Here's Where All The Floyd Cheat Theories Fail

[travestyny]

From the contract-

Follow the blue in my post above.

contract --> U.S. ANTI-DOPING AGENCY PROTOCOL FOR OLYMPIC AND PARALYMPIC MOVEMENT TESTING Section 5
Section 5 --> Annex A
Annex A --> The code that you claim was omitted.

So what is changed? Let me know.

[travestyny]

Rules
4 mayweather and pacquaio agree that articles 1 through 10 and 24.2 and the associated definitions, of the world anti doping code shall be the substantive anti doping rules for all purposes in relation to the competition and the period of pre and post competition testing provided for in this agreement-

So the contract says that rules from the WADA Code are to be the substantive rules for anti-doping.....


And you think that means that USADA made substantive changes to the code?????????


You are by far the dumbest person I've ever met.

[travestyny]

This is where usada broke WADA rules

USADA broke WADA's rules....by referencing WADA's rules in the contract?


Leave this to someone else. A ****ing chinchilla could understand these things better than you can.

Log off.

[img]https://media.*****.com/media/l3E6uhDAN3W7vylji/*****.gif[/img]

[koolkc107]

What you fail to realize is when you crackheads **** on about garbage I basically ignore it, you 2 ****** on about labs for 3 pages, why would I need to explain myself about a topic I didn't even touch on. I let you imbeciles ramble on and embarrass yourselves, you clowns are the ones who could argue that it's cold in Antarctica, you 2 reply can't be that dumb to believe fluid is clean after the IV incident

Your problem (and the problem of all the heartbroken Pac fans that are grasping at straws to explain such a one-sided fight) is that conspiracy theory can't hold up to common sense.

You want to say Floyd is dirty?

Explain how he passed a test given before the IV.

You wanna say he bought off USADA?

Explain why bribed folks would let any evidence that seemed even slightly shady see the light of day.

You wanna say there is a coverup?

Explain how USADA and Floyd could do what RUSADA could not.

They are really simple questions to answer if you have an actual clue how if and how anyone cheated.

But, you don't have a clue.

You don't know shyt.

But, it makes you feel better to say Floyd cheated because that would help explain why Pac looked so bad in there against a superior fighter.

Your ignorance has been on display for literally hundreds of posts now.

You thought Pac and Floyd were WADA signatories.

You thought USADA could cover up things in labs WADA certifies and regulates.

You can't read a contract.

And what you do try to read you get horribly, horribly wrong.

There have been times during this thread that I thought you were using Google Translate, that you don't speak English and were using the program to try and have a conversation in a language you do not speak and that the program was clearly translating some things wrong.

That is how awful your comprehension has been for over 850 posts.

Travestyny is right.

You really need to log off if you aren't going to step up.

Still waiting for your essay...

[Shape up]

Your problem (and the problem of all the heartbroken Pac fans that are grasping at straws to explain such a one-sided fight) is that conspiracy theory can't hold up to common sense.

You want to say Floyd is dirty?

Explain how he passed a test given before the IV.

You wanna say he bought off USADA?

Explain why bribed folks would let any evidence that seemed even slightly shady see the light of day.

You wanna say there is a coverup?

Explain how USADA and Floyd could do what RUSADA could not.

They are really simple questions to answer if you have an actual clue how if and how anyone cheated.

But, you don't have a clue.

You don't know shyt.

But, it makes you feel better to say Floyd cheated because that would help explain why Pac looked so bad in there against a superior fighter.

Your ignorance has been on display for literally hundreds of posts now.

You thought Pac and Floyd were WADA signatories.

You thought USADA could cover up things in labs WADA certifies and regulates.

You can't read a contract.

And what you do try to read you get horribly, horribly wrong.

There have been times during this thread that I thought you were using Google Translate, that you don't speak English and were using the program to try and have a conversation in a language you do not speak and that the program was clearly translating some things wrong.

That is how awful your comprehension has been for over 850 posts.

Travestyny is right.

You really need to log off if you aren't going to step up.

Still waiting for your essay...

It was a partial urine sample, which means he pees in a cup, could be 3 drops, has an IV, waits 6 hours, pees in another cup, they mix the 2 cups together and there is his sample, not really hard to understand

[koolkc107]

It was a partial urine sample, which means he pees in a cup, could be 3 drops, has an IV, waits 6 hours, pees in another cup, they mix the 2 cups together and there is his sample, not really hard to understand

That is so far away from how the DCOs operate that what you wrote is actually funny.

And yeah, it is hard to understand...how you actually think this crap up THEN type it so it can be seen in public.

[Shape up]

So the contract says that rules from the WADA Code are to be the substantive rules for anti-doping.....


And you think that means that USADA made substantive changes to the code?????????


You are by far the dumbest person I've ever met.

so this is your answer, funny thing is that if you were up on murder charges, I came in with all this proof and your defence was " your the dumbest person I've ever met", that would get you hung, that's not an answer. They changed WADA code wording, they omitted articles from the WADA code, THAT IS SUBSTANTIVE CHANGE TO WADA CODE

[Shape up]

The attention of each Major Event Organization is drawn to the clauses which must in all circumstances be reproduced without substantive change in the Major Event Organization’s Anti-Doping Rules. Such clauses (specified in Article 23.2.2 of the Code) are highlighted in yellow in the text of the Model Rules.
Wow, that really seals the deal eh-----------------• Appendix 1 - Definitions-------------------------------------------------------------QUOTE=Shape up;18149217]From the contract----------- Rules 4 mayweather and pacquaio agree that articles 1 through 10 and 24.2 and the associated definitions, of the world anti doping code shall be the substantive anti doping rules for all purposes in relation to the competition and the period of pre and post competition testing provided for in this agreement----this sounds like substantive change to me, what do you think gimp

substantive change

[Shape up]

That is so far away from how the DCOs operate that what you wrote is actually funny.

And yeah, it is hard to understand...how you actually think this crap up THEN type it so it can be seen in public.

Go and do your homework nuffy

[koolkc107]

Go and do your homework nuffy

I think you should take your own advice.

Just look at all of the factual errors you made here:

...the reason this didn't involve wada is simple, it was a paid job, USADA was hired to do a limited drug testing job, by fluid IVayweather, none of the participants were signatories, why would wada get involved, they weren't paid anything, contracts stipulated a limited code compliance, which could be over ruled anyway, usada might have used wada approved labs, but wada doesn't own or run those labs, this would be viewed as a private job for those labs, reporting back to usada the results, it was all 1 big sham by fluid, but eh, knock yourselves out, contact wada, you won't get a reply

There are at least 7 factual errors in this statement.

Can you tell me what they are?