Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The "tainted Mexican beef" excuse is plausible

Collapse
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by ShoulderRoll View Post
    So does clen help stamina or does it increase size? Which is it?

    Because Canelo critics in this very thread keep making comparisons of his physique before the first and second GGG fights, claiming that the loss in size when he was clean proves he was on clenbuterol before.

    Also, his critics were asking for him to take the hair test. That's a fact. He did take it and they don't like the results so now the narrative is that the hair test isn't reliable after all.
    I said it helps stamina, I said nothing about increasing size. Don't use what others have said. Do I find his physique questionable? Sure, but that's another discussion. As to clen for stamina, it's definitely a benefit. The owner of my work has been a horse racer/breeder for years. When the story broke about Canelo using clen and we talked boxing like we usually do, he immediately knew what it was and how it was used, especially regarding horses (he also spoke about guys he knew who were using it or some form of it). Any difference in overall physiology is negligible because we have inherently the same systems in place. He told me how they used to give clen to horses little by little and noticed how much greater their stamina became. They became leaner, more aggressive etc. I'm a little fuzzy on all the details but he very much knew how much it could benefit those metabolic systems.

    And as for the hair test, it wasn't hard to find out whether it was reliable or not before he took it. Just because they didn't do their due diligence doesn't take away what most research has shown when talking about clen and hair tests. With everything that's been said about it being unreliable it should be equally unreliable in proving his innocence and for those that defend him.
    Last edited by AKAcronym; 01-29-2019, 11:58 PM.

    Comment


    • Default
      Quote:
      Originally Posted by Vadrigar. View Post

      I just came here to post the same video, LOL! So the cyclist was caught with 0.050 of clenbuterol and was suspended because 0.050 is estimated 3 times the absolute limit for clenbuterol in the european union, while Clenelo is somewhere between 0.600 and 0.800 of clenbuterol. Now try to twist that!

      Condor the cyclist was banned for 2 years and he had a much lower level than canelo

      Comment


      • Francisco Vargas had a higher level of clenbuterol than Canelo yet didn't suffer any suspension and his fight with Salido was allowed to go on.

        Comment


        • Very plausible indeed!

          WADA has established an increased allowable threshold for clenbuterol and the WBC will begin acknowledging it.

          https://www.espn.com/boxing/story/_/...ug-clenbuterol

          Comment


          • Originally posted by ShoulderRoll View Post
            Francisco Vargas had a higher level of clenbuterol than Canelo yet didn't suffer any suspension and his fight with Salido was allowed to go on.
            every person on this board knows I've said this a 1000 times. I always asked why nobody challenged it. Why wouldn't you challenge it. As I always so, no consistency in this sport.

            look even USADA has been clearing guys with CLEN when properly investigated.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by I'm Widdit! View Post
              every person on this board knows I've said this a 1000 times. I always asked why nobody challenged it. Why wouldn't you challenge it. As I always so, no consistency in this sport.

              look even USADA has been clearing guys with CLEN when properly investigated.

              Ultimately it is a legitimate excuse. That's my main point of contention.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by ShoulderRoll View Post
                Ultimately it is a legitimate excuse. That's my main point of contention.
                It is a plausible excuse for sure. Urine testing can't confirm whether a result was due to PED use or meat contamination but below certain concentrations meat contamination is absolutely a possibility. The only question really is whether you opt to to take a zero tolerance full liability appraoch to punitive action or elect to protect the innocent from the possibilty of being wrongly accused at the risk of letting some cheats go unpunished.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Shape up View Post
                  Default
                  Quote:
                  Originally Posted by Vadrigar. View Post

                  I just came here to post the same video, LOL! So the cyclist was caught with 0.050 of clenbuterol and was suspended because 0.050 is estimated 3 times the absolute limit for clenbuterol in the european union, while Clenelo is somewhere between 0.600 and 0.800 of clenbuterol. Now try to twist that!

                  Condor the cyclist was banned for 2 years and he had a much lower level than canelo
                  This has been said more than a hundred times! Pay attention! And you’re lying about Canelo’s results.

                  Contador got caught like this a couple of days before finishing the race.

                  Tuesday: Negative
                  Wednesday: Negative
                  Thursday: Positive
                  Friday: Negative
                  Saturday Finished: Negative

                  Contador said the night of Wednesday he consumed meat..

                  So, you’re comparing .05 nanograms 2 days before he finished his race to Canelo 78 days away with .6ng?

                  What’s even funnier is that Canelo’s second test, 3 days later, his result was .06ng! That’s a .01 difference from Contador except that it was 75 days away...

                  Learn how to logically approach half life decay and the PED use close to events.

                  Don’t feel bad, you tried.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Koba-Grozny View Post
                    It is a plausible excuse for sure. Urine testing can't confirm whether a result was due to PED use or meat contamination but below certain concentrations meat contamination is absolutely a possibility. The only question really is whether you opt to to take a zero tolerance full liability appraoch to punitive action or elect to protect the innocent from the possibilty of being wrongly accused at the risk of letting some cheats go unpunished.
                    There should be zero tolerance. Canelo was rightfully punished for it and served his penance.

                    I just believe him when he says it was accidental and he wasn't trying to seek some unfair advantage. And I don't think he deserves to be lumped in with the likes of Big Baby Miller for whom there really is no excuse.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by I'm Widdit! View Post
                      This has been said more than a hundred times! Pay attention! And you’re lying about Canelo’s results.

                      Contador got caught like this a couple of days before finishing the race.

                      Tuesday: Negative
                      Wednesday: Negative
                      Thursday: Positive
                      Friday: Negative
                      Saturday Finished: Negative

                      Contador said the night of Wednesday he consumed meat..

                      So, you’re comparing .05 nanograms 2 days before he finished his race to Canelo 78 days away with .6ng?

                      What’s even funnier is that Canelo’s second test, 3 days later, his result was .06ng! That’s a .01 difference from Contador except that it was 75 days away...

                      Learn how to logically approach half life decay and the PED use close to events.

                      Don’t feel bad, you tried.
                      Doesn’t matter when he was caught, it matters he WAS CAUGHT, canelo will always be known as a PED cheat, deal with it

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X
                      TOP