Should PED users be allowed in the hall of fame?

You'll find all sorts of PED apologists on here and basically they are not fans of the sport of boxing, they are just delusional, blinkered fanboys whose favourite boxer is blatant PED cheat and will do anything to protect their idol from the glaring reality staring them in the face - that their idol is a blatant cheat and an absolute ****ing disgrace to the sport of boxing.

The ring magazine has always been the most cringeworthy american hype machine to try and brainwash gullable American fight fans into believing everything they write but over 12 years after Roy Jones disgraced the sport and was caught red-handed, The Ring magazine has finally shown an ounce of moral decency and changed its policy on PED cheats (though its 12 years too late!! ).



http://ringtv.craveonline.com/blog/1...-tests-are-out

The recent spate of failed drug tests has underscored an obvious – and troubling – problem in boxing.
Thus, THE RING Editorial Board decided it was time to make a strong statement: From now on, any fighter who tests positive for a banned substance will immediately be removed from THE RING Ratings.
That fighter would be reinstated if the testing agency reverses its decision. And he will be allowed to earn his way back into the ratings after any suspension.


Here is the new RING policy:
THE RING will remove from its ratings any rated fighter – including a champion – if such fighter at some point undergoes drug testing (Olympic-style or otherwise) and that fighter tests positve for a banned substance.
In the event that a fighter has undergone testing in which the fighter provides two samples ("A" and "B") and the fighter's "A" and subsequent “B” samples test positive for a banned substance or if his “A” sample tests positive and he waives his right to have the “B” sample tested then the fighter shall immediately be removed from the ratings.

A fighter whose “A” sample tested positive and is awaiting the results of his “B” sample will not be allowed to fight for a championship or rise in the ratings.
A fighter who is removed because of a postitive test will have the opportunity to earn his way back into the ratings after any suspension period is completed.
A fighter who is dropped also may be reinstated if the testing agency subsequently reverses its decision or a court of competent jursidiction finds that the test result was invalid.

This means that Andre Berto, who had been rated No. 3 in the welterweight division, and Lamont Peterson, No. 1 at junior welterweight, have been removed from THE RING Ratings.
Berto’s rematch with Victor Ortiz, scheduled for June 23 in Los Angeles, was canceled after Berto tested positive (both “A” and “B” samples) for the steroid norandrosterone. Peterson tested positive (“A” and “B”) for synthetic testosterone, which scuttled his May 19 rematch with Amir Khan in Las Vegas.
Peterson, who said he had a testosterone pellet implanted for medical reasons, has applied for a license with the Nevada State Athletic Commission and is awaiting a hearing. He must convince the commissioners that the violation was inadvertent.
Berto and Peterson were tested by the Voluntary Anti-Doping Association.
Cruiserweight Antonio Tarver tested posititive for the steroid drostanolone after he fought to a draw with Lateef Kayode on June 2 in Carson, Calif. The California State Athletic Commission, which conducted that test, suspended Tarver for a year.
However, Tarver will remain in the ratings for now because he has said he will exercise his right to have his “B” sample tested. THE RING will not make a decision on its No. 6-rated 200-pounder until the process has played out.
The decision to drop Peterson elevates Nos. 2 and 3 junior welterweights Amir Khan and Danny Garcia to Nos. 1 and 2. Thus, their fight on Saturday in Las Vegas will be for THE RING 140-pound championship.






Its taken the cringworthy Ring magazine 12 years to grow a pair of balls and basically re-iterate what any real fan of the sport has thought all along and now its time for the hall of fame to man the **** up and wipe all proven cheats from ever entering the esteemed ranks.

Every single PED user has a ready made excuse lined up to cover their tracks and only the gullable fanboys ever believe the damage limitation lies that are fed to the public. All these boxers know exactly what they are doing and when they are caught they must be punished to the maximum. The likes of James Toney, Roy Jones Jnr, and Shane Mosley are proven cheats who have further endangered the lifes of their opponents through their PED use, they should never be allowed anywhere near a hall of fame, setting a firm example to a future generation of potential PED using boxers of the serious consequences of their disgracefull actions.

 

For all the differences Headbanger and I have, he's spot on in this case. Known steroid offenders jeopardized the lives of their opponents for financial gain. That behavior should not be further rewarded.

The slippery slope comes with the burden of proof. Obviously, steroids have been and continue to be prevelant in boxing. Not having a dirty test and being clean are two different things.

We need more testing, and of a more comprehensive variety.

 

Yeah. Half your favorites wouldnt be in or going in otherwise

 

It goes without saying that all major sports, and yes boxing too, has rampant ped use by it`s athletes. It is not a north american problem, it is a global one. This is not being a steroid apologist, this is being a realist. The pressure assoicated with participating at the pinnacle of any sport, to gain fame, wealth, the ability to provide monetarily, the ego of being the best, remaining on top, getting an edge to compete against the elite, etc etc etc etc has caved the morals of many an athlete. Is it ethical...no. Is it understandable...yes to a degree. Is it going to be eliminated....no chance. Do all users get caught...not even an appreciable percentage. Not fanboy denial, not having blinders on, simple reality. Those who have tested positive aren`t any different than a decent percentage of those who never have. Are there clean fighters...absolutely. Are there a higher percentage of those on peds than those who remain clean....very probable. Inclusion into the HOF boils down to an ethics debate. Those who were caught undoubtedly fought many opponents who used and were never caught, along with clean fighters. It`s hard to take an absolute stance when the testing is so full of loopholes, and so easy to beat....you do not know with any certainty who was clean and not beyond the few who get caught. Those who are caught will always have a negative attachment to their acheivements, and rightfully so, but to think they are alone in being on peds is absolute willful ignorance.

Until an independant and credible body performs more stringent testing on all fighters then there can be no absolute. Until actual penalties are in place that have any semblance of an actual detterent....same deal. Those who have been caught in the past probably belong in the HOF, but will likely wait longer than if they were clean, or never get in at all.

 

no

 

While I can understand that point of view in baseball (I'm a huge baseball fan) I can't in boxing. You are essentially substituting Jones for Bonds. Both were extremely talented outside of steroids.

However, in boxing roids can make a knock out punch turn into a permanent brain damage punch. The risks are too huge. People die in this sport.

 

Steroids dont increase punching power bro. Neither does weightlifting in general or any strength training

 

In an almost perfect world, that would be ideal, pacquiao- the li'l roider- out of the HOF?!?! Justice would be served! I mean if Bonds, Sosa & Clemens didn't do it on their first try in MLB, pacquiao and ALL the roiders behind him shouldn't do it either in box!!!!!!!

 

The HOF would be mighty empty if all PED users were removed.

 

i say no

 

the boxing hall of fame is a joke anyway, they let anyone in

 

This content is protected

 

I say just let them in, let's be honest we don't know who took what, if I said who I thought was on it it would sound like a troll it really is that polarized.

 

keeping it short and sweet... NO!