Here's Where All The Floyd Cheat Theories Fail

[ADP02]

FAIL

Ahhh, no. WRONG!!!!!

There are 4 situations which allow you to apply for a retroactive TUE, not 2.

Emergency is just one of them.

Exceptional circumstances is just one of them.

"Applicable rules" and "Fairness, determined by the ADO" are the other two.

You only need to satisfy one of them to be able to apply for a retroactive TUE.

From what I gather, Floyd fit at least 3 and possibly all 4.

But, he only needed to satisfy 1.

Which is why debates about whether he was severely dehydrated or whether he was in an emergency status might be fun, but they are also MOOT.

They are irrelevant as long as Floyd satisfied one of the other 2 situations.

Satisfy just one of the 4 and you can apply for a retroactive TUE.

So it doesn't matter how dehydrated Floyd was.

It doesn't matter how much of an emergency it was as long as not doing something would adversely affect the athlete.

I covered this in post #1654 and Travestyny expanded on it in post #1812.


Thanks for playing, butthurts.

Nope. koolkc107 is WRONG!!!



1) Must meet the criteria to even get a TUE for an IV ... Floyd was able to drink fluids - Alternative and was adequately hydrated that no IV would be required!!!!





2) Unless you explain yourself, NO, those criteria for RETRO TUE didn't fit Floyd's circumstances!


criteria 3 and 4, I already explained, it's not.


criteria 2. What is so "exceptional" of someone being "just dehydrated (Ellerbe's response) " after a weigh-in

when the MAJORITY of those who are in combat sports, dehydrate/drain themselves a lot more than Floyd.



and Floyd agrees with me!!!

I'm not one particular fighter that has drained himself 20 or 30 pounds.

I'm a fighter that walks around at 150, 148...I'm extremely happy with everything...

......," stated undefeated pound-for-pound king Floyd Mayweather,

who invited FightHype.com into his home less than 24 hours before he steps into the ring to face Manny Pacquiao

[ADP02]

Dann ADP02 GETTING CLOWED.

I CANT STOP LAUGHING.
Dead.

Damn.

Let me slap him up now....


"If the DCO agrees with the Athlete that there are no collection vessels suitable
for use, the DCO should contact the Anti-Doping Organization (ADO)
immediately to determine the next steps. The sample collection session should
not be terminated, as a sample collection kit bottle could be used as a collection
vessel."



"If the doping control equipment and administration forms do not meet the specifications as
listed above, the DCO shall report it to the ADO who shall arrange for the relevant
equipment and forms to be provided."


Lol.


Didnt this idiot ADP02 claim the DCO ran out of cups??????

Lmao.



This is exactly what I'm talking about m. These are links/articles that ADP02 HAS PROVIDED. He processes partial information, just enough to support his conspiracy theory, then ignores everything else.


Then goes and spams the forum for 2 years and never takes any responsibility. Smh.



ADP02 is a Clown.

The only clown is DoNothing!!!

There have been reported cases where there were no more available containers or that the remaining containers were in bad shape according to either the athlete or the DCO.


If the DCO agrees with the athlete, the DCO can determine to stop the sample collection or try to get other ones brought over ... which is not always the case and not always possible!!! KABOOOM!!!


From a case (2014) that Travestyny knows about:
The Panel notes Article D.4.4 in Annex D of the IST, which states as follows:

“…If the Athlete is not satisfied with any of the equipment available for selection, this shall be recorded by the DCO.
If the DCO does not agree with the Athlete that all of the equipment available for the selection is unsatisfactory, the DCO shall instruct the Athlete to proceed with the Sample Collection Session.

If the DCO agrees with the Athlete that all of the equipment available for the selection is unsatisfactory, the DCO shall terminate the collection of the Athlete’s urine Sample and this shall be recorded by the DCO”.

The above is clear.





Then the panel notes that the DCO didn't stop the urine sample collection session BUT what is important is that the panel is even saying this!!! Meaning, the DCO could have stopped it!!!

It is also clear that the urine sample collection session was never terminated by the DCO, but continued while awaiting delivery of the additional urine collection equipment.

It was in this context that the Athlete expressly and unilaterally refused to submit to sample collection, terminated the doping control session and ultimately left the DCS without providing a urine sample.

and of course, the DCO can STOP the Sample Collection Session!!!

