Newest Teddy Atlas Interview on Floyd-Manny

Luckily Teddy didn't give his opinion.

 

Good point. Bloke ****s his stock up bad.

 

Jeez, ******s out in force tonight.

 

wow! teddy atlas sounds like a joyboy.

 

Couple of things:

I'm not a world-reknowned expert on boxing (just a fan), but I do know about technology.

Speaking on the email issue: It's more complicated than it appears at first glance. In theory you could prove whether the emails were genuine or not; In practice it's very, very hard to do it conclusively.

The "easy to fake" crowd are right to a certain extent. Emails contain a set of fields called 'headers' that are usually hidden from you when you read them. It's incredibly easy to create an email with a fake "From:" header that would appear to come from toprank.com. This would look to people at the receiving end like it was completely legit, unless they also looked at the headers and understood what they were looking at.

On the flip side, there are other headers that aren't so easy to fake; they contain things like the source IP addresses and the email routing information.

If you were releasing an email to the public, it would be fairly easy to replace those fields with information that made it look as if it was legit, but this would require doctoring the email after you'd received it (not before sending it as is the case with the doctored 'From:' header).

So you've got three options: Email doctored before sending; Email doctored after receiving (or completely fabricated); and Email is genuine.

If it was just sent by a prankster or external server, you could rule out the first case just by looking at the full set of headers; the routing information and IPs wouldn't match the addresses in the 'From:' or 'Return-to:' headers.

If it was doctored after receiving (or just made up from scratch), you could theoretically still prove whether it was genuine, but this requires legal access to stuff that nobody in this case has got a right to look at: you'd need subpoenas to look at the networking records; the carrier's logs; the ISP's logs and the mail servers at each end. So, while it's theoretically possible, it's not really practically possible, unless there was a massively well-funded lawsuit involved.

In most cases where people admit to having sent incriminating emails just based on short bits of the email's text, it's because they know that, if it did come to court, it could be proven so they hold their hands up so as not to waste everyone's time and look much worse later on.

Nobody's done that in this case. Nobody's even produced an email. For what it's worth, I wouldn't take the email schtick seriously until they either produce an email including the full set of headers for analysis, or they release some text and TopRank admit to having sent it.

Again: neither of those things have happened. Until they do, this **** is moot.

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/athletics/5325262.stm

http://sports.espn.go.com/oly/trackandfield/news/story?id=2576909

 

We'll see if these emails truly exists or not soon enough. But I'm guessing they don't exist or it would have been made public by GBP or Mayweather's camp by now.

In the meantime - shouldn't you be at the dry cleaners picking up Floyd's clothes by now?

 

To say someone is completely unbiased is wrong but teddy also has a reputation for not pulling punches when it comes to exposing truths. No matter how unpopular and potentially damaging. Just watch his comentating style, you want to punch him yourself sometimes.

You're right about him being biased about Tyson , at the same time a lot of what he says is true. Though definitely not happy with letting Tyson get a good name while he's around.

 

And your proving my point again. Her B sample came back negative. To test positive both A and B sample has to test positive. Do you even read what you google or do you just randomly post crap? Both articles say Jones is innocent.

 

:good

 

Atlas makes a great point about Roach and Toney, if he didn't know he was using PED's then how can he be sure that Pac isn't?

Unless he knew what Toney was up too?:huh

 

I truly believe Atlas believes this email actually exists. The problem is, he is basing this totally on "a guy who heard it from a guy", which is RIDICULOUS to hang your hat on. And as to all the supposition for where his source "saw" this email in question, it obviously must be from someone he knows in the boxing community, and they might have been easily duped as well. Someone could have just opened a manipulated email and said "Read this!!". All this discussion about IP headers and spoofing of an email is irrelevant, because his source isn't saying he HAS an email directly from the Pac camp, he is saying he "saw" an email from the Pac camp.

 

Oh, I agree. :good

I was just addressing the "how easy it is to fake" angle.

 

May not be as easy to fake an orginal email. But a forward? That's prime for the taking! :good