Here's Where All The Floyd Cheat Theories Fail

[mathed]

We are talking about one of the most polarizing figures in the history of sports.

Arrogant (to some).

A convicted wife beater.

A man caught on film spewing racism.

A man proud of profligate public displays of wealth.

And on and on and on.

There are literally millions of people who spent all kinds of money in the hopes he'd get his azz kicked.

They hate him...a lot.

Yet, after all of this?

Zero.

Not one piece of concrete indisputable evidence he ever cheated.

Yeah, you got rumors.

But not one substantiated.

You would think that one guy of the tens or hundreds in those labs over 7 years would look to leak a bad test result and get paid handsomely for it.

Never happened.

You would think that someone at USADA with access to the records would blow the whistle.

Nope.

WADA gets those records too and they have NO DOG IN THE HUNT. Surely they would reveal something if there was something to reveal?

Crickets.

They got Lance, they got Marion, they got scores of other athletes fabulously popular or just as able financially to bribe folks as Floyd.

The popular athletes got taken down.

But hated Mayweather? Let's give him a pass.

And, oh yeah, all of those samples are STILL THERE.

They can be retested.

With his ABP, I am certain comparisons to some of Floyd's samples over time have indeed been made.

Still crickets.

With all this supposed cheating, which all these rumors, with all this hate for Floyd, not one concrete thing has every come to light.

Isn't that odd?

Vampire facials.......go talk to Lance Armstrong about that....case closed.

[koolkc107]

Vampire facials.......go talk to Lance Armstrong about that....case closed.

Yep, the Armstrong case is closed.

It has nothing to do with Mayweather, who had no such case in the first place.

And by the way, try to do your homework before you post.

Blood doping IS illegal.

PRP therapy is not and is actually WADA approved with a TUE.

http://www.orthohealing.com/blog/wada-reverses-restrictions-of-treating-olympic-athletes-with-prp-platelet-rich-plasma/

There is no evidence whatsoever that Floyd ever used the procedure.

But if he did and filed the appropriate paperwork, it would be legal.

[koolkc107]

Your response is long on hyperbole and excuses and short on facts and documentation. I don't accept the USADA or Floyd's rebuttal to all of the claims levied against them. You can copy and paste their rebuttals until your fingers fall off, but it doesn't exonerate Floyd in the least.

You will not and cannot listen to facts and you are glossing over valid facts presented to you by myself and others. If you want to be a hopeless cheerleader then just own it. But don't try to convince the rest of us that Floyd fought clean all these years and that FACTS that have Ben presented are fiction or driven by agenda.

Facts? WHERE ARE YOUR FACTS?

You CANT be both the guy that uses YAPPITY-YAP in a post then accuses another of HYPERBOLE.

BTW, we are over 100 posts in with you making all sorts of claims, putting forth all kinds of theories and guess what?

NOT ONCE (zero, zilch, nada!) HAVE YOU CITED A NEWSOURCE OR ARTICLE TO BACK WHAT YOU ARE POSITING.

You have spent this entire time blowing smoke out of your azz, with not one thing to establish what you say as actual fact.

This when I- and especially other posters trying to talk you off the ledge- have given you sources you can fact check.

Where are the things that back what you say?

And lacking those sources, why should anyone believe a word you say?

You certainly DO NOT come off as someone who has the slightest idea of what they are talking about.

I'm going to need you to source arguments with credible evidence.

[Shape up]

Wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, and....yeah, wrong too.

We might not be able to explain Floyd's testosterone, but USADA and WADA sure can. They know something we don't since they have had this info for years and not BOO has come of it. They are the experts, not you Dempster.

And while we are on the subject, the defamation suit was not settled to avoid releasing Floyd's records, at least not by Mayweather's lawyers. The suit was settled because once again they thought they could make the fight. Mayweather's lawyers didn't even address the subpoena for Floyd's records- it was lawyers for USADA that filed the motion to quash and for good reason. Floyd's medical records had nothing to do with proving or disproving whether or not Pacquiao had been slandered and was due damages. It was an unprecedented request by Pac's lawyers and it would not have been granted in any case since medical records are confidential.

I have mentioned the ABP several times in this thread and you, Demps, have taken great pains to ignore it.

And for good reason.

The ABP is a "golden ticket" when it comes to proving oneself clean. It's a profile built over time, which serves as a template to prove or disprove abnormalities that may occur. Clearly, Floyd's have an explanation good enough for WADA, USADA, NSAC, and any other interested parties- save message board morons who can't let go of the fact Floyd ruined their hopes and dreams every single time he won a fight.

As to retroactive TUEs, they are not extraordinary. They happen all the time and are part of how WADA and USADA conduct things with ALL OF THEIR TESTED ATHLETES. Again, ANY ATHLETE CAN APPLY FOR AND BE GRANTED A RETROACTIVE TUE.

What happened in Floyd's case happens all the time.

As for your allegation about Mayweather cycling on and off drugs while he is not being tested, other posters have explained why that is bullshyt much better than I can so I will let their words stand as mine too. But, I am curious.

