yet only weighed 149. BUT was he feeling weak at 149? No Floyd was boasting that he was "physically extremely strong" WOW, just WOW!!!!!


back to your post: Apples and oranges.

There are situations for which TUEs may be granted retroactively. They are just stating when this can occur. There are even other criteria that may apply that are not written in this section that is specific for each substance and method.


"An Athlete may only be granted retroactive approval for his/her The****utic
Use of a Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method (i.e., a retroactive TUE) if:"

I think I understand why you're convinced that Floyd wasn't dehydrated. If I recall you posted pictures of before and after even throughout career correct? If you know the late 147 Floyd, it has been his most comfortable weight innit? Has he ever looked like a skeletor compared to many other boxers that look ''drained'' or have a hard time making weight? I assume you think that...in order for him to be dehydrated he'd need to at least look like a skeletor of some sort innit? In other words, your idea of a boxer being dehydrated only relates to one looking skinny and boned?

Let me give you a fact bruv. Most athletes and general blokes or people that play sports, when they faint or pass out because of lack of water or so called ''dehydrated'' aren't going to look ''dehydrated'' or skeletor looking. Again, as we said a thousand pages ago, people vary in appearances (in general) and let alone when being dehydrated. There's no way you can know if someone is dehydrated just by a look. When a fat or chubby person is dehydrated or passes out how can you explain that they look dehydrated? Where's your measuring stick? Fluids are very important to the body and where it's dispersed to keep joints fluid. When the brain lacks the proper fluid or when a person has a general headache most of the time it relates to dehydration. Why do you think people feel like crap on a hangover? The body is severely dehydrated.

So to recap, your idea about Floyd and dehydration will never work bro. If Floyd wanted to ''flush'' for whatever that means in a ONE DAY period, 750ml ain't gonna cut it, and blood doping is a completely different process than taking in water. The report wasn't about ''Floyd Seen With An IV Wound, Can't Explain To Commission or USADA.'' Even so, that theory would also be a fumble suitable for the National Enquirer.

[travestyny]

Just like you saw it written where you got it for TUEs you would have seen it for retroactive ones BUT THEY DID NOT!!!

You saw for yourself that when its for chronic medical condition, they clearly indicated it, but Floyd had a retroactive TUE. The criteria is different. Right? Did they mention chronic specifically or you just believe its there?

There are situations for which TUEs may be granted retroactively. They are just stating when this can occur. There are even other criteria that may apply that are not written in this section that is specific for each substance and method.

"An Athlete may only be granted retroactive approval for his/her The****utic
Use of a Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method (i.e., a retroactive TUE) if:"

ADP, come on man. You are not answering this honestly and I think you are smart enough to know that. You are indeed ducking this question. If you can't see that you are wrong about this, there is really no reason to talk. I think you are a cool dude and all, but you are just showing that even when you're blatantly wrong, you won't admit it.

I'm asking you about the ISTUE, and you are "deflecting" back to severe dehydration. I've already said more than a number of times that the ISTUE never mentions that he has to be severely dehydrated to receive the TUE.

Furthermore, I've already stated that it should be clear that he could feel weak at 149 when he was dehydrated and still headed down in weight, compared to at 149 after eating, drinking, and having the IV. I think this is common sense.

So, once again:
4.3 An Athlete may only be granted retroactive approval for his/her The****utic Use of a Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method (i.e., a retroactive TUE) if:
a. Emergency treatment or treatment of an acute medical condition was necessary; or

OR (definition): otherwise (used to introduce the consequences of something not being done or not being the case)

Can it be any more clear that the retroactive TUE can be granted when emergency treatment or treatment of an acute medical condition is not the case?

now look at B:
b. Due to other exceptional circumstances, there was insufficient time or opportunity for the Athlete to submit, or for the TUEC to consider, an application for the TUE prior to Sample collection;

It is clear that an athlete may receive the retroactive TUE in the instance that they qualified for the TUE under the guidelines mentioned in section 4.1, but either the athlete had insufficient time to submit the application, or the TUEC had insufficient time to consider the application. THIS IS CLEAR!

You've already stated that the criteria for the retroactive TUE is different and anything that applies to the retroactive TUE would be clearly stated in that section. So how is it that the retroactive TUE does not include these conditions that are found under section 4.1:

b. The The****utic Use of the Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method is highly unlikely to produce any additional enhancement of performance beyond what might be anticipated by a return to the Athlete’s normal state of health following the treatment of the acute or chronic medical condition.
c. There is no reasonable The****utic alternative to the Use of the Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method.
d. The necessity for the Use of the Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method is not a consequence, wholly or in part, of the prior Use (without a TUE) of a substance or method which was prohibited at the time of such Use.