OR until the DCO determines that there are exceptional circumstances which mean that for logistical reasons it is impossible to continue with the Sample Collection Session. Such exceptional circumstances shall be documented accordingly by the DCO.

Finally, in the London games, this was actually specified. So to say, the DCO was already provided the procedure to follow and there was a pre-determined number of samples to collect.

G.9 The DCO should continue to collect additional Samples until the requirement for Suitable Specific
Gravity for Analysis is met, or until the DCSM/DCO determines that there are exceptional
circumstances which mean that for logistical reasons it is impossible to continue with the Sample
Collection Session. Such exceptional circumstances shall be documented accordingly by the DCO.

G.10 In accordance with Procedure G.9, given the logistical nature of the Games, it would typically be impossible to collect more than two (2) Samples from Athletes during one Doping Control session.


As such, the IOC will typically require Athletes to provide one (1) additional Sample in the event the Athlete’s Sample does not meet the requirements for Suitable Specific Gravity for Analysis.


G.13 If it is determined that none of the Athlete’s Samples meets the requirement for Suitable Specific
Gravity for Analysis and the DCSM/DCO determines that for logistical reasons it is impossible to continue with the Sample Collection Session, the DCSM/DCO may end the Sample Collection
Session. In such circumstances, if appropriate, the IOC may investigate a possible anti-doping rule
violation.

G.14 The DCSM/DCO shall send to the WADA-accredited laboratory for analysis all Samples which were collected, irrespective of whether or not they meet the requirement for Suitable Specific Gravity for
Analysis.

.

Some of you Floyd fanatics get hit with your own dirt!!! CLOWNs!!!!



.

[ADP02]

typical kool... still avoiding why he called me a monkey boy, yet he wants me to answer his question that had nothing to do with me LOL.

Koolie is Koolie ... he is set in his ways.


For him, if someone didn't bring up this scandal during a specific time frame (before Hauser did), then that's it. They can no longer bring this scandal up!

[ADP02]

No. It doesn't have to be an emergency. You've been here for how long and you still haven't figured that out? You're done.

You ignored what I actually wrote and you just picked what you wanted to pick. Just like you and DoNothing did with the what Tygart stated but you guys keep on bringing up the WHIZ .... typical!


I stated in several posts that the other criteria does not fit Floyd's case.


There was nothing "exceptional" in Floyd case .... Almost every other athlete is way more dehydrated/drained that Floyd. So there is NOTHING EXCEPTIONAL about Floyd's case which was "just dehydration" as per Ellerbe's statement!!!


The other 2 points, we went over already and its not about Floyd .....

[travestyny]

You ignored what I actually wrote and you just picked what you wanted to pick. Just like you and DoNothing did with the what Tygart stated but you guys keep on bringing up the WHIZ .... typical!


I stated in several posts that the other criteria does not fit Floyd's case.


There was nothing "exceptional" in Floyd case .... Almost every other athlete is way more dehydrated/drained that Floyd. So there is NOTHING EXCEPTIONAL about Floyd's case which was "just dehydration" as per Ellerbe's statement!!!


The other 2 points, we went over already and its not about Floyd .....

Who decides whether there was something "exceptional" in Floyd's case for the TUE? Would that be the independent TUEC members that don't have any athlete name on the TUE application? Or would that be ADP02? Tell us more. Your fantasy gets more and more outrageous every post.

[koolkc107]

Nope. koolkc107 is WRONG!!!

Typical C-3PO, making statements without having a clue WTF he is talking about...

1) Must meet the criteria to even get a TUE for an IV ... Floyd was able to drink fluids - Alternative and was adequately hydrated that no IV would be required!!!!

The TUEC decided what criteria was met, not you. And they did it using an anonymous case file.



2) Unless you explain yourself, NO, those criteria for RETRO TUE didn't fit Floyd's circumstances!

Actually, I have explained myself to everyone well enough for them to see you are getting thrashed here...


criteria 3 and 4, I already explained, it's not.

Again, the TUEC make that call, not you. You can cry yourself to sleep all you want, but it won't change the fact that doctors who didn't even know it was Floyd's case they were reviewing found cause to grant him the TUE.


criteria 2. What is so "exceptional" of someone being "just dehydrated (Ellerbe's response) " after a weigh-in

when the MAJORITY of those who are in combat sports, dehydrate/drain themselves a lot more than Floyd.

