NSAC: Evangilista saw Margo get his hands wrapped

Your opinion, which is based off of flawed logic, means very little to anyone with a reasonable level of intelligence and lack of bias.

This is dumb argument, and pretty much irrelevant. I've given numerous explanations of why he might try to cheat in one fight and not the other. It doesn't matter anyway. There were at least 3 witnesses that saw him wrap his hands against Cotto. That would strongly suggest that he was clean in that fight.

That's a statement that was made by Arum. Arum claims Evangilista was working another fighter's corner at the time. However, Evangilista worked one other fight that day, and that was at 4p.m, too early to interfere with the later bout. The inspector who was in the room says Evangilista was there.

You're completely incorrect here. In the Margo/Mosley fight, Margo's hands were wrapped when Richardson entered the room. Richardson asked for the hands to be rewrapped, and couple of blocks fell out according to Richardson. He didn't have to do much investigating in that one. There's a good chance the CSAC wasn't even present when Margo had his hands wrapped. In this case, at least 3 witnesses were there when he wrapped is hands. Now no one can prove that he still wasn't able to cheat regardless. However, that accusation is nothing but a conspiricy theory in which there is no proof of.

 

I don't ride on anyone's nuts. I barely even post about Floyd. There are too many threads on him as it is.

Because people do that often when they speak of events that weren't in the recent past. If his memory was hazy, he would've said something to the effect that he wasn't sure or he didn't know.

It's more than half ass evidence. This is a pretty big story that was posted on a popular boxing site today, why wouldn't I post it? It's not random, and I never claimed it to be random. As far as Cotto, for all I know, he's getting his info from Arum. Arum has already admitted that he doesn't know if Evangilista was in there. However, eyewitness testimony is pretty credible. It's not like Evangilista is some stranger, these guys are all familiar with him. Therefore, it's pretty reasonable to believe them when they say he was in the room. This claim could easily be refuted and they know this. It would seem pretty stupid for them to lie. To call eyewitness testimony half ass evidence is pretty ignorant on your part. If someone you know says they saw you rob a bank and you have no aliby, you think the cops are going to dismiss it as half ass evidence?

 

Your quote proved nothing. Who knows why Miguel said that? Someone could've missinformed him. Who knows? Eyewitness testimony is pretty damaging though. Now if Nady or Evangilista refute the claim, then the inspector's statement comes into question. And the inspector is being careful with his words to protect himself. He may not be a 100% sure, but that doesn't mean he's wrong. Judging from his statements, it doesn't seem like he's guessing regardless. Furthermore, Kizer remarked that from everyone he talked to that Evangilista was in the room. This means multiple people placed him in that room. Here's the quote;

"Well, Bob was not back there, nor was I," Kizer said. "But Jack Lazzarotto and Jay Nady were. And when the hands were wrapped, Evangelista was back there, that was my understanding. ... From everyone I've talked to, Evangelista was back there and he was definitely on his game and definitely observing the hand wraps of Mr. Margarito."

Seriously, how can you simply dissmiss this?

 

Just because he said Nady and Laz were there doesn't mean that they were the only ones there or that there is no one else who knows for sure who was there. It doesn't matter if Nady was the ref for the fight, he was still there.

 

I'm saying that would be an ineffective way of covering his ass considering it could easily be exposed as a lie.

There were multiple people in that room who have all told Kizer that Evangilista was there. I'm supposed to dissregard multiple eye witness testimony in favor of people who weren't in the room? This makes sense to you? Again, I have no interest in discrediting Cotto here. Margo being clean in no way discredits Cotto. You're just trying to use desparate tactics to distract from the truth.

 

Show me the rule in the NSAC handbook where it states. You are guessing here.

 

Ray, show me where it states in the handbook where the ref has to be back there checking the handwraps. Show me proof of this rule. You sit here in call me an idiot, yet my whole argument is based off of direct quotes. Yours is based off of guesses. Look at his other quote from Laz;

"I can tell you emphatically, I checked the wraps and I felt the wraps and there was nothing illegal about the wraps,"

Again, your only refute is that everyone is lying. You further based this assertion on interpretation of rules that you don't even know. You state that they're just covering their asses. However, if they were lying, it could easily be detected. Not only that, they are not under fire. The CSAC are the ones that it is proven were going to let him walk into the ring with illegal wraps. You notice they're not making any statements. But hey, maybe you're right. Maybe the NSAC is voluntarilly telling lies(even though they could be exposed as liars easily) when they could easily keep their mouths shut and be perfectly fine.