If you are correct that the section regarding retroactive TUEs states all of its criteria specifically, then these 3 circumstances don't apply. Furthermore, in your last statement, you mention that there are other criteria that may apply to retroactive TUEs but are not mentioned. WHICH IS IT???

So is it your belief that B, C, and D apply, or not? If they do apply, why would only part of requirement A apply? And let me remind you that part B of section 4.3 refers back to the entirety of section 4.1 because that is the criteria for a TUE!

Lastly, if you look at the actual application for the TUE, the athlete must fill out the form and then section 5 simply asks "Is this a retroactive application?" It then asks the athlete to check one box. A, B, C, or D, depending on which criteria fits for section 4.3. This makes it clear that it need not be section A that applies.

[IMG]http://i62.***********.com/albums/h95/travestyny/Screen%20Shot%202016-03-20%20at%207.37.48%20AM.png[/IMG]


Come on man, I can't make it anymore clear than this. Just admit you are wrong. By the way, in the past with the whole "got you" thing, I was just making fun of you for even thinking that I have conversations with you just to say "got you." Come on, I'm not that ******ed. We all make mistakes. If you can admit you are wrong, it's no big deal to me. However, I do feel that what I stated is absolutely clear and if you refuse to see that, well then it honestly doesn't really make sense for us to have a discussion about this any longer. Understand what I mean?

[Dosumpthin]

You've already stated that the criteria for the retroactive TUE is different and anything that applies to the retroactive TUE would be clearly stated in that section. So how is it that the retroactive TUE does not include these conditions that are found under section 4.1:

Not to mention (c) under retroactive guidelines

c. It is agreed, by WADA and by the Anti-Doping Organization to whom the application for a retroactive TUE is or would be made, that fairness requires the grant of a retroactive TUE.

Just wanted to point out as far as the retroactive tue goes.....

Doesn't even matter if the medical condition was acute (a) or if there wasn't enough time to submit the application (b). If wada and USADA simply states its fair to do so, they will allow a tue application to be submitted retroactively.(c)

The last scenario (c) makes adp02 claims of "different criteria" even more insane.




It's obvious, Adp09 does not understand what makes the tue "retroactive". For him to even imply there is different criteria demonstrates his inablity to actually apply the code where applicable.


But when you are constantly subjected to spoon/Rath ******ity and lies about retro tues you can get lost in understanding a simple concept.

[GTTofAK]

Here is a reality check: No one cares about your opinion when there are experts in the field that reject it. Get over yourself.

You mean the same lying ***** who lied about EPO detection to cover for the labs failure to catch Armstrong.

[GTTofAK]

So, once again:
4.3 An Athlete may only be granted retroactive approval for his/her The****utic Use of a Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method (i.e., a retroactive TUE) if:
a. Emergency treatment or treatment of an acute medical condition was necessary; or

OR (definition): otherwise (used to introduce the consequences of something not being done or not being the case)

Can it be any more clear that the retroactive TUE can be granted when emergency treatment or treatment of an acute medical condition is not the case?

now look at B:
b. Due to other exceptional circumstances, there was insufficient time or opportunity for the Athlete to submit, or for the TUEC to consider, an application for the TUE prior to Sample collection;

It is clear that an athlete may receive the retroactive TUE in the instance that they qualified for the TUE under the guidelines mentioned in section 4.1, but either the athlete had insufficient time to submit the application, or the TUEC had insufficient time to consider the application. THIS IS CLEAR!

You've already stated that the criteria for the retroactive TUE is different and anything that applies to the retroactive TUE would be clearly stated in that section. So how is it that the retroactive TUE does not include these conditions that are found under section 4.1:

b. The The****utic Use of the Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method is highly unlikely to produce any additional enhancement of performance beyond what might be anticipated by a return to the Athlete’s normal state of health following the treatment of the acute or chronic medical condition.
c. There is no reasonable The****utic alternative to the Use of the Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method.
d. The necessity for the Use of the Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method is not a consequence, wholly or in part, of the prior Use (without a TUE) of a substance or method which was prohibited at the time of such Use.

If you are correct that the section regarding retroactive TUEs states all of its criteria specifically, then these 3 circumstances don't apply. Furthermore, in your last statement, you mention that there are other criteria that may apply to retroactive TUEs but are not mentioned. WHICH IS IT???

So is it your belief that B, C, and D apply, or not? If they do apply, why would only part of requirement A apply? And let me remind you that part B of section 4.3 refers back to the entirety of section 4.1 because that is the criteria for a TUE!

You are mixing an matching the rules for a normal TUE with a retroactive TUE. There is no mention of treatment of chronic conditions in the retroactive TUE section only the standard TUE section. The retroactive TUE section only allows for TUE's to be granted due to acute conditions.

