Does anyone put Canelo over Barrera, Morales & Marquez...?

lol Denial is not just a river in Africa.

 

Actually it isnt shaky it proves he's learning at last. Pay attention you might learn somethin'

 

It was a combination of all of them them
When Tony fought Cotto & I predicted Tony would beat him I was ridiculed they were calling Tony The Statue lol. Oscar stated prior to the fight that he wanted the winner as his final fight thinking it would be Cotto. Floyd too was interested BUT When Tony literally beat the **** out of Cotto making him quit on his knees they both backed off & wanted no part of him.
What a wonderful stroke of luck wasnt it when Richardsons blatant "Plaster blocks " lie led to Tony being railroaded. They got what they wanted he was suspended out of the way & they didnt have to fight him !!!
The only good thing that came out of this was when Oscar picked on little Pac instead of Tony. Pac totally destroyed Oscar humiliated him kicked him out of boxing. As we all know Floyd was terrified of Tony he was overjoyed he didnt have to fight him either. Looks very suspicious from here

 

But Canelo is a Ped's cheat, a proven one. He popped dirty for Clenbuterol causing the GGG fight to be cancelled. The NSAC were forced to "punish " him lol A six month suspension which just happened to coincide with the knee surgery Canelo needed. Its in the books Canelo popped dirty & got suspended. Therefore he is a PROVEN ped's cheat

 

thanks for clarifying

 

How do you expect to be taken seriously in regards to Tony being wronged and innocent of what he was accused of, when you are making accusations about Canelo being a PED cheat. Anotherwords, you're doing the same thing to Canelo that you're accusing Nazim of doing to Tony. Making up lies about a fighter, not considering the meat contamination problem as the reason for the positive test, which is backed by the VADA lab director who examined the positive test. He's the expert, he knows, not you or the NSAC.

It's ironic that you use the NSAC, the same NSAC that you say is corrupt as your proof that Canelo cheated. Because the NSAC punished him, because the NSAC deemed it a violation "on the books", to you that proves that Canelo is a cheater? But according to you, the NSAC can't be trusted or relied on, as you claim they are corrupt to their core. So why are you siding with the NSAC's then view of clenbuterol which is very different than other commisions like Californias that treated clenbuterol positive tests not as a PED violation but as meat contamination. Nevada did not consider the meat contamination possibly as other states did when they decided to punish Canelo. The NSAC wasn't "forced" to punsh Canelo, they punished him because it was incorrectly treated as a PED violation instead of a meat contamination issue because Nevada, unlike states that border Mexico, at that time did not have experience with fighters who train in Mexico and are affected by Mexico's meat contamination problem.

The reason for that is simple. Nevada is not a border state with Mexico so they were not as aware of the clenbuterol situation in Mexico as other states like California where clenbuterol positive tests were more common from Mexican fighters who live in Southern California and travel back and forth to Mexico who weren't punished because in California, unlike Nevada, it was treated as a meat contamination problem for Mexican fighters not a PED violation. But you back the NSAC and their archaic and uninformed view of clenbuterol, the same NSAC that you claim is corrupt to the core. CJ if you want to be taken seriously in your quest to exonerate Tony and all the false accusations made against him, you need to take a step back and realize that what you are accusing Canelo of is the same thing that you are defending Tony against - false accusations.

 

Read James Bourland's report on this subject. It pretty much confirms BCS8's post. Drugs tend to stick to melanin, thus the darker the hair the more drug retention.

 

I'm not denying the science of that, I'm simply saying that even with lighter hair, it doesn't totally negate the hair follicle test. You can still find evidence of drug abuse in the hair follicle of a light haired fighter. It might be harder to find the evidence in lighter hair than in darker hair, but evidence of drug abuse over time can still be found in a light hair follicle.

 

You've butchered the famous quote. It goes "Denial ain't just a river in Egypt."