Which is it?

Is he dirty and using in training camp so he needs an IV to flush PEDs from his system right before a fight?

Or does he cycle off beforehand so he won't test dirty in camp?

You are so bent by this you haven't realized you are forwarding conflicting positions.

Get well, man.

The aim was to see if microdosing, as it’s called, would accomplish two things: still improve performance, yet evade detection in the passport system. The biological passport is unlike traditional anti-doping tests. Instead of looking for the presence of banned substances, it tracks values in an athlete’s bloodwork to show the effect of banned substances. In the passport, the blood itself is the marker.

ADVERTISING
inRead invented by Teads
The result? A two percent improvement in a short cycling time trial, and none of the athlete’s blood values would have tripped the quantitative limits used in the passport system's automated software screening. If two percent sounds small, consider that it’s roughly the same difference between the fastest ascent of Pla d’Adet in last year’s Tour de France and the all-time fastest ascent in 1993, the height of the EPO era. Races are won and lost on less than two percent.

RELATED: Cycling Still Has a Doping Problem

Reaction was swift: The World Anti-Doping Agency shot back in a coldly hostile statement that noted that the study had not been published in a peer-reviewed journal, didn’t follow passport analysis guidelines, and that WADA had certainly not endorsed the research.

Just a week ago, a statement by WADA President Craig Reedie said that the passport “can allow athletes to hold up their hands and prove they are clean.” So what are we to believe? As always, the truth seems to be somewhere in the middle. A few points to consider:

• Interestingly, some pro cyclists were less skeptical than WADA. Both climber Pierre Rolland and top sprinter Arnaud Demare expressed dismay about the report on Twitter. Demare wrote, “The fight against doping must be worldwide. The biological passport isn’t enough!”

That’s encouraging. A decade ago it would have been extremely unusual for prominent pro cyclists to be so openly supportive of anti-doping efforts. But it’s also worrying, in that neither rider seemed surprised or disputed the study’s relevance. Privately, a number of people in pro cycling and anti-doping readily admit that the passport has gaps and limits, and isn’t the sort of “proof” of being clean that Reedie’s statement suggests.

• WADA’s statement said it doesn’t support research where humans are used as “guinea pigs” and given otherwise banned drugs. But they do fund such research (as recently as 2013), and even when they don’t, they benefit from it. Since WADA’s founding, no fewer than 13 studies have looked at EPO alone and its effect on performance and blood values. Most of those studies were carried out by researchers who have long associations with WADA, like Carsten Lundby, Mike Ashenden and Robin Parisotto (one of the creators of the passport model).

WADA’s attempt at a principled stand belies a truth: It’s impossible not to do this kind of research since it’s often the only way to get the kind of data on what drugs like EPO do to blood values. Without that, it’s hard to determine what’s an abnormal passport profile and what’s natural fluctuation.

• WADA’s statement said that it welcomes research relevant to the passport and continues to work with experts to advance and enhance the project. That’s partly true. Since the UCI became the first sport governing body to implement the passport program in 2008, WADA has funded 15 studies directly related to the passport.

But two-thirds of those have focused on implementing the newer “steroid module” side rather than the older hematological model (which, for endurance sports, is arguably more important).

What’s more, none of the five studies that looked at the hematological module directly studied its efficacy. WADA is far from the only body that’s funding research like this. But it’s a bit disingenuous for WADA to call for rigorous, peer-reviewed research that it says is lacking from the French study when WADA itself doesn’t support much of it.

RELATED: Lance Armstrong's End Game

• Most of the uproar over the French study is about how none of the athletes’ profiles would have tripped the automatic thresholds in the passport software analysis. But that’s only one way that the passport works. The software is an automatic screening tool, bolstered by expert review; the UCI, for instance, has a review panel of expert researchers who scrutinize some percentage of profiles. Even if a particular athlete’s bloodwork never exceeds the tolerances, it can be flagged as su****ious by a reviewer. However, that requires random review by experts; it’s easier for some authorities just to rely on the software.

• Last, the news that the passport is beatable is not, well, news. Remember that point that other organizations fund research? Another study, not directly funded by WADA, found much the same as the recent French study.

The researchers in the other study included several well-regarded scientists (led by Ashenden). They gave 10 subjects twice-weekly microdoses of EPO for 12 weeks. Similar to the French study, researchers found a 10 percent increase in total hemoglobin mass, which correlates strongly to aerobic capacity. Just as with the French study, researchers found that none of the 10 athletes’ profiles would have been flagged as abnormal by the software analysis—it would have taken expert human review to catch, a point that the researchers made in their conclusion. The study met the other standards WADA says the French study missed: It used passport guidelines and was published in a peer-reviewed journal (the European Journal of Applied Physiology). The publication date? September, 2011.------------------ the ABP is no golden ticket

[koolkc107]

The researchers in the other study included several well-regarded scientists (led by Ashenden). They gave 10 subjects twice-weekly microdoses of EPO for 12 weeks. Similar to the French study, researchers found a 10 percent increase in total hemoglobin mass, which correlates strongly to aerobic capacity. Just as with the French study, researchers found that none of the 10 athletes’ profiles would have been flagged as abnormal by the software analysis—it would have taken expert human review to catch, a point that the researchers made in their conclusion. The study met the other standards WADA says the French study missed: It used passport guidelines and was published in a peer-reviewed journal (the European Journal of Applied Physiology). The publication date? September, 2011.------------------ the ABP is no golden ticket

Hey Dempsey, take notes!

