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

[Zaroku]

True that there are bigger issues.... but I do not come here for that.


I read your previous post .... good luck!

Funeral... Yeah... Thanks

[layton]

kinda simple really, if testing isn't random and all yr round, its never going to be an accurate form of testing, and certainly wont be a deterrent. You could make a case that any boxer could be juicing. Fights are announced, then 12 weeks later they fight, whats been going on in between the testing, boxing is a dirty sport period

[ADP02]

You're telling me that in my post which was right after we agreed to go question for question, which has the word "question" bolded, you somehow lost what the question was?

Come on man. You are seriously behaving like a coward. Don't tell me what my question should be. Answer the damn question that you agreed you would answer.

And can you please pay attention to what I wrote and turn off your spin techniques. You aren't fooling anyone. I said (this is my third time stating this I believe) what is USADA's definition of acute and chronic. I didn't ask for your expertise analysis based on you riding your tricycle on the weekend with a helmet.

Do you see my question now, or is it hard to find?

Trust me ... I missed it.

But the good news is that I will answer it now!

Your question:
"how do you explain him giving a partial urine sample from BEFORE the IV to the same DCO that took the sample from after the IV and all tests coming out negative?


First of all, who knows the truth. You guys keep on believing only one side but not the other side.

but lets say they did get what was stated:


In previous posts I remember that you made the assumption that they intentionally were getting 2 samples so that to check the before and after.... but you can correct me if I'm mistaken. If so, it does not mean what you think it means. It means that they were not able to collect sufficient sample in order to have a proper test. Only when they had the sample hours later were they satisfied that they had collected a sufficient amount of urine to do their testing.

[Rath]

What happened to your Steve Harvey pics?

how did steve harvey read it wrong?

how?

[travestyny]

Trust me ... I missed it.

But the good news is that I will answer it now!

Your question:
"how do you explain him giving a partial urine sample from BEFORE the IV to the same DCO that took the sample from after the IV and all tests coming out negative?


First of all, who knows the truth. You guys keep on believing only one side but not the other side.

but lets say they did get what was stated:


In previous posts I remember that you made the assumption that they intentionally were getting 2 samples so that to check the before and after.... but you can correct me if I'm mistaken. If so, it does not mean what you think it means. It means that they were not able to collect sufficient sample in order to have a proper test. Only when they had the sample hours later were they satisfied that they had collected a sufficient amount of urine to do their testing.

Are you serious? This is your answer?

Why would they bother collecting before the IV if it doesn't matter? Why wouldn't they just collect it all afterward.

You can do better than that. I SEE WHY YOU DUCKED THIS QUESTION 3 TIMES!

[ADP02]

Are you serious? This is your answer?

Why would they bother collecting before the IV if it doesn't matter? Why wouldn't they just collect it all afterward.

You can do better than that. I SEE WHY YOU DUCKED THIS QUESTION 3 TIMES!

So I was not mistaken. That is what you thought.

Sorry but that is what "Partial sample" means. It does not mean that it will not be used but that is a possibility ..... just that it is not sufficient to do all the required testing and more is required.

Here is one definition:
"As much urine as possible should be passed into the vessel unless otherwise advised by the DCO. If an athlete is unable to provide the required volume of urine, the sample will be considered a partial sample. The partial sample will be sealed in a secure, tamper evident sample collection vessel and stored until the required amount can be given."

So it wasn't that the DCO got the required full sample at 1pm then another required full sample at 8pm.

[ADP02]

how did steve harvey read it wrong?

how?

We should ask Steve!

[travestyny]

So I was not mistaken. That is what you thought.

Sorry but that is what "Partial sample" means. It does not mean that it will not be used but that is a possibility ..... just that it is not sufficient to do all the required testing and more is required.

Here is one definition:
"As much urine as possible should be passed into the vessel unless otherwise advised by the DCO. If an athlete is unable to provide the required volume of urine, the sample will be considered a partial sample. The partial sample will be sealed in a secure, tamper evident sample collection vessel and stored until the required amount can be given."

