So who was in the wrong here?

The point I'm trying to make, I get all of what you're saying. I really do, I guess the point I'm trying to get across to you all. Is that USADA and WADA are private drug testing agencies their rules and procedures mean zero to the rules of boxing in the state of Nevada.The NSAC does not have a rule that limits saline or vitamins to 50ml or any amount per however amount of time. Therefore, Mayweather committed no illegal act. It looks bad because he was hydrating with more than their guidelines, at the end if the day means nothing. At the end of the day NSAC is disappointed with the USADA for not following procedure and overstepping their authority.

 

I'm just upset it was done in the first place. They knew the rule about IVs but decided to not follow it.

I also don't think Bennett would reference that it was not done in a medical setting if they cared nothing for the rules as described by USADA/WADA. And it was 10 times what was allowed. It was not a small overage.

 

Floyd cheated pure and simple.

 

Don't be upset, it's how they do it. This is only big because of when the TUE was filed, by whom it was filed, and because it's Mayweather. When Mikey Garcia fought Salido he was hydrated by IV in his hotel room. When ODLH fought Pacquiao he was IV'D in his dressing room. Don't get fooled into thinking this is something new.

 

What were the amounts used though? The IV is not the problem. Its the quantity (over 50ml).
Also, the behavior of usada is very odd don't you think? Why would they act like this?

And wrong is wrong.

 

Besides USADA submitting the TUE when they did and submitting it at all since only the NSAC has the authority, what else was done wrong?

 

Why didn't they report it when they found out on that day? Bennett mentioned that it was not brought to our attention at that time.

Why did they issue an exemption tue at all let alone a retro one when only NC can do it? It doesn't make sense.

Wouldn't you report it right away and then maybe NC could issue a tue if warranted .. though it wouldn't because it didn't happen in hosp. and maybe for other reasons.

What are the amounts in the IVs in the other examples you mentioned? How much did OLDH take?

 

Those are all questions for the USADA. And the amount ODLH is irrelevant. NSAC doesn't have a rule limiting amount

 

wada and usada do, and nsac is aware of that

it is revelant because less than 50ml breaks no rules even using an IV

10 times that not in a hosp for good reason is banned.

and bennett references the rule

 

Now we know the supposed details we can discuss it... now why the hell would he need THAT much? What on earth would he be so dehydrated for?

 

USADA and WADA rules are irrelevant to NSAC decision making, hence NSAC being upset with USADA for submitting the TUE, and when it did. The 50ml is irrelevant because it is not against any rule for the NSAC, the governing body.

 

It was relevant because I said that I did not like that they broke this rule. I've no problem with doing a IV as long as the amount does not break the rule as defined by WADA/USADA. So you said that this happens often and then give two examples. But you only stated they used IVs. That by itself doesn't break the rule and that would not upset me. So I ask, since you said others do it, how much over 50 ml did they do? Nothing to do with NSAC, in this specific instance, just my dislike of breaking the Wada/USADA rule.

 

" Bennett is quoted as saying in the report. "I've made it clear to [USADA CEO] Travis Tygart that this should not happen again. We have the sole authority to grant any and all TUEs in the state of Nevada. USADA is a drug-testing agency. USADA should not be granting waivers and exemptions. Not in this state. We are less than pleased that USADA acted the way it did."

 

Why should you care if the NSAC did not? Because again how ever much amount was against none of their rules.

 

Because I do - there are rules to prevent cheating. That's just being sensible. Again - how much did they take? Do you even know? Were they subject to WADA/USADA rules?