-
-
the way I see it, there are 2 types of Canelo fans. The Mexican ones who support him regardless of what happens due to nationalistic pride. The second are Floyd fans who want Floyd to be the only one to have a win over canelo because in their minds, it will enhance Floyd's legacy.Comment
-
I didn't say that's what I thought , but in their minds, that's their logic. They hate hearing that Floyd waited until pac slowed down, or until cotto was beaten with plaster, or how he tricked Marquez with the weight. To them, beating an undefeated canelo who hasn't "lost" since (at least as per the judges cards) was a crowning achievement, especially if he were to go on and make himself the top p4p guy.Comment
-
Thurman knows he can't beat Spence.Spence vs Crawford is the fightComment
-
Amazing comment, that totally exposes the Canelo defenders and biased media/sanctioning bodies defending him as well
Hello,
This is a long email but I think you would find some of this interesting.
I've been a member of an enormous Mexican soccer forum for over a decade, which has quite a large user base. There is a boxing sub-forum and I've seen personally how racial identification can make people so blind to even admitting there's some oddities regarding Canelo's failed tests.
Researching the various articles written about the subject, I've found most information was copied and pasted across the media so no one really offered anything different. Through personal research these are important points I have found which many people refuse to acknowledge.
1) Canelo was tested unexpectedly 11 weeks from the fight. Most camps are 6-8 weeks and this is typically when the fighters are tested. Abel Sanchez allegedly lobbied for more stringent testing, and this is why Canelo was tested so far back.
2) Canelo waited 5 weeks to have his hair tested. There is a lot of confusion regarding the headlines about this and i wanted to make the following clear, because 98% of articles are blindly repeating the same thing erroneously without researching or having a basic knowledge of chemistry. The hair test was NOT performed to determine the origin of the Clen. An endogenous chemical like clen taken from meat or from a syringe or from a strippers ******** will look exactly the same in the body - like Clen. It's not going to change and analyzing one's hair doesn't give a hint of the origin of the clen. It's like looking at someone's fecal matter and trying to determine if the protein they consumed was from beef purchased at McDonalds or Burger King. That's simple not how it works.
I researched steroid testing (there's entire forums with olympic and professional athletes giving each other advice on how to pass tests), and the only thing I could find which would give the media/Golden Boy this idea of hair testing was one person postulating on an independent website "High levels of Clen in hair could potentially indicate long term use." What it doesn't mention is that Clen is not needed long term, a 4 week cycle is enough, and furthermore long term use of Clen is actually counter productive, as the body builds a tolerance (much like any endogenous chemical) and becomes ineffective over longer periods of time.
What NO main stream media article includes is the fact that many factors come into play with hair testing to determine consistent use: the length of one's hair, the time which has passed since the substance was taken (5 weeks anyone?), the dose of the chemical (I believe clen is taken in micro-gram doses), etc.
3) He literally tested positive twice. If the mainstream media was correct that "clen stays in the hair for 6 weeks' he should have tested positive with his hair test regardless, just in lower levels "not consistent with long term use." Again, this is poor research from the media. No one seems to question why the test returned negative when he tested positive twice before. By their own logic regarding the hair test, they've contradicted themselves and failed to see it.
4) Here is where a bit of research and speculation come into play. Earlier this year the WBC personally released a list of Boxers not enrolled in VADA testing. Boxingscene posted this list. Canelo's name was not on the list, making it seems as though he was indeed enrolled in the testing. It is a requirement for anyone competing for a WBC belt to be enrolled in VADA testing. It was announced during the hearing that VADA personally stated Canelo is not currently enrolled, nor has he been enrolled in VADA's volunatry testing program. He was tested this time because it's in the fight contract, not because he's voluntarily enrolled in the program. I find it very strange that the WBC president has been blindly supportive of Canelo being clean despite Canleo not being enrolled into a program he requires his champions to be enrolled in. It also makes me wonder why he refused to fight for the WBC title last year. I would like to research when the WBC made these mandates with regards to being tested, if it was before or after Canelo fought Cotto. To me this is a clear indication that there is something su****ious at play.
4) It seems as though (i've read this though haven't been able to find official rules), that now that Canelo is suspended, he's out of jurisdiction to be tested. He's also not enrolled in any voluntary testing. So the next potential time he has to be tested is in the window before his september fight, five months to eat as much meat as he wants. This is also highly su****ious from a man that insists he will do anything to prove he's a clean fighter.
I think blind nationalism is terrible. I can't imagine how someone can support Canelo despite all these red flags just because he's Mexican. I am very disappointed in the mainstream media for repeating erroneous storylines like "His hair test proves he didn't take clen." I think if anything these things should be brought to the attention of someone important in the media. I have absolutely no faith, as a Mexican, that Canelo is a clean fighter. Every single indication points otherwise.
Damian Casanova
Bread’s Response: Everyone who has an objective bone in their body should read this comment. This is one of the most well researched, objective and thoughtful comments I have ever received. I was told this off the record by insiders in boxing, but this was the first fan to write in with such a level of intelligence.
I won’t even comment on it because I don’t want to take away from anything that Damian is trying to say. Just read....Comment
-
so, Canelo IS cheating..... and Pac IS - and always has been - clean?
o, k, then..... lol
did bone-density help Pac throw 1200+ punches at Clottey, did it?
oh..... while looking as fresh as a daisy
I think I will pass on that thorough technical investigation
people see what they want to see, and are therefore notoriously unreliable
it that assessment was balanced, maybe..... but Pac is clearly getting another free-pass simply because he is popular, and because people just don't want to believe it..... which is exactly what the "unbiased" guys are accusing Canelo of receiving, a free pass
I will pass on that assessmentComment
-
I found some info that is a bit different on a legal site called Lexology. They give info on what is accepted as proof in court for hair tests for recreational drugs. Here are the juicy parts: "''A limitation of hair testing is that any drug used within three to four weeks immediately prior to sample collection cannot be detected. This is due to the fact that any drug used in this time interval will still be in the part of the hair shaft which is within the follicle, and it will not yet have emerged from the scalp. As the collection of the sample entails cutting the hair close to the scalp and not plucking the whole hair, the most recently used drugs are therefore invisible.'' (...)
"The time covered by the hair testing may also be an issue. The laboratory analyses only the three centimetres closest to the scalp because this avoids dealing with hair which has undergone more deterioration from exposure to sunlight, pool chlorine, shampoo or colouring agents. This means that not only are the most recent three to four weeks invisible, but so too are drugs used prior to the growing time of the hair tested. This approach approximately samples from a month prior to hair collection back as far as four months prior to hair collection depending on the length of the hair sample. " (...)
"A further consideration with respect to hair testing is the sensitivity of the test. The test will not detect single use of a drug. ******* and methamphetamine are probably the most readily incorporated into hair and they are likely to return a positive test if used more than three times during the growing period, while most other drugs must be used at least a dozen times within the time for detection".Comment
Tweet
Comment