Did Evander "Evan Fields" Holyfield juice up?

I wonder if people who believe Holy didn't use steroids believe Bonds did? There seems to be as much, if not more, evidence against Holyfield as there is against Bonds.

 

Actually, the "evidence" against Bonds is every bit as flimsy as against Holyfield. It consists SOLELY of unsubstantiated accusations, rumor, and inuendo - just as with Holyfield.

It's gotten so bad in this coutnry where people simply assume someone is guilty of something just because they are accused. That is wrong.

 

Whether or not Holyfield took steroids and I am leaning more towards the idea that he did; boxers need to be randomly tested. A lot of boxers in the past year or so have failed post fight drug tests, this hurts boxing. IF there were more random testing, than we could catch some of these cheaters earlier.

 

Hell yeah he did. Get a grip. Holyfield is a pro juicer and never gets caught. I dont know what system he uses but thats for real. You can tell how he fights. One night he looks gassed out like for no reason and on another night he looks like superman. You can tell by his build and how he looks in the ring that he juiced. I dont think he juiced like Toney. Toney didnt juice while training. He juiced the damn night or two before the fight like an idiot. Holyfield juices in camp. **** yeah he juices. I dont care how much you work out you dont go from being a natural cruiser to heavy and add all that muscle without performance enhancing drugs..Look at the damn guy.

 

I know that you're not an athlete and all, but are you familiar at all with steroids or what they do; or what the telltale signs of them are? Besides what Sports Illustrated tells you?

 

Also I dont need a boxing gun to see the obvious. The evan fields **** is truth. Ordering roids. Get a clue. SHANE GOT CAUGHT JUICING TOO. SO NO HARDCORE SHANE FANS SEEM TO BRING THAT UP. He was part of the BALCO scandal like all athletes.

 

All of that is SUBJECTIVE. Show me some OBJECTIVE, verifiable evidence like a POSITIVE TEST, and I'll believe Holyfield's guilty. Until then, he's entitled to the presumption of innocence.

 

Nevada tests for steroids by a **** test..HOW MANY PEOPLE HERE HAS BEATEN A **** TEST?:rofl BOXING IS JUST RECENTLY STEPPING ITS GAME UP SINCE THE BALCO SCANDAL AND A FEW BOXERS NAMES CAME UP? :yep

 

I took drugs(weed) and still beat a drug test countless times. The **** is a art. :rofl:rofl:rofl:rofl ****ing naive ass people. Like you cant beat a **** test. Get the **** out of here.:rofl:rofl:rofl:rofl:rofl

 

Maybe so. But until you have a positive test, you don't have hard evidence and concrete proof against Holyfield or anyone else. Besides, Holyfield's been tested in many jurisdictions besides Nevada - including NY, which I believe is one of the more rigorous states. And still, there's no positive test.

 

No, it's worse to me, in terms of the integrity of the game.

Drinking and using recreational drugs does not affect the level playing field of professional sports.

Taking steroids does.

 

Isn't this ******ED post dead?

THE NEXT GUY WHO MAKES A POST ON THIS THREAD WILL CERTIFY THAT HE IS THE BIGGEST UNDISPUTED "PETER PUFFER" ON THIS FORUM!

 

I like how some people here say "I need actual evidence otherwise, they aren't guilty". "I dont think they are juicing".

Ok so that means that all the evidence found is fabricated? OK, so you are stating that it is not possible to mask a drug test? There have been pro bodybuilders (Lee Priest & Greg Valentino) who have come out and admitted to using them and stated that it is used by every high rated professional that competes.

Also, think about Baseball. Many guys werent being tested enough, so guess what? They were not being caught like they are now with random testing. So does that mean that before they weren't using steroids, even those that Jose Canseco named out?

 

Look, ultimately a positive test is important if any action was to be taken following any of Holyfield's fights. No governing body is going to suspend a fighter without a positive test, unless it became absolutely clear that Evander bought steroids. Even then he'd had a pretty good defense by claiming he never tested positive.

However, this idea that only a positive test would indicate guilt is silly. It's an established fact that there have been ways to beat steroid testing. So, it's totally possible that a guy could still be doing steroids and never test positive.
If there was enough circumstantial evidence that pointed to Holyfield using steroids, it wouldn't be unreasonable to conclude that he did.
It's like saying that no murder case could ever secure a conviction unless the suspect's DNA is found at the scene. Well, of course finding a suspect's DNA at the scene of a crime is a huge, huge bonus for the prosecution, but it doesn't mean he couldn't be convicted on other evidence.

To cover one's ears and close one's eyes and scream "No, no, no I will not even consider that Holyfield use steroids until there is a postitive test" is rather silly.

I certainly give Holyfield the benefit of the doubt since I believe someone should be proven guilty, and not labelled guilty until all the evidence has been thoroughly investigated.
If nothing more ever happens in this matter, Evander should not be branded as a steroid user.
But, let's not kid ourselves. Almost everyone will carry suspicions.