Shocking PED revelations by T. Hauser. GBP, Mayweather, Quillin, Morales.

[K-Nan]

I would agree that the biggest conversation point in this forum would be the part about Floyd testing positive, but to me it doesn't seem like the most important part of the article. People are blowing it up like it is even thought I don't think the author intended it to be. It makes up such a tiny fraction of the article. But the main reason it had to be mentioned is because it's apparently it's the reason why Pacquiao wanted a subpoena.

You're saying the floyd testing postive thing is articles biggest claim, but it does not even read like a claim to me. It's not something he's asserting as true. But nonetheless it needs to be mentioned. It would be amateurish of Hauser if he was trying to convince the reader that Floyd tested positive with his evidence being just a rumor, but trying to prove for a fact that Floyd tested positive because of that rumor is not his intention. It's just something some dumbass readers with no reading comprehension are taking away from the article.

I agree that its not the biggest claim in the article, but its getting the most attention.

[AP♠]

IF you dont like Boxing...WTF you on this site for?

Show me where i said i didn't like boxing??




Because its called criticising, you know the same **** you do with other boxers on here??duuuh.Boxing doesn't take the right 'procedures' it what you failed to observe little boy.

[Dr Rumack]

So Floyd was the cheater the entire time, and just accused Pac for no reason.

Wow.

It was Kevin Spacey the whole time.

[Check_hooks]

So Floyd was the cheater the entire time, and just accused Pac for no reason.

Wow.

I always thought it was possible

Now that its true and I really think about it, it was obvious from day 1

[warp1432]

USADA does in fact employ CIR testing, the Cotto-Mayweather fight used it and it says that much on the USADA website. Next thing is that, USADA does not have the authority in boxing to deny a fighter from fighting even after testing positive. It's out of their domain. VADA has stated the same thing.

I'm aware of the Press Release that they gave to Woods, and I'll believe they used it for Cotto-Mayweather. However the question is how often do they use it? Do they use it every time? The press release said "effectively" which doesn't automatically mean every time.

Also, I'm pretty sure USADA does have the authority to actual give suspensions and stop a fight from happening. It's up to the commission though to uphold or reverse USADA's decision though.

The main difference is that VADA doesn't seem to make a judgement before handing it over to the Commission, while USADA appears to.

Of course I could be wrong, but USADA has never actually said a fight shouldn't go on due to a positive test. They did give Morales the go ahead though.

If we are to discuss transparency, the irony is that VADA is less transparent than USADA. In the past, USADA has released the results of Floyd Mayweather's tests. Whereas, VADA has not released any full-scale results to the public. In fact, the Founder of VADA is on record saying that VADA only releases results if the fighter grants them permission to do so. Thereby, a positive or negative result can easily be concealed if the fighter chooses, in regards to VADA. And this information was supplied in a Boxing Scene interview/article with VADA's Founder.

I could not disagree with you more that VADA is less transparent than USADA is. When it was time for push come to shove, VADA alerted all parities on the contract involved and urged for those parties to tell the others not involved in the contract.

Although, I do agree with you on that they should release the results of the tests. That is true transparency.

For their to be true transparency, this has to be something implemented by the boxing commissions. Where they work together with testing agencies like USADA and/or VADA. Implementing the testing all across the board in boxing. Otherwise, what's stopping fighters like Donaire (who uses VADA) from hiding a positive result from the public?

I agree with you there, but if Donaire were to test positive VADA would have the authorization to notify commissions testing involved wouldn't it? They did that with the NSAC and Peterson. I'm sure if it were up to Peterson, they wouldn't have his permission.

[Light_Speed]

It was overturned, but you can't say USADA followed WADA protocol in the Morales case. They didn't. Would we have even gotten that excuse if the story hadn't leaked?

Also, "he Mexico health department said Friday that cases of contaminated beef in Mexico are fewer than one in a million."

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/sport...ent-beef_n.htm

Your article is from Oct 6, a week later WADA dropped their case against the football players and said they received evidence that there's a health problem in mexico concerning contaminated beef.

http://road.cc/content/news/46153-wa...danish-cyclist

So I don't understand what was overturned. Maybe I'm missing something.

[warp1432]

What do you say to those who suggest that all USADA's findings are in fact, publicly available?

Are Garcia Morales' findings publicly available on USADA's website?

[warp1432]

Your article is from Oct 6, a week later WADA dropped their case against the football players and said they received evidence that there's a health problem in mexico concerning contaminated beef.

http://road.cc/content/news/46153-wa...danish-cyclist

So I don't understand what was overturned. Maybe I'm missing something.

The case against the players were overturned. They were banned and then cleared to play. But yeah, it was dropped.

My bad on the confusion.

[K-Nan]

word. benefit of the doubt until real evidence arises. people forget that you are innocent until proven guilty and Hauser hasn't proven without a reasonable doubt that Mayweather was doping.

I do think Hauser is a credible source and wouldn't throw allegations like such out there without having a foundation to stand on but until or if he releases evidence then they are mere accusations and simply rumors.

you can't say everything else about the article wasn't on point though

Very, very on point. Overall I agreed with Hauser.

[New England]

word. benefit of the doubt until real evidence arises. people forget that you are innocent until proven guilty and Hauser hasn't proven without a reasonable doubt that Mayweather was doping.

I do think Hauser is a credible source and wouldn't throw allegations like such out there without having a foundation to stand on but until or if he releases evidence then they are mere accusations and simply rumors.

you can't say everything else about the article wasn't on point though

this is my feeling on the subject. as of right now we're waiting for anything to be substantiated.

if hauser puts out a story like this one you've got to figure it's because he can actually substantiate these things. again, we're speculating, but i'll try and give a journalist like hauser the benefit of the doubt initially.

if he can't go anywhere with any of this then he's probably not doing much more than going for publicity, or trying to slander somebody.