 

Are you paying attention??.......
Canelo Alvarez..... Popped dirty for Clenbuterol causn GGG fight to be cancelled. Was proven guilty & the NSAC suspended him for 6 months.
The called him a ped's cheat not me The fact that Canelo took that time to have needed knee surgery was purely co incidental lol Then the NSAC changed the amount of Clenbuterol needed to prove positive because the level was the same as having eaten contaminated meat. So Ginger can eat all he wants LOL
BUT
The amount of sulphur & calcium found in Margarito's pad was equivilent to
the minute amount found in human sweat NOT plaster but did the NSAC change that???? No way Jose Tony wasnt the Vegas cash cow loike Canelo

 

Proven guilty by whom? The NSAC? lmao. The same NSAC who you claim is corrupt to its core? How does the NASC all of a sudden become the arbitor of guilt, the same commision who you claim is massively corrupt and isn't to be trusted. Because they treated it as a PED violation and didn't consider the meat contamination issue? Since then, they have realized their error and updated their rules to treat trace amounts of clenbuterol as simple meat contamination. The NSAC was wrong to punish Canelo, was wrong to treat simple meat contamination as a PED violation. They were wrong to suspend Canelo, they were wrong to cancel the GGG rematch. You of all people should realize how wrong the NSAC and Bob Bennett were for how they persecuted Canelo unfairly for eating meat. And you of all people trying to get justice for Tony are acting like Nazim Richardson in accusing Canelo of being a cheater for doing nothing wrong.

And they called Tony a brick cheat for using loaded gloves. Does that make them right?

It was incidental. Take off your tinfoil hat CJ. After being suspended for 6 months, since he couldn't fight Canelo used that time to get a surgery on his knee to remove a cyst. He couldn't fight so he might as well use that time to get that removed. You're trying to connect dots that simply do not exist. You need to come down to earth my man.

They realized they wrongly punished Canelo so they corrected their mistake so it couldn't happen again. Now they consider the meat contamination possibily before suspending. Not so Canelo can eat all he wants in the future, but so Mexican fighters don't get wrongly accused of being drug cheats for eating Meat like Canelo did.

You're making a false equivalency. You can't expect the NSAC to take such an action regarding allowing hand wraps to be hard and examine the amount of sulphur and calcium found in hand wraps after the fact. The rules regarding hand wraps and what is allowed and what isn't is very different than the rules regarding drug testing. WADA has made it clear that there's a widely known contaminated meat problem in Mexico. NSAC used WADA's stance to change the way it views clenbuterol. There is no such over-arching World organization that oversees the examination of hand wraps that would cause a commission to update its rules for handwraps Rules regarding hand wraps and the methods allowed vary from state to state. But Tony was caught with gypsum (calcium sulfate) which, when combined with moisture, forms plaster of Paris.

But it's important to point out the timeline of when Tony was accused of cheating and where that happened at. It wasn't in Nevada CJ, it was in California when he fought Mosley. Nazim spotted the plaster of Paris not when he fought Cotto but when he fought Mosley, which was in California. When Nazim brought this to the attention, it was the California official, not the NSAC, that forced Margarito to re-wrap before he fought Mosley. Margarito was then hammered by Mosley. When Cotto caught wind of this, he became convinced that the reason why he was beat up so badly by Tony was because Tony must have used the same illegal wraps that he was caught with in California. So you really should be upset not at the NSAC, who allowed Tony to fight vs Cotto with his wraps, as far as I know, Cotto's team never saw anything wrong with Tony's wraps that night, it wasn't until Tony fought Mosley in California that Nazim called on the CSAC to make Tony re-wrap after Nazim brought Tony's wraps to their attention.

If one side objects to the wraps, they take it up with the inspector from the commision overseeing the wraps, and the inspector makes the decision if the figher has to re-wrap. The CSAC inspector sided with Nazim, so that more than anything made it "official" that he was using illegal wraps, at least in California, at least vs Mosley. Not necesarily vs Cotto though which was in nevada as Cotto's team didn't object at the time. When Sanchez claimed Canelo was illegally stacking his hand wraps vs GGG, the Nevada inspector informed Sanchez that stacking is allowed in Nevada, but perhaps the rules regarding hand wraps were stricter in California which was why Sanchez objected to it since he was used to the hand wrap rules of California.

 

Wrong. GGG only found out when Jacobs didn't go through with the second weigh in.

Jacobs would be at a disadvantage against Jacobs? Your wheels are coming off, kid.

Could rehydrate as much as the other guy. Yes.

You are a little dim, aren't you? In a unification, the non IBF challenger can simply elect to not fight for the IBF title, and ignore rehydration rules, whereas the IBF champion, if he wants to keep his belt, needs to adhere to the rehydration clause. He is at a disadvantage. By eliminating that clause for unifications, the playing field is levelled.