This makes sense when you have an IQ over 90 because if a condition is chronic it is by definition not sudden should be dealt with through then normal TUE process.

[Zaroku]

Not to mention (c) under retroactive guidelines

c. It is agreed, by WADA and by the Anti-Doping Organization to whom the application for a retroactive TUE is or would be made, that fairness requires the grant of a retroactive TUE.

Just wanted to point out as far as the retroactive tue goes.....

Doesn't even matter if the medical condition was acute (a) or if there wasn't enough time to submit the application (b). If wada and USADA simply states its fair to do so, they will allow a tue application to be submitted retroactively.(c)

The last scenario (c) makes adp02 claims of "different criteria" even more insane.




It's obvious, Adp09 does not understand what makes the tue "retroactive". For him to even imply there is different criteria demonstrates his inablity to actually apply the code where applicable.


But when you are constantly subjected to spoon/Rath ******ity and lies about retro tues you can get lost in understanding a simple concept.

But in slow motion nothing is happening. There is no issue...

But now GattAzzAttack is gonna add his drivel, punctuating it with many bad words..

PAC crapped on him and his LGBT lifestyle... But he attacks people who say PAC isn't that great...

GattazzAttack is an athlete, he knows about things.. Ask him about winning a gold at the Pinoy LGBT games!! He swallowed more lumpia and balut than anyone!!

[Zaroku]

ADP, come on man. You are not answering this honestly and I think you are smart enough to know that. You are indeed ducking this question. If you can't see that you are wrong about this, there is really no reason to talk. I think you are a cool dude and all, but you are just showing that even when you're blatantly wrong, you won't admit it.

I'm asking you about the ISTUE, and you are "deflecting" back to severe dehydration. I've already said more than a number of times that the ISTUE never mentions that he has to be severely dehydrated to receive the TUE.

Furthermore, I've already stated that it should be clear that he could feel weak at 149 when he was dehydrated and still headed down in weight, compared to at 149 after eating, drinking, and having the IV. I think this is common sense.

So, once again:
4.3 An Athlete may only be granted retroactive approval for his/her The****utic Use of a Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method (i.e., a retroactive TUE) if:
a. Emergency treatment or treatment of an acute medical condition was necessary; or

OR (definition): otherwise (used to introduce the consequences of something not being done or not being the case)

Can it be any more clear that the retroactive TUE can be granted when emergency treatment or treatment of an acute medical condition is not the case?

now look at B:
b. Due to other exceptional circumstances, there was insufficient time or opportunity for the Athlete to submit, or for the TUEC to consider, an application for the TUE prior to Sample collection;

It is clear that an athlete may receive the retroactive TUE in the instance that they qualified for the TUE under the guidelines mentioned in section 4.1, but either the athlete had insufficient time to submit the application, or the TUEC had insufficient time to consider the application. THIS IS CLEAR!

You've already stated that the criteria for the retroactive TUE is different and anything that applies to the retroactive TUE would be clearly stated in that section. So how is it that the retroactive TUE does not include these conditions that are found under section 4.1:

b. The The****utic Use of the Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method is highly unlikely to produce any additional enhancement of performance beyond what might be anticipated by a return to the Athlete’s normal state of health following the treatment of the acute or chronic medical condition.
c. There is no reasonable The****utic alternative to the Use of the Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method.
d. The necessity for the Use of the Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method is not a consequence, wholly or in part, of the prior Use (without a TUE) of a substance or method which was prohibited at the time of such Use.

If you are correct that the section regarding retroactive TUEs states all of its criteria specifically, then these 3 circumstances don't apply. Furthermore, in your last statement, you mention that there are other criteria that may apply to retroactive TUEs but are not mentioned. WHICH IS IT???

So is it your belief that B, C, and D apply, or not? If they do apply, why would only part of requirement A apply? And let me remind you that part B of section 4.3 refers back to the entirety of section 4.1 because that is the criteria for a TUE!

Lastly, if you look at the actual application for the TUE, the athlete must fill out the form and then section 5 simply asks "Is this a retroactive application?" It then asks the athlete to check one box. A, B, C, or D, depending on which criteria fits for section 4.3. This makes it clear that it need not be section A that applies.

[IMG]http://i62.***********.com/albums/h95/travestyny/Screen%20Shot%202016-03-20%20at%207.37.48%20AM.png[/IMG]


Come on man, I can't make it anymore clear than this. Just admit you are wrong. By the way, in the past with the whole "got you" thing, I was just making fun of you for even thinking that I have conversations with you just to say "got you." Come on, I'm not that ******ed. We all make mistakes. If you can admit you are wrong, it's no big deal to me. However, I do feel that what I stated is absolutely clear and if you refuse to see that, well then it honestly doesn't really make sense for us to have a discussion about this any longer. Understand what I mean?