So it wasn't that the DCO got the required full sample at 1pm then another required full sample at 8pm.

No one ever said that it was another full sample. If they weren't concerned with having a sample before the IV, why wouldn't they just wait to get the full sample after the IV? Couldn't the evil Mayweather have stated that he couldn't urine at all and then just waited until after the IV? USADA made it very clear that a partial sample was taken from before the IV for a reason. You just don't have any way to spin this, do you?

Come on. Your answer to this question is pathetic and you know it.

Edit--
Actually, you didn't give much of an answer at all, unless your answer is "who knows what really happened"? Pretty lame since you claim to know everything else that happened. Just explaining what a partial example is doesn't add anything of relevance.

[Dosumpthin]

Sorry but we are not talking about other boxers. We are talking about someone who was being tested by USADA. His name is Floyd.

It is quite relevant when Floyd knows when the testing may begin. If you noticed, Floyd has announced some of his recent fights at a late date. Either way, only Floyd knows when. Not USADA not FLoyd's opponent.

example:
"For example, Mayweather didn’t announce Andre Berto as the opponent for his upcoming Sept. 12 fight until Aug. 4, only 39 days before the fight. That didn’t leave much time for serious drug testing. From the conclusion of the Pacquiao fight until the Berto announcement, Mayweather was not subject to USADA testing."

The above is a joke right?


With Floyd being the only one in the know, he could prepare himself to know when he should do what as far as cheating goes. That is, just before the fight, use PEDs and possibly even prepare his own blood (blood doping). You do not think the Vampire facial side effects were su****ious? How about his excuse to get one? Who would be doing that JUST BEFORE training camp?


While your point was confusingly written, you are wrong in saying that some people within USADA cannot be in it. You check out Lance Armstrong for example. Lance had people at different levels helping him but he still required to mask his results, delay being tested and so on. Lance had to even get a retroactive prescription for his prohibited substance. Lance, like Floyd, had his representatives paying off those people. So just like Lance, the same can be the case for Floyd. Get it?


Nobody is saying that Floyd is guilty of everything. If you have read my posts, I point out that its fishy that the NSAC wanted an investigation on Manny and not Floyd, even though they both incorrectly filled out a pre-fight form. Floyd actually got an IV.
Then I point out the transparancy issues that exist. If not for Manny, there was the likelihood that we would never know about the IV scandal. I'm sorry but I'm stuck on the delays and Floyd's excuse for an IV. There is nothing to support that claim. NOTHING! Not one Floyd fan can come up with anything that makes sense.

What I said is that perhaps Floyd was not expecting USADA to be showing up prior to the weigh in. Not because of what you said. Just because he was not expecting to be giving a sample at that moment in the day. So he then intentionally delayed.


Why do I need to change what I said about possibly micro-dosing?

Anyways, Floyd has done some things just like Lance Armstrong. THey were su****ious of Lance but even with all the su****ions, all those investigations, all those theories of what he may be doing, they couldn't catch him. Cheaters are always one step ahead of the testers. We can come up with ways but only Floyd can tell you just like only when Lance came out did the doubters realize that Lance was cheating.




.

Im done. If you cant understand a simple concept like "year round testing" and how it relates to all boxers, not just floyd.....our would be debate is pointless.

[Dosumpthin]

kinda simple really, if testing isn't random and all yr round, its never going to be an accurate form of testing, and certainly wont be a deterrent. You could make a case that any boxer could be juicing. Fights are announced, then 12 weeks later they fight, whats been going on in between the testing, boxing is a dirty sport period

You would think its simple.


Being that floyd is the face of boxing he is associated with all things that are wrong with the sport. Majority of the "conspiracies" would hold true to boxing as a whole.

Look at this whole iv issue. Its pretty standard in combat sports and was something that was heavily debated prior to thomas hauser article.

But people just want floyd so bad you cant even logically reason with them anymore. Its crazy.

Vampire facial? Is that how he beat manny? Manny was in awe at floyds beauty and prevented hin from landing more than 3 punches in the first three rounds?



,