Is there a rehydration clause for the Margarito fight?

Lol at these arguments. People flat out REFUSE to hear anything negative about Pacman. So since there's no "evidence" shown to us of a rehydration clause it's not true? Do you have the contracts for those fights? If so please show them to me, I want to see it. Do we have pictures of Josie Harris' injuries? But I bet each one of you say Floyd is guilty as can be. My God you all are so bias it's insane. You can't even hid it anymore.

 

Yes, you ****ing idiot, that's EXACTLY how it worksatsch

 

Did you read the rest of the post? Have you seen pictures of Josie Harris? Do you believe Floyd is guilty. My guess is those answers go NO, NO, YES.

 

This how is how your post looks:

speculation
speculation
WOW speculation
further speculation

 

Well, no evidence, plus common sense and logic suggests otherwise.

It's kind of in the same bracket as Santa Claus, the tooth fairy and Floyd's balls. Everything points to there being no substance.

 

So you think, Cotto weighed less than 149 lbs?

 

Of course the Floyd fanboy comes to chime against Pac. Look, if there was ANY sorrt of proof, where is it?

And some are asking very legit questions, so how about answering some of these rather then suckin on the mayweather teet!

1. Why would the most powerful guy iin boxing, DLH, agree to some hydration clause, and yet never mention it?

2. Why has NO BOXER, as a mattr of fact, admitted that it exsisted? Today, boxer come up with all kinds of excuses, yet, here we have a legit one, and it never gets mentioned?

The rest of your post is just fanboy crying....Josie Harris pics? Really? Are you that hard up for them? atsch

And you call others bias? Hate to tell you this, you aren't any different. Just as fanatical....

 

Merits no response.

 

Josie Harris? Testimony from 2 of the children. Police took pictures, made reports. The reports are available online. The pictures are for the police. Contrary to popular belief, you are NOT meant to see everything on the internet.

Do I know that Floyd has 4-5 previous accusations of this sort of **** in the past? Yes. Do I know that battered women can recant their story under coercion or not wanting to get the man in trouble? Yes. My sister is a victim of domestic violence. I've seen it first ****ing hand.

These rehydration clauses are not like Floyd's domestic violence charges though, moron. These are fiction. The **** he's being accused of is real. If he's guilty or not is for Nevada to decide.

 

I will say this, IF there is a "Rehydration" clause in effect...
Please belive that if Margarito was to come in over, The fight would be OFF.
(No way, Roach let's Manny in the ring)

 

This was something I've been questioning since day one, but everyone seems to ignore them. That's why I just posted if Margarito's weight is with held or if he comes at his lightest at fight night, are their private demands not being spoken about? Cotto look great, but then again no one ever knew his weight and he pretty much look the same from weigh in and fight night. At 140 he even look much bigger and bulkier, same with DLH. Does anyone have Clottey's weigh in? Because he look pretty light as well?

 

"rehydration clause" hahahaha lol ****ing noob :yep

 

Fanboy? No.. Everything I've posted on this site has been backed with logic and reasoning. If I'm proven wrong I admit it.. Fanboy not.

1. Why would he agree to 147 in which he didn't fight at for years? He wanted the fight just as much as Top Rank did. Pass the torch to Manny and retire making the most he could. I'm sure you'll come back and say that it's completely impossible for Oscar to allow Manny the upperhand even though it's no reason for him to have fought at 147 if he wanted an advantage.

2. What boxers have been asked about a rehydration clause? And I'm quite sure someone already posted one for IBF fights, Cobbler I believe it was. So the clause exists, we just don't know if it was for those fights. Once again, do you have the contract? So how do you know it wasn't in there? Did you know IBF did that? Wait I'm sure you did right?!?

I don't want to see the Josie pictures. My point is you quickly say Mayweather has to be guilty with NO evidence. This has gone to trial before only to be thrown out. So him getting charged is NOT evidence buddy. But yet there HAS to be evidence in ANYTHING questioned about Manny?

I'm not being bias. I am pointing out the bias for Manny. Is there a bias for Floyd here? You bet. Not im my posts though. Do I post more questioning Manny? You bet. It's millions of posts questioning Floyd and it's all good, but soon as someone does it to Manny all hell breaks loose? No, I'm bringing balance to the situation. You've not once saw a post where I was blindly bias.