You are misinterpreting what Jacobs is saying.

Why would the IBF changetheir rule for a fighter that isn't even their champion? Who doesn't pay them anything? You aren't thinking this through.

You're not mistaken, you are delusional.

 

You're not getting it my man. As far as the IBF is concerned, GGG was put at a disadvantage by Jacobs bypassing the same day weigh in, which is why Jacobs wasn't allowed to compete for the title as a result of that. But as far as the other commisions were concerned where there was no required rehydration limit, GGG wasn't at a disadvantage.

You claimed that the rehydration limits imposed by the IBF put their Champs at a disadvantage. As far as the IBF was concerned, their Champ would only be at a disadvantage if the challenger who bypassed the rehydration limit would still be allowed to compete for the title. Which is why the IBF deciding to allow Jacobs to bypass the rehydration limit and still compete for the title would then put their Champ (GGG) at a disadvantage that wasn't the case before because Jacobs couldn't win the title after bypassing the same day weigh-in, but as a result of the rule change, now Jacobs could, which would then be unfair to GGG. Comprende?

It's one thing for a challenger to ballon up in weight and fight a Champ with a functional weight advantage. It's another thing entirely for that fighter to do that and still be eligible to win the title when that Title is subject to a rehydration limit.

All they had to do to eliminate that loophole was to implement a severe financial penalty for an IBF challenger who agrees to challenge for the IBF belt as part of the contract who then proceeds to renege on that at the last minute as Jacobs did and decide not to participate in it. Jacobs should have been mandated by the IBF to show up for the same day weigh-in, or face major penalties for not doing what he agreed to. He should have been forced to at least show up and try to make weight, if he couldn't make weight then he would be unable to fight for the title Jacobs should have been fined heavily for not participating in the weigh-in as he agreed to as part of the requirement to compete for the IBF title which he agreed to.

Yes he would still be able to compete for the other titles, even by skipping the IBF same day weigh-in, but as far as the IBF is concerned there should have been major consequences for Jacobs deciding to not participating in the same day weigh-in that he agreed as part of the fight contract. If he wasn't interested in doing the same day weigh-in as required to compete for the IBF TItle, then he needed to make that clear when the fight was signed, that he wasn't interested in competing for the IBF from the beginning, not at the last second on the day of the fight that he agreed to. So, I understand the loophole that Jacobs exploited, but there are ways that the loophole could have been repaired without the IBF deciding to eliminate its long-standing rule to accommodate Jacobs and his weight issues. At the end of the day, no fighter should be allowed to compete for or win an IBF Title without adhering to their standard rule of making the same day weigh-in. Jacobs violated their rules, then got the rule changed so he could still compete for the title without following the IBF's own rules. He should have been fined, barred from ever competing for the IBF ever again rather then getting the IBF to change their rule, simply because Jacobs has issues rehydrating too much. The rule was there for a reason, and it differentiated the IBF from the other commissions. It was a standard accepeted rule by everyone. No one ever had a problem with it existing except for Jacobs. He complained and convinced the IBF to change their rule, rather than changing its rule, the IBF should have punishe Jacobs, fined him for making a mockery of its rules for Title Fights and suspended him from competing for the IBF again until he showed remorse and decided to play by the rules that everyone has had to play by when competing for an IBF TItle.

What's there to misinterpret? Straight from the horse's mouth Jacobs said "We made history 2 years ago when we changed the ruling of the IBF in how they, uh, take care of fighters with the 2nd day weigh-in in unification bout".

You're saying Jacobs didn't really say what he said, or that he didn't really didn't mean what he said. Either way you're reaching. Jacobs said it, I'm not misinterpreting anything. He said he changed the ruling of the IBF and was proud of it.

Bingo, that's why I have such a problem with the IBF changing their rule. The IBF rule existed for decades. Jacobs problems with following the rules is Jacobs problem, not the IBF. THe IBF shouldn't have changed their rules because Jacobs couldn't follow their rules. Rules exist for a reason.

 

Jesus Christ you are thick. I'm not talking to a brick wall anymore.

 

I've emailled the IBF directly concerning this question. I doubt I'll get a response but you never know.