And of course, here you are confusing the 4 criteria for granting a retroactive TUE with the criteria for granting a regular TUE. Is it any surprise that your confused arse hasn't a clue WTF it is talking about?

Get help, fool!

FAIL

All of these questions have been answered previously in this thread.

However, you have failed to answer this one.

DID YOU OR DID YOU NOT HAVE ANYTHING TO SAY IN MAY 2015 WHEN KEVIN IOLE REPORTED THE IVs AND THE RETROACTIVE TUE?

[koolkc107]

Koolie is Koolie ... he is set in his ways.


For him, if someone didn't bring up this scandal during a specific time frame (before Hauser did), then that's it. They can no longer bring this scandal up!

FAIL

C-3PO missing the point again, as usual.

It isn't about not bringing the scandal up in a "specific time frame" you moron.

It's about the fact that the truth was published and no one had a problem with it for 4 months.

Then, some hack with a known bias against Floyd publishes a smear campaign that gets all of the important facts wrong and all of a sudden Manny's legion of mouth-breathing parrots think something went on.

Their hero knew about it for four months and was OK with it; so were they.

So my question to each of you butthurt is valid.

And the fact that you won't answer it, won't even try to address it is proof of what any sane person can see: you have no credibility.

I am glad that you know it is me that did that to you.

Here's your sign...

DID YOU OR DID YOU NOT HAVE ANYTHING TO SAY IN MAY 2015 WHEN KEVIN IOLE REPORTED THE IVs AND THE RETROACTIVE TUE?

[ADP02]

Who decides whether there was something "exceptional" in Floyd's case for the TUE? Would that be the independent TUEC members that don't have any athlete name on the TUE application? Or would that be ADP02? Tell us more. Your fantasy gets more and more outrageous every post.

So what you are saying is:

Travestyny understands that there was NOTHING exceptional about Floyd being dehydrated since a MAJORITY of athletes in combat sports are MORE DEHYDRATED/DRAINED than Floyd and even Floyd admits to that right after getting the BANNED IV!!!

When Travestyny cannot respond, as is the case here, he DEFLECTs!



Floyd and Ellerbe admit that Floyd makes weight EASILY.



Exceptional?
Ellerbe said it was "Just dehydration"

Floyd:

I'm not one particular fighter that has drained himself 20 or 30 pounds. I'm a fighter that walks around at 150, 148...I'm extremely happy with everything

- Floyd Mayweather

.

[ADP02]

FAIL

All of these questions have been answered previously in this thread.

However, you have failed to answer this one.

DID YOU OR DID YOU NOT HAVE ANYTHING TO SAY IN MAY 2015 WHEN KEVIN IOLE REPORTED THE IVs AND THE RETROACTIVE TUE?

AGAIN, that is NOT an answer. That is just a DEFLECTION!!!!


What I mean AGAIN, is that YOU, yes YOU, cannot think of why the TUEC would even consider Floyd's simple dehydration of nothingness to be even considered.

I on the other hand can!


and NO, criteria 3 & 4 is invalid for Floyd. You just admitted that you do not understand 3 & 4!



and how many times do you need to DEFLECT? It doesn't matter that a person commented or not prior to Hauser's report! Even though people did question the IV being received way before Hauser's report but who cares?

You are the ONLY one asking this silly question.





.

[ADP02]

FAIL

C-3PO missing the point again, as usual.

It isn't about not bringing the scandal up in a "specific time frame" you moron.

It's about the fact that the truth was published and no one had a problem with it for 4 months.

Then, some hack with a known bias against Floyd publishes a smear campaign that gets all of the important facts wrong and all of a sudden Manny's legion of mouth-breathing parrots think something went on.

Their hero knew about it for four months and was OK with it; so were they.

So my question to each of you butthurt is valid.

And the fact that you won't answer it, won't even try to address it is proof of what any sane person can see: you have no credibility.

I am glad that you know it is me that did that to you.

Here's your sign...

DID YOU OR DID YOU NOT HAVE ANYTHING TO SAY IN MAY 2015 WHEN KEVIN IOLE REPORTED THE IVs AND THE RETROACTIVE TUE?

I did respond like 5 times to this DEFLECTION!!!


AGAIN, it does NOT matter. Hauser gave us much more information that Kevin Iole.


and again, YES, I brought up about why was USADA allowing Floyd to get IVs. Others did too. There were threads on this subject both here and elsewhere.

but I said all this already ... DEFLECTOR!!!!!





.