Blood vs. urine? USADA clears up fuss over Mayweather-Pacquiao drug testing feud

spaceman · 12-26-2009, 06:58 AM

Some official statements for you to read:

[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

concerning urin and blood tests:

Travis Tygart, the CEO of USADA, told Kevin Iole of Yahoo! Sports that both urine and blood tests are needed to determine if a fighter is clean. "There is no urine-based tested for human-growth hormone," Tygart said. "It doesn’t show up in the urine. It’s only a blood-based test. That’s true of a number of prohibited substances, particularly those that would enhance and aid a boxer.”

the schedule:

Tygert also added the schedule Arum is proposing won't work, because a fighter would have the advantage of knowing when he'd be tested. “That kind of window is totally unacceptable,” Tygart said. “It would provide a huge loophole for a cheater to step through and get away with cheating.”
Dr. Gary Wadler, an internal medicine physician and chairman of the World Anti-Doping Agency’s Prohibited List and Methods sub-committee, supported Tygar's position. “The fundamental principle is that the time and place of testing is in the domain of the governing body, not of the athlete,” Wadler told Yahoo! Sports. “It would lose all its validity if the athlete could pick and choose when he is going to be tested and for what he’s going to be tested for and how he’s going to be tested. They’re sophisticated enough now that if someone wanted to, you could play the calendar to your advantage.“

the influence of taking blood:

Victor Conte, the founder of Bay-Area Laboratory Cooperative (BALCO), said the tests would have no physical effect on either fighter. “That amount would be less than one-half of one percent (of the total blood in the body),” Conte told Yahoo! Sports. “It’s not going to have any effect, the drawing of blood. Could it have some mental effect? That’s the only down side of that. It’s certainly not going to have any physical effect, giving blood before a fight.”

josak · 12-26-2009, 07:00 AM

"But if the Nevada Commission was doing it, then we would agree to do as many tests as they wanted to do -- urine and blood -- up to a certain date to be agreed upon," said Arum.

"The Nevada Commission will do it appropriately. That's terrific," said Arum. "In other words, we wouldn't limit it to a certain number of tests because we know that the Nevada Commission won't harass the fighters. "

"And then, the commission would then take it from there, and hold random urinalysis and random blood tests."

[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

spaceman · 12-26-2009, 07:06 AM

"...because we know that the Nevada Commission won't harass the fighters. "

Yeah, they know this Nevada Comission lets cheaters go through. They seem to have made good experiences in the past. Suddenly blood tests right before the fight don't matter, it's the bad USADA comission which does proper tests.

josak · 12-26-2009, 07:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spaceman

it's the bad USADA comission which does proper tests.

How would you know? Because Leonard Ellerbe said so?

spaceman · 12-26-2009, 07:19 AM

How do you know USADA is harassing fighters, because Bob Arum said so? He already disqualified himself by saying that urin tests are sufficient to detect all types of forbidden substances. Obviously it isn't as you can read in the first quote.

k1llu · 12-26-2009, 07:33 AM

Nobody with a sane mind can see what pac and his camp are doing and not come to conclusion that pac has something to hide. His reputation already destroyed what a fucking loser.

Da Chin Chekka · 12-26-2009, 07:37 AM

If ur not guilty what's the problem?

Cormega · 12-26-2009, 07:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Da Chin Chekka

If ur not guilty what's the problem?

We still haven't heard anything close to a reasonable excuse.

boxbox · 12-26-2009, 07:44 AM

There's no reasonable excuse for a closed minded individual. Pac already stated his reasons.

Twirdman · 12-26-2009, 07:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Da Chin Chekka

If ur not guilty what's the problem?

This line of reasoning is ridiculous. It has always been the case that the accuser has to prove the other persons guild not the accused has to prove his innocence. I mean does Mayweather have any indication that Pac is using PEDs, if not then why bother using more stringent testing. There isn't even really any type of evidence besides he has boxed well. So should we look with suspicion at every boxer who as ever fought well? Obviously not you use more stringent test if you have some credible reason to believe that he is cheating current testing practices.

Cormega · 12-26-2009, 07:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by boxbox

There's no reasonable excuse for a closed minded individual. Pac already stated his reasons.

If Manny came out and said that dog shit was delicious and nutritious you'd eat it for breakfast, lunch & fucking dinner every god damn day, so you might want to shut the fuck up.

k1llu · 12-26-2009, 08:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cormega

If Manny came out and said that dog shit was delicious and nutritious you'd eat it for breakfast, lunch & fucking dinner every god damn day, so you might want to shut the fuck up.

Da Chin Chekka · 12-26-2009, 08:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Twirdman

This line of reasoning is ridiculous. It has always been the case that the accuser has to prove the other persons guild not the accused has to prove his innocence. I mean does Mayweather have any indication that Pac is using PEDs, if not then why bother using more stringent testing. There isn't even really any type of evidence besides he has boxed well. So should we look with suspicion at every boxer who as ever fought well? Obviously not you use more stringent test if you have some credible reason to believe that he is cheating current testing practices.

Ok let me put it this way , With $40,000,000 at stake WHAT'S THE FUCKIN PROBLEM?

now is that better. is that a little less ridiculous?

Gneus7 · 12-26-2009, 08:22 AM

Still no proof Pac has ever cheated.
Mayweather & Pacquiao are boxers. Nowhere in the rules of boxing does it say U need to have Olympic style drug tests. Stick to the rules you've used your entire careers.

