Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Massachusetts commission corruption.

Collapse
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #11
    Discrimination against carnival folk it is.

    Comment


    • #12
      Originally posted by boliodogs View Post
      It seems ridiculous to me that a substance in a nasal spray that anyone can buy over the counter should be banned in the first place. If it's so potent and effective it should only be available with a doctor's prescription.I think sometimes those in power get carried away busting everybody for every thing in the name of cleaning up the sport. A perfectly good and logical fight between two of the world's top middleweights is dead now. They should have let Saunders fight and just test him hard between now and the fight. Now Andrade will almost certainly fight someone not as good as Saunders. It would be nice if Andrade fought Jermall but that is far too logical to ever happen in today's boxing world.
      There are weight lifting supplements that contain "legal" substances that convert into genuine steroids when metabolized. The supp industry games the law by slightly altering the chemical composition every time one gets banned.

      What BJS tested for is a variant on ephedrine that was created because ephedrine was banned in many places, including the US. These are classified as amphetamines.

      Comment


      • #13
        Originally posted by Derranged View Post
        Discrimination against carnival folk it is.
        I'm not going to lol.... Not gonna do it...





        Comment


        • #14
          The B sample testing negative and the fight still being cancelled really doesn't make sense. So I'm going to guess it's fake news, that the B sample, if it was even tested, did not come back negative.

          Comment


          • #15
            Who said the B sample came back negative? The reported sample that came back negative was from a month after the positive test.

            If the B sample came back negative, then I think the fight would still be on.

            Comment


            • #16
              Originally posted by KTFOKING View Post
              Who said the B sample came back negative? The reported sample that came back negative was from a month after the positive test.

              If the B sample came back negative, then I think the fight would still be on.
              That's what I thought I read initially. It's somehow morphed into a B sample.

              Comment


              • #17
                Originally posted by b00g13man View Post
                That's what I thought I read initially. It's somehow morphed into a B sample.
                Definitely some false information being thrown out. Never once has it been reported that the B sample came back negative.

                Comment


                • #18
                  Originally posted by Robbie Barrett View Post
                  If BJS B sample came back clear he's in the clear under VADA rules. Refusing to give him a license can only be corruption. Hearn got to them or wanting to give the hometown fighter an easy title. Disgusting
                  I told you Robbie that Saunders wouldn't be licensed or permitted to fight in Massachusetts or anywhere else in the U.S. In addition, I said that inevitably he would be stripped of his WBO title too but you doubted me.

                  Now he is appealing it. There will be a WBO title fight on Oct 22 but Saunders won't be one of the fighters to challenge for it but Andrade will.

                  You see you are from England and I am from the United States. Therefore, I know the rules, laws, protocols and regulations a lot better than you do in this country.

                  Comment


                  • #19
                    Originally posted by Robbie Barrett View Post
                    If BJS B sample came back clear he's in the clear under VADA rules. Refusing to give him a license can only be corruption. Hearn got to them or wanting to give the hometown fighter an easy title. Disgusting
                    It doesn't matter Robbie. He admitted to taking it the first time. So whether the B sample came back positive or negative. It's still is irrelevant.

                    Comment


                    • #20
                      Originally posted by bigdunny1 View Post
                      The problem is Saunders team admitted to taking the substance immediately. Their defense was yeah we took it but it was out of competition then in the last hour the second sample came back so hard to argue a procedure technicality when you already told the world yes we were using the illegal substance.
                      ^^^^^ This

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X
                      TOP