No he won't understand what you mean ever!! The truth doesn't matter... how he feels matters!!!

[ADP02]

ADP, come on man. You are not answering this honestly and I think you are smart enough to know that. You are indeed ducking this question. If you can't see that you are wrong about this, there is really no reason to talk. I think you are a cool dude and all, but you are just showing that even when you're blatantly wrong, you won't admit it.

I'm asking you about the ISTUE, and you are "deflecting" back to severe dehydration. I've already said more than a number of times that the ISTUE never mentions that he has to be severely dehydrated to receive the TUE.

Furthermore, I've already stated that it should be clear that he could feel weak at 149 when he was dehydrated and still headed down in weight, compared to at 149 after eating, drinking, and having the IV. I think this is common sense.

So, once again:
4.3 An Athlete may only be granted retroactive approval for his/her The****utic Use of a Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method (i.e., a retroactive TUE) if:
a. Emergency treatment or treatment of an acute medical condition was necessary; or

OR (definition): otherwise (used to introduce the consequences of something not being done or not being the case)

Can it be any more clear that the retroactive TUE can be granted when emergency treatment or treatment of an acute medical condition is not the case?

now look at B:
b. Due to other exceptional circumstances, there was insufficient time or opportunity for the Athlete to submit, or for the TUEC to consider, an application for the TUE prior to Sample collection;

It is clear that an athlete may receive the retroactive TUE in the instance that they qualified for the TUE under the guidelines mentioned in section 4.1, but either the athlete had insufficient time to submit the application, or the TUEC had insufficient time to consider the application. THIS IS CLEAR!

You've already stated that the criteria for the retroactive TUE is different and anything that applies to the retroactive TUE would be clearly stated in that section. So how is it that the retroactive TUE does not include these conditions that are found under section 4.1:

b. The The****utic Use of the Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method is highly unlikely to produce any additional enhancement of performance beyond what might be anticipated by a return to the Athlete’s normal state of health following the treatment of the acute or chronic medical condition.
c. There is no reasonable The****utic alternative to the Use of the Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method.
d. The necessity for the Use of the Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method is not a consequence, wholly or in part, of the prior Use (without a TUE) of a substance or method which was prohibited at the time of such Use.

If you are correct that the section regarding retroactive TUEs states all of its criteria specifically, then these 3 circumstances don't apply. Furthermore, in your last statement, you mention that there are other criteria that may apply to retroactive TUEs but are not mentioned. WHICH IS IT???

So is it your belief that B, C, and D apply, or not? If they do apply, why would only part of requirement A apply? And let me remind you that part B of section 4.3 refers back to the entirety of section 4.1 because that is the criteria for a TUE!

Lastly, if you look at the actual application for the TUE, the athlete must fill out the form and then section 5 simply asks "Is this a retroactive application?" It then asks the athlete to check one box. A, B, C, or D, depending on which criteria fits for section 4.3. This makes it clear that it need not be section A that applies.

[IMG]http://i62.***********.com/albums/h95/travestyny/Screen%20Shot%202016-03-20%20at%207.37.48%20AM.png[/IMG]


Come on man, I can't make it anymore clear than this. Just admit you are wrong. By the way, in the past with the whole "got you" thing, I was just making fun of you for even thinking that I have conversations with you just to say "got you." Come on, I'm not that ******ed. We all make mistakes. If you can admit you are wrong, it's no big deal to me. However, I do feel that what I stated is absolutely clear and if you refuse to see that, well then it honestly doesn't really make sense for us to have a discussion about this any longer. Understand what I mean?

You are mixing this all up. The first section is clearly discussing which medical condition (emergency/acute). Right?

If you do not know, there are instances where they allow retroactive TUEs for something other than medical conditions

BUT

as we both know, Floyd, Ellerbe, the NSAC and USADA said that it was due to a medical condition .... furthermore, the NSAC's statement is not their own. They are getting this information from the form that had the reason why he had requested the retroactive TUE. In other words, USADA sent NSAC the reason and the NSAC relayed USADA's/Floyd's statement to the media. Are you following me or not? I doubt it.

So again, they have ALL told you so DO NOT TWIST WHY. They told you why. You cannot agree to that because you know that if that was why then Floyd was not telling us the truth. Still following me or did I lose you?


Did we get another statement to correct their official statement? NO!!!!


"According to records provided by the Nevada Athletic Commisison, each man gave 11 urine and eight blood samples ......

Mayweather also applied for, and was given, a the****utic use exemption (TUE) for rehydration purposes after the May 1 weigh-in. "

So we can stop with the guessing excuses from the Floyd fan club.

Plus, we can also stop pretending that the IV happened before the weigh in. Its all there. It happened after the May 1st weigh in.


So now you can go back to your regularly scheduled deflections!!!



.