Since neither were ever PROVEN guilty - who was/is the more likely juicer?

how do you think this evidence affects holyfield's legacy?

 

It hurts it, but at the same time you have to wonder how many other fighters would be implicated if the full truth were ever known.

 

yeah it's a difficult one. i tend to turn a blind eye to it for that very reason.

 

:rofl

Pacquiao could be guilty of steroid use. In today's era what professional athlete can't be accused of the same, forget even being linked to the PED industry like plenty have been. My problem is that you're accusing Pacquiao of it based on bonehead logic, such as his appearance and weight jumping, as well as losses.

This is a picture of a young Pacquiao first starting out. Maybe 16?

This content is protected

Even at that age, pretty ripped. And considering he was fighting to eat at the time you should not be surprised that he lost. He was drained, cutting weight, and hadn't met Roach of the time, who clearly turned his boxing around ... Are you the same weight and physique you were in your teens? Are you as better at certain things, like your career choice than you were back then? Clearly age, experience and physical maturation are to be taken into account here with Pacquiao. You also only need to look at his fight night weights since the FW division to now to understand what his walk around weight is to begin with.

Now look at Holyfield, consider the muscle mass he gained moving up and so quickly, being caught TWICE with Signature and Applied pharmacies..While Pacquiao has zero concrete evidence against him?

You are also attempting to equate steroid usage directly with success in boxing which is stupid to begin with.

 

Mr.Evan Fields.

 

At 18 I weighed 119lbs and by my mid 20s I was more like 150.

Pac is verry much like old school fighters such as Bob Fitzsimmons and Sam Langford, in that his first fights were at an early age when his nutritional health was not 100%.

We are in the presence of a throwback.