Foreman (Holyfield fight) Vs. Tyson (Ruddock fights)

Furthermore world class athletes or "sports folk" have already been proven to be, again, as a social group, one of the most rule-breakingly hyper-competitive groups of people on the planet. The extremely easy to break rules that most organisations don't actually care about. Lets take the Olympics for example. We know that the performance enhancing drugs taken by world class athletes are so powerful (not can be, ARE, so powerful) that they can take you from national level to world level and can improve performances by a large percentage. Sprinters have gone from running 10.2 to a 9.8. We know that the most naturally talented athletes of all time take them. We know that in the 2012 Olympic Finals, every single athlete except for Usain Bolt failed drug tests in their careers, some before, some after this. We know that every single one of Usain Bolt's training partners failed drug tests in their careers. We know that Usain Bolt is one of the largest outliers in all sports history, as there is a Tiger Woods sized gap between him and the rest of his competition with his PB being a 9.58 and the second bests being a 9.69.
Given that an 0.11s difference represents one of the largest outliers in human history, this means that if Usain Bolt WASN'T on PED's, when running his 9.58, that if he were to take them, he would run anywhere from a 9.38 to a 9.08. The chances Usain Bolt being such a massive outlier, that he's over half a second faster than the second fastest person, is so unlikely that it's basically zero. Therefore, we know that there is an extremely high chance that Usain Bolt is on PED's.

[/QUOTE]
Alright I much appreciate the debate!
Since you said so many things, I will keep it brief to answer everything substantive.

1) Still PEDs are illegal, & you are arguing that effectively it is not seriously enforced.
First even IF you were correct through all sports, that is literally wrong: still illegal you mean easy to cheast NOT that it is not cheating.

2) There are sports even with much history of cheating where people are banned for years, like track & field.
You also cannot cherry-pick examples of corruption like Pride FC & extrapolate to even a majority-let alone (now you say nearly) everyone.
It is as if I gave you endless examples of men over 6', it is REALLY common~> then argued most men, or even worse, most human beings, were over 6', when even the former is a distinct minority.

3) Many sports turned a blind eye, but it is also unreasonable to claim nobody cares or wants everyone to cheat!
There are people with integrity, & the success of sports can suffer wit the perception & reality of PEDs.
It was a massive scandal in baseball, it hurt them-like the home run race saved them after the '94 lockout-& players did get substantially smaller then.
Doubtless it crept back up at different times & degrees, but why do you think the extreme performances stopped?
Enforcement made some difference. Many DO care about their reputations. Bonds, Big Mac, Clemens Sosa became national disgraces & may never get in the Hall of Fame.

4) Individual examples of coaches that say they only want PED users neither shows how often it is said, followed, or provides specifics.
A couple B-Ball players-& before they did a semblance of cracking down in the early 2000s-using PEDs is like showing me guys who are 6'1" all day (or more) & believing everyone is!

5) Tyson is yet another example of the fallacy of using one person to cover all. I did not debate his morals-another accidental Straw Man-but I have no idea if he was guilty of R***-& neither do you.

The vast majority of woman making accusations are telling the truth. But she had plausibility issues with past accusations, no evidence was presented besides testimony, & let's say as an analogy that only 5% of the time criminal claims are false. Besides that celebrities are particularly prone to false accusations for obvious reasons, would you be fine if, say, every black man in America who was charged with crimes was immediately ruled guilty? But they are @5% of the population; you are extrapolating far too much certainty from anecdotes!
Also Tyson apologized for the ear biting & even made a commercial about it with Holyfield LOL!
And I gave so many reasons a guy may NOT use PEDs; you cannot only entertain one about one boxer & be rhetorically effective.
I showed how Tyson was so strong when a poor 13 year old, & he had a very old school trainer Cus D'amato who he worshipped & trained like a Monk & Cus would be unlikely to countenance it OR think it will help as old school guys believed, & no evidence ever emerged & no way to know Tyson would hide this & not other drug use etc...

6) You first said 100% of boxers, I see now you meant the best ones/World Class, OK.

7) I know all about non-muscle expanding PEDs & stacks.
I made one point that the size of these guys is overwhelmingly not beyond what could be achieved naturally, UNLIKE many pro body builders...And unlike Ngunna, 6'4" 7 272 lbs. when quite LEAN is beyond natural capacity without dinosaur bones lol!

8) Yes I know inductive reasoning too.
Still makes no sense to assume from your set up/premises that 99% use(d).
But you never proved the 90% premise even, or near that.
And: that PEDs are powerful does not show that everyone uses them so effectively or gets a huge benefit. People respond in different amounts & ways, some protocols can make guys worse, stiff, not gain much...

That a team who loses was on drugs (or most of them) means who they beat must be, WHAAAA?
Even if they benefitted significantly, there is sooo much "noise" there: numerous things including training, recruiting, population, morale, efficiency, nutrition...might be the difference.
Maybe the PED team only got haf way decent because of drugs, maybe they did not even use it effectively, there are numerous reasons a team wins or loses, you cannot reduce it to a single factor absent analyses & make those assumptions.

9) Also that some pro athletes or on average they are more violent does NOT show that anywhere near most are.
Some racial groups for understandable reasons have much higher crime statistics, MEN & especially young men are much more reckless & violent: it is similarly unfair & irrational to assume almost all IN ANY of these groups are.

10) Opinions vary on how sincere testers are-& sports vary on how corrupt. Endurance bicycling is amongst the worst.
Examples & anecdotes without good statistical evidence are meaningless.
Science must be Conservative to be accurate.

