The "All Things Mayweather/Pacquiao" Express!!!!!!

This is easy. If Floyd has nothing to hide he makes the information available. It would be consistent with his stance of cleaning up the sport. In all honesty we have no indication that Floyd is not willing to do so at this point in time. However, should he not do so, then people are going to assume he is hiding something. That's the way it is.

 

I would be for it as far as allowing the boxing community to see what's in the contract as far as seeing if there is any manipulation from an Athlete to a Tester. After all, that's what Pac wanted and he got ripped for it.

USADA can look at Total testosterone levels. A person on TRT or not has to fall into a certain level or it will be a red flag.

As far as the ratios, I thought USADA's was lower?
4-1. And they still do CIR testing and look at fluctuations in the fighters own biological parameters.

So are you asking if he is on TRT?

 

People who keep bringing up Pacquiao here are a) doing my head in b) barking up the wrong tree.

Yes, I'm fully aware of the Pacquiao situation and have my own views on that. I don't need you to remind me every two seconds. This thread is about the letter from GBP to Montoya and the allegations contained within it. If you can't discuss that without acting like a kid leaping to defend their favourite pop star then I suggest this thread isn't for you.

The letter raises a couple of important issues regarding drugs I sport, mainly the ability to create a bespoke set of testing rules for a fight. There are also other factors not mentioned in the letter, such as the discrepancy between the amount charged by USADA and VADA for their services, despite working from the same laboratory.

I find this stuff interesting and am keen to find out more.

 

An A and B sample both have to be positive before any official announcement about whether a fighter violated is made. You know how much trouble the USADA would be in if they screwed up and released a false positive without even trying to be certain of no contamination or a misread? They would be coping a lawsuit so large that it would jeopardize everything they have, not because of the money lost from the lawsuit but because of the media attention and potential other competitors and organizations that would file similar suits or demand release from contractual obligations due to the lawsuit.

And even if Mayweather did fail, as he claimed. He wasn't dirty because test B which is taken at the same time as test A came back clean. Or is the USADA covering up violations for Mayweather?

As for Peterson, I have no idea what the hell you were trying to say there. Can you please restate? But if I read it right, the reason Peterson probably sat on a result was because he probably got a call from VADA saying he failed his A and they were going to run additional tests on his B sample. Besides what would Golden Boy gain from Peterson being on PEDS and covering that up? Nothing, Khan is worth more to them than Peterson due to his larger fan base and a second loss to Peterson completely wrecks his value for a big money Mayweather fight or a fight with Alexander or a second fight with Maidana. Hell a violation actually helps GBP as now they can wink and nudge saying the only reason Peterson won was because of PEDs.

In fact that also works for Ortiz. Dude is a ****** but do you think GBP wouldn't clean that idiot up and make him Oscar Jr. if he beat Mayweather? He would have a music album out, would be making workout videos, and have a TV movie made about him had he beaten Floyd with GBP collecting big time.

 

You're like the idiots in congress calling for Obama's ORIGINAL birth certificate, not a copy (which is what a ton of people have), cause "that ain't good enough". :rofl:roflatsch

 

Come one man, be reasonable.

A journo is accusing Floyd Mayweather of having a contract with USADA that would allow him exemption from failed drugs tests in the case of 'inadvertent use', and has already failed three drugs tests.

It sounds bat**** crazy, and so GBP have issued a cease and desist threatening legal action unless Montoya complies. Therefore you have to assume that were he to continue, GBP would seek legal action against him, meaning they'd have to disclose the contracts anyway.

If it's bull**** and gossip, as it most likely is, then it can quite easily quashed. But GBP have acknowledged it now by trying to shut Montoya up, so one of the parties is going to have to prove something.

Pretty interesting.

 

The irony here is hilarious....seeing so many Floyd fans crawling to his defence, dismissing the allegations and thinking that we should all believe that everything is above board without any effort to disprove the smoking gun. This behaviour is EXACTLY the same as the Pac fans dismissing the allegations against their man.

The evidence for the allegations against both men are weak at best, but the Floyd fans have NO right to get mad about potentially false allegations. This is truly comical.

For the record, I think Pac should take the test, and Floyd should reveal the contracts. Neither of those demands are unreasonable, and both would go a long way to clearing all this up. Until that happens, I'm going to have fun laughing at the hypocrisy of so many people commenting on this.

 

I am being reasonable. It was "rumors" and "innuendo" that was accusing Obama of actually being born in Kenya and not actually being a U.S. citizen. Some idiots came up with this "movement" to expose Obama. He produced his birth certificate, but it "wasn't good enough" cause it was a copy and short form (like a lot of people's). He had to them produce his long form, original BC just to shut everyone up, and people are STILL accusing him of not being a citizen.

Think logically, as others have brought up, do you not think there has been all types of money thrown @ USADA in the past to "look the other way" under certain circumstances? They've built their reputation on unflinching fairness and testing protocols. There's much more money in the Olympics than some boxer or his promotional company can produce to influence them. It just makes zero sense. But hey, people listen to bull****...

 

There's a difference. Nobody was calling for contracts to be released until some doof poster on ESB said it. atsch

 

As much as I despise the Pacquiao - Floyd stuff, I was thinking the exact same thing. It's brilliant.

This content is protected

*****:"Manny's on the juice homes. If Manny aint done no thang wrong, why don't he just da tesss. What kind of person sues a mother****er when he could just beat his ass in a ring instead!"

This content is protected

*******:"Floyd have vewy bad contract with USADA. He naughty man, vewy naughty man. If he not done nothing wrong then why he not just show the contract? Why he sue?"

 

My feelings exactly...Oh the irony!

 

That would be the 2008 Clinton campaign.

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3-MzKvVi1FI[/ame]

 

:rofl:rofl:rofl

 

Golden Boy is too quick to react. That's what make this whole thing even more suspicious.

It's like a preemptive attack to prevent Montoya from digging deeper into the allegations.

I wonder how they'll react now that everything is public.

 

You seem very naive:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2003/apr/24/athletics.duncanmackay

Carl Lewis has broken his silence on allegations that he was the beneficiary of a drugs cover-up, admitting he had tested positive for banned substances but claiming he was just one of "hundreds" of American athletes who were allowed to escape bans.

"There were hundreds of people getting off," he said. "Everyone was treated the same."

Lewis has now acknowledged that he failed three tests during the 1988 US Olympic trials, which under international rules at the time should have prevented him from competing in the Seoul games two months later.

The admission is a further embarrassment for the United States Olympic Committee, which had initially denied claims that 114 positive tests between 1988 and 2000 were covered up. It will add weight to calls by leading anti-doping officials and top athletes for an independent inquiry into the US's record on drug issues.