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

[travestyny]

thanks for the info.....

clarifications:

is toradol now included in the banned substance list?

i take it that pac was not allowed the shot b4 the fight....so what is the issue?

i could only guess on why team pac "lied" on the shoulder issue because of the court cases....but really, it still appears to me as a totally disconnect on the tread topic...

or perhaps, you may have more to it....

again, thanks...

I don't believe Toradol is now included in the banned substances list.

However, saline solution is also not listed in the banned substances list.

This thread is about suspected PED users. Some suspect that Floyd used PED's. Some suspect Manny used PED's. Some say both did. If Toradol is being abused for an advantage, I'd say it is considered a PED.

So I don't think there is a disconnect at all. Margarito was stopped from using plaster, but he is still rightfully labeled a cheater, and fans debate if he used plaster in his past fights. Manny was stopped from using Toradol. Was he attempting to cheat, and if so, has he cheated with Toradol in the past? That's the question.

[tangalog2200]

I don't believe Toradol is now included in the banned substances list.

However, saline solution is also not listed in the banned substances list.

This thread is about suspected PED users. Some suspect that Floyd used PED's. Some suspect Manny used PED's. Some say both did. If Toradol is being abused for an advantage, I'd say it is considered a PED.

So I don't think there is a disconnect at all. Margarito was stopped from using plaster, but he is still rightfully labeled a cheater, and fans debate if he used plaster in his past fights. Manny was stopped from using Toradol. Was he attempting to cheat, and if so, has he cheated with Toradol in the past? That's the question.

now, that's a bit of a grey area...

how can we accuse somebody of cheating using a legal substance? if there is really no legal prohibition on toradol up to now, how was pac cheating?.....

as to the iv, what i take from it was that there is a prohibition/limitation on its use as per the wada code,.......as it could be used to hide illegal substance use....

anyway, thanks....

[travestyny]

now, that's a bit of a grey area...

how can we accuse somebody of cheating using a legal substance? if there is really no legal prohibition on toradol up to now, how was pac cheating?.....

as to the iv, what i take from it was that there is a prohibition/limitation on its use as per the wada code,.......as it could be used to hide illegal substance use....

anyway, thanks....

You're right. There is a grey area.

Toradol may be legal, but it can be used to gain an unfair advantage. This is obviously not what athletic commissions want for fighters.

According to WADA code, IV infusions are legal at any amount if accompanied by a TUE. So in both cases, there is nothing inherently illegal about the activity. The main crux of what is being debated is whether there was more going on than the activity at face value.

And it's no problem at all.

[tangalog2200]

You're right. There is a grey area.

Toradol may be legal, but it can be used to gain an unfair advantage. This is obviously not what athletic commissions want for fighters.

According to WADA code, IV infusions are legal at any amount if accompanied by a TUE. So in both cases, there is nothing inherently illegal about the activity. The main crux of what is being debated is whether there was more going on than the activity at face value.

And it's no problem at all.

ah! yes...the tue

if memory serves, there were issues raised about the tue being 3 weeks late.....and a confusion on who really has the authority to grant it....

i think the above is the last item i need clarified...

[travestyny]

ah! yes...the tue

if memory serves, there were issues raised about the tue being 3 weeks late.....and a confusion on who really has the authority to grant it....

i think the above is the last item i need clarified...

Hm. I'm not sure what these issues are about. Three weeks late according to whom?

When it comes to authority, it makes sense that USADA has the authority to grant the TUE since the organization is a signatory to the WADA code. If not for the WADA code being involved, a TUE would be unnecessary.

[tangalog2200]

Hm. I'm not sure what these issues are about. Three weeks late according to whom?

When it comes to authority, it makes sense that USADA has the authority to grant the TUE since the organization is a signatory to the WADA code. If not for the WADA code being involved, a TUE would be unnecessary.

but is it not that tues should be "granted first" before the application or use of any substance and/or methods? also, i think i read somewhere here on nsb that nsac claimed sole authority on tue approval....

[travestyny]

but is it not that tues should be "granted first" before the application or use of any substance and/or methods? also, i think i read somewhere here on nsb that nsac claimed sole authority on tue approval....

The WADA code allows for retroactive TUE's. It can be found in Article 4.3 of the WADA Code International Standard for The****utic Use Exemptions.

As far as I know, NSAC did issue a statement claiming they were the sole authority for tue approval. However, USADA clearly pointed out that IV infusions are not prohibited under NSAC rules, and therefore discussion of a tue for IV infusions with NSAC is not necessary. NSAC does not follow the WADA code, so obviously there would be no need for NSAC to discuss issuing a TUE. NSAC thereafter never mentioned this issue.

[tangalog2200]

The WADA code allows for retroactive TUE's. It can be found in Article 4.3 of the WADA Code International Standard for The****utic Use Exemptions.

As far as I know, NSAC did issue a statement claiming they were the sole authority for tue approval. However, USADA clearly pointed out that IV infusions are not prohibited under NSAC rules, and therefore discussion of a tue for IV infusions with NSAC is not necessary. NSAC does not follow the WADA code, so obviously there would be no need for NSAC to discuss issuing a TUE. NSAC thereafter never mentioned this issue.

if that be the case...both the toradol and iv issues are really non-issues after all...

hmmm...then i wonder why floyd is voted on as the top notch one who got away the most...

[travestyny]

if that be the case...both the toradol and iv issues are really non-issues after all...

hmmm...then i wonder why floyd is voted on as the top notch one who got away the most...

Well, for all intents and purposes, they are non-issues.

As for the voting here, it's clear that Mayweather is the most hated of the three boxers mentioned. Maybe that has something to do with it.

[tangalog2200]

Well, for all intents and purposes, they are non-issues.

As for the voting here, it's clear that Mayweather is the most hated of the three boxers mentioned. Maybe that has something to do with it.

hate? yes, maybe hate...

but perhaps, in most people's mind, floyd did what he did in more su****ious circumstances....than pac and jmm....say, like having the iv at his home? and having no real justification for having the iv.....

our exchanges on the topic have been very enjoyable and informative...

cheers!