PanchoVilla · 12-26-2009, 08:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Da Chin Chekka

Ok let me put it this way , With $40,000,000 at stake WHAT'S THE FUCKIN PROBLEM?

now is that better. is that a little less ridiculous?

Pacquiao is already RICH! U think this is about money? ..well let me put it this way.. If Pacquiao is an EASY FIGHT, WHY ALL THE BULLSHIT DEMANDS?!?... EASY... FLOYD is QUACK QUACK

peace.

12-26-2009, 06:58 AM	#1
spaceman Journeyman ESB Jr Member Join Date: May 2005 Location: Germany Posts: 177 vCash: 1000	Blood vs. urine? USADA clears up fuss over Mayweather-Pacquiao drug testing feud Some official statements for you to read: [Only registered and activated users can see links. ] concerning urin and blood tests: Travis Tygart, the CEO of USADA, told Kevin Iole of Yahoo! Sports that both urine and blood tests are needed to determine if a fighter is clean. "There is no urine-based tested for human-growth hormone," Tygart said. "It doesn’t show up in the urine. It’s only a blood-based test. That’s true of a number of prohibited substances, particularly those that would enhance and aid a boxer.” the schedule: Tygert also added the schedule Arum is proposing won't work, because a fighter would have the advantage of knowing when he'd be tested. “That kind of window is totally unacceptable,” Tygart said. “It would provide a huge loophole for a cheater to step through and get away with cheating.” Dr. Gary Wadler, an internal medicine physician and chairman of the World Anti-Doping Agency’s Prohibited List and Methods sub-committee, supported Tygar's position. “The fundamental principle is that the time and place of testing is in the domain of the governing body, not of the athlete,” Wadler told Yahoo! Sports. “It would lose all its validity if the athlete could pick and choose when he is going to be tested and for what he’s going to be tested for and how he’s going to be tested. They’re sophisticated enough now that if someone wanted to, you could play the calendar to your advantage.“ the influence of taking blood: Victor Conte, the founder of Bay-Area Laboratory Cooperative (BALCO), said the tests would have no physical effect on either fighter. “That amount would be less than one-half of one percent (of the total blood in the body),” Conte told Yahoo! Sports. “It’s not going to have any effect, the drawing of blood. Could it have some mental effect? That’s the only down side of that. It’s certainly not going to have any physical effect, giving blood before a fight.”
Top

12-26-2009, 07:00 AM	#2
josak Belt holder ESB Addict Join Date: Jan 2007 Posts: 1,562 vCash: 1000	Re: Blood vs. urine? USADA clears up fuss over Mayweather-Pacquiao drug testing feud "But if the Nevada Commission was doing it, then we would agree to do as many tests as they wanted to do -- urine and blood -- up to a certain date to be agreed upon," said Arum. "The Nevada Commission will do it appropriately. That's terrific," said Arum. "In other words, we wouldn't limit it to a certain number of tests because we know that the Nevada Commission won't harass the fighters. " "And then, the commission would then take it from there, and hold random urinalysis and random blood tests." [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]
Top

12-26-2009, 07:06 AM	#3
spaceman Journeyman ESB Jr Member Join Date: May 2005 Location: Germany Posts: 177 vCash: 1000	Re: Blood vs. urine? USADA clears up fuss over Mayweather-Pacquiao drug testing feud "...because we know that the Nevada Commission won't harass the fighters. " Yeah, they know this Nevada Comission lets cheaters go through. They seem to have made good experiences in the past. Suddenly blood tests right before the fight don't matter, it's the bad USADA comission which does proper tests.
Top

12-26-2009, 07:19 AM	#5
spaceman Journeyman ESB Jr Member Join Date: May 2005 Location: Germany Posts: 177 vCash: 1000	Re: Blood vs. urine? USADA clears up fuss over Mayweather-Pacquiao drug testing feud How do you know USADA is harassing fighters, because Bob Arum said so? He already disqualified himself by saying that urin tests are sufficient to detect all types of forbidden substances. Obviously it isn't as you can read in the first quote.
Top

12-26-2009, 07:33 AM	#6
k1llu Journeyman Join Date: Jul 2008 Posts: 88 vCash: 1000	Re: Blood vs. urine? USADA clears up fuss over Mayweather-Pacquiao drug testing feud Nobody with a sane mind can see what pac and his camp are doing and not come to conclusion that pac has something to hide. His reputation already destroyed what a fucking loser.
Top

12-26-2009, 07:37 AM	#7
Da Chin Chekka Chi-Town!!! ESB Addict Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: InYaMoufDeeply Posts: 1,744 vCash: 1000	Re: Blood vs. urine? USADA clears up fuss over Mayweather-Pacquiao drug testing feud If ur not guilty what's the problem?
Top

12-26-2009, 07:44 AM	#9
boxbox Champion East Side Guru Join Date: Feb 2006 Posts: 5,300 vCash: 1000	Re: Blood vs. urine? USADA clears up fuss over Mayweather-Pacquiao drug testing feud There's no reasonable excuse for a closed minded individual. Pac already stated his reasons.
Top

12-26-2009, 08:22 AM	#14
Gneus7 Belt holder ESB Addict Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 2,915 vCash: 528	Re: Blood vs. urine? USADA clears up fuss over Mayweather-Pacquiao drug testing feud Still no proof Pac has ever cheated. Mayweather & Pacquiao are boxers. Nowhere in the rules of boxing does it say U need to have Olympic style drug tests. Stick to the rules you've used your entire careers.
Top