11) There is a saying to distinguish real science from pseudo science & quackery such as the world is flat, ___ is a miracle cancer cure, global warming is not man made, Fill in your massive almost impossible to hide conspiracy theory...Everyone is secretly out to get you/a robot/A.I./alien, a bizarre highly restrictive diet is good for you & will cure diseases, the world is only 6000 years old...

"Extraodinary claims require extraodinary evidence".
Saying almost everyone is cheating & using PEDs & not even addressing all the other motivations some will stay clean is a *tremendously untenable*, extreme claim.
It is massively different from claiming, say, 25% of the best athletes use regularly, or 1/2 have at least dabbled...
I better put the rest in another thread, to fit, To be continued!

 

Hotep Kempa, here is my part two!
Curious about your background & region?
trivial: Armstrong by weight was 160 lbs. after cancer had him lose 20 lbs. of muscle & it helped his endurance to not have to oxygenate & carry that much upper body mass, but average height & 160 lbs. is a MW, no stick, he had very low body fat, but much lower body muscle...

12) The Sprinting example was a GOOD ONE for your case!
But you meant the 2012 100 meter final only.
Yep that is a sport & event that is one of the bigger problems.
But if the Olympics did not really care or wanted druggies in there, they would find a way to have most of them NOT get caught or punished.

.11 is not as massive as a gap as you think, it is big, but guys blew away world records (& kept them for far longer) by much larger percentages. 5-10% in some cases, such as Bob Beamon's 29' 2 1/2" long jump.
Bolt is a genetic outlier, & to be able to do it that tall...
But where on earth do you get the 1/2 second lower IF he used PEDs?
SPEED is something that is highly impressive, but like say height does not vary much.
Even WITH including pituitary giants it like speed has liited variation compared to many other realms.
Bolt on the best possible conditions was only about 50% faster than an AVERAGE, untrained young man!

Edit: even an average man without PEDs can get roughly twice as strong as an average man. Endurance like long distance running improved even more, our species adapted for that cardio, upright, big lungs & butt.
Muscular endurance? Can be increased by dozens or HUNDREDS of times. Look up or consider how long a average plank or "wall sit" can be done for. Then look at the records, well over 9 & 11 HOURS respectively.
So drugs help, but the margins are so small that you think .11 is massive, WITH PEDs, + increasingly better tracks & shoes & training & larger populations...The actual gain in time over many decades is SMALL.

Oh Bolt MAY WELL be a drug cheat.
But we do not know how much it would give him, NOR the users: Jesse Owens had a 10.2 nearly a century ago BEFORE steroids were even invented, on MUCH worse equipment. And had to dig a hole iinstead of having starting blocks.

13) Opioids, HGH & contaminants: Fury may have been a B.S. artist, but you should know that it is very possible to test + due to contaminated samples. And even some health food products have inaccurate labels.
The organizations & athletes & experts all agree: & sometimes people screw up. Other times they are LIARS.

10% taking a certain class of drugs is a terrible way to show about 100% are taking any PEDs!
Just like you did not establish how common HGH is in the NBA, nor if it is many WOULD take it if legal, rather than so prevalent now.

14) Many DO care about using drugs even here re: something like "Evan Fields" scandal.
But the American Muhammed Ali used PEDs?

15) Hard to catch them/some things were not tested for/some start very young...

These are more instances of you taking the very real facts & trying to bridge a MASSIVE gap in logic.
Conditions enabling behavior does not remotely show either various countervailing pressures, or even if those are weaker, shows nothing about how COMMON behavior is.
Again, as if I showed, say endless woman taller stronger heavier than men...& claimed most all were.
When in reality men are much more likely to lead in all of these categories.

It is a misunderstanding of statistical tendencies & individual events, + what constitutes adequate evidence & proof.

It IS as extreme as if I claimed virtually nobody ever not caught ever used PEDs!
Or because some folks had false positives, most or all did!

MANY use PEDs.
We do not even have a good idea what percentage in what sports.

But even if, say, it is 75% in some, that is STILL a huge # of clean athletes.
And in other cases it may be 25% max. who ever even dabbled.

We do not know.
Scientists & Buddhists agree that "don't know mind" if often the most intelligent & defensible position, enabling learning & personal growth, until the evidence is overwhelming.

Also, not being emotionally attached to unresolved opinions & a single explanation facilitates becoming close to the Truth later: if you remain not emotionally handicapped by being married to one position when the facts are not established-you may well learn what the Truth is!

 

I gotta go with you, ikrasevic. I don't think Tyson could stand up to that Foreman power (and, of, course, that surprising Foreman speed.. the way he could lean/torque into his 1-2 so quick). Really that simple. I don't know why people discount his power like that, like Tyson could eat it up all night long. I don't think so. And he damn sure wasn't a boxer like Holyfield was. FLOATING AROUND, HARDLY.. he hopped around pretty good. I think Foreman was looking for a Tyson fight then.

You remind me of a boxing buddy friend of mine from back in '90-'91- He swore that Foreman would beat Tyson at that time. It sounded just as crazy to me then as it does to all of these people in this thread today (but I kept it to myself.. I didn't want to hurt his feelings).

But now I see he was right. I'll be damned. All these years later.. Just remember, ikrasevic.. all these people today, in this thread, saying Foreman wouldn't stand a chance with Tyson, it's laughable to even suggest it, were saying the same thing about Holyfield before Holyfield-Tyson I.