This is how you try to have a rational discourse.

You cite factual evidence.

Shape Up, this is far and away the best anti-OP post in this thread.

It makes sense and forwards a good argument that indicts one of the things that most strongly upholds Mayweather as clean.

But, it also has problems.

The publish date in the most damning citation is 2011.

Surely, we cannot rely on that when Floyd didn't start testing til 2010 and the methods used then are nowhere near advanced as what was used after.

WADA didn't even start using the ABP until 2009, so kinda hard to indict it for a time spanning from 2010 to 2017 with an article from 2011.

The ABP IS a golden ticket when used in conjuction with other rigorous testing methods such as CIR and when examined over time.

The other point here is the article (articles?) talk about cyclist being able to fool ABP software, that only human examination can catch the difference.

Well, it's one thing to tests hundreds of cyclist or Olympic athletes at a huge event, quite another to test 2 boxers over 2 months. Why would software be used for them? If you look at the lab reports for any of fights tested, they are not running those thru software those are lab technicians signing them.

So, I would submit that since the boxers testing may get more human scrutiny than a slew of cyclist, the ABP for boxers may be more valid and reliable.

Good post tho.

[Dosumpthin]

Hey Dempsey, take notes!

This is how you try to have a rational discourse.

You cite factual evidence.

Shape Up, this is far and away the best anti-OP post in this thread.

It makes sense and forwards a good argument that indicts one of the things that most strongly upholds Mayweather as clean.

But, it also has problems.

The publish date in the most damning citation is 2011.

Surely, we cannot rely on that when Floyd didn't start testing til 2010 and the methods used then are nowhere near advanced as what was used after.

WADA didn't even start using the ABP until 2009, so kinda hard to indict it for a time spanning from 2010 to 2017 with an article from 2011.

The ABP IS a golden ticket when used in conjuction with other rigorous testing methods such as CIR and when examined over time.

The other point here is the article (articles?) talk about cyclist being able to fool ABP software, that only human examination can catch the difference.

Well, it's one thing to tests hundreds of cyclist or Olympic athletes at a huge event, quite another to test 2 boxers over 2 months. Why would software be used for them? If you look at the lab reports for any of fights tested, they are not running those thru software those are lab technicians signing them.

So, I would submit that since the boxers testing may get more human scrutiny than a slew of cyclist, the ABP for boxers may be more valid and reliable.

Good post tho.

I want to be considered this guy's alternate account when I grow up.

It would be an honor.

[pasawayako]

Floyd got caught with an illegal substance that is known to masks the PEDS.

[pasawayako]

lance armstrong = floyd mayweather jr.

[Lester Tutor]

casuals are excusable.

the funny ones are the diehard Pac fans refusing to admit any foul play when boxing is reputed for having corruption. smh... As if Arum, a kingpin in the game for a long time and legal mastermind, wouldnt know easy loopholes or threaten to blacklist particular people. it amazes how people dont know the concept of non-disclosure from a legal binding agreement.

I mean if Meldonium is considered a now a banned substance, its safe to say that the Klistchko's were doing shady stuff as was Holyfield...

anybody boxing fan acknowledging that there's PED use in boxing even with the elites before, well then that glorfies the whole theory with Floyd Mayweather Jr.

The whole point of Floyd's approach with Pacquaio, assuming both Pac and Floyd were on stuff, even though Floyd comes from a substantial pedigree and Olympian and multiple national golden gloves in various weights, Floyd could prove that he would still beat Pac if PAC wasnt on stuff.

Its very practical for a promoter to match all inhouse stable with each other to conceal doping. Who are Marquez, Bradley, Vargas, Morales, Margarito, etc... goiing to battle against if they're all housed in the same roof? If anything it gives the stable a lucky opportunity to do things shady because papa Arum is supervising it all with its affiliates. Why would Arum get upset if Rigo and Donaire were both doing simultaneous testing with USADA and VADA? As if that expense is a real burden... it just means Arum coudnt play the game with Donaire, and was the reason why shelved Rigo because he didnt get what they wanted and Rigos team didnt buy into being purchased.

People need to understand the nature of ''settlements'' with goo lawyers. Its basically a nice way to bribe other boxers. Who knows what Walters got to sit around and take a knee when some nice cash is given on the side on the downlow. Its easy to tempt boxers with such shady things when you toy their inactivity to begin with. Koncz...all them guys look super shady...

[Metho_4u]

Here's where the theory fails....hes 50-0 no losses EVER in his pro career...i don't give a **** about the wannabe judges here, they don't matter. The man will go down as 50-0 and a top 3 ATG...end thread.