Pac/Floyd investigation, documented punches (disputed rounds) blow by blow

[Vadrigar.]

Did he just admit to pu$$ying out? LMFAO yes he did.

He pu$$ied out.

The biatch pu$$ied out.

It's over.

Flawless victory.





















[img]//media3.*****.com/media/oe33xf3B50fsc/200.gif[/img]

KABOOM!

[Dosumpthin]

Did he just admit to pu$$ying out? LMFAO yes he did.

He pu$$ied out.

The biatch pu$$ied out.

It's over.

Flawless victory.





















[img]//media3.*****.com/media/oe33xf3B50fsc/200.gif[/img]

KABOOM!

****in Weirdo

[ADP02]

Game over DEFLECTOR?

(YOU) Misinterpreting a statement and claiming it means what you think does not make you right.


I have WADA experts stating that there are threshold type tests.


How are those WADA EXPERTs WRONG?????

You have NEVER EVER ANSWERED THIS QUESTION DEFLECTOR!!!!



.

I'm not confused. You said EPO is a threshold substance.

Now you're harping on ABP blood screening to support your "dco ran out of cups" diluted urine conspiracy theory.

Idiot. rEPO is still detected in dilute samples - let alone providing a partial sample pre IV and the presence of 2 SPG test.





You're confused and its amusingly entertaining watching you learn about the ABP "passport thingy".
I'm the one who told you how it's used in conjunction with CIR testing. REMEMBER? Wait did you ever figure out the info I gave you in that thread?

Nevertheless, I just have one question:


How does your "10 mins and a Whizzinator" theory beat ABP blood and urine matrix again?

It's OK .... you just have not been following, I guess.

The discussion that we were dueling on was NOT threshold substance.


Look bud, this type of discussion has been brought up in the past with other athletes.

If you go back to Lance Armstrong, his fans kept on defending him until Lance finally admitted it. So I do not expect you and Travestyny to be any different unfortunately.


Lance was tested on different days in 1999. Some of those days he was tested positive and some negative. His fans said that didn't make any sense. Well, it does make sense! Lance and other dopers try there best to hide their doping. Sometimes they do not succeed and get caught! That is why there is a discrepancy!


Sure you taught me about ABP .... even though I have known about that way before we discussed it for Floyd Mayweather!!!! Thanks for the laugh!


Question:
So do they have ABP testing as an approach to catch those who use synthetic EPO? and NO, I'm not discussing threshold substances! Threshold type tests!


The interview was is it possible? YES IT IS was his response but you prefer to discuss ******ity instead of have a normal discussion.

ABP and other tests can be beat. It has happened in the past. There have been cases where athletes have actually masked their drug even with the DCO standing right in front of them.

We just hear about these stories later. Often only once they get caught as an example.

[Spoon23]

This thread has now reached 500,000 viewers!!

INCREDIBLE!!!


[IMG]//media.*****.com/media/xT0BKyzsIglmWE8oDK/*****.gif[/IMG]

I've been gone for over 2 months now and this epic thread still keeps on rocking and exposing the truth of the corruption of this fight. And I can see how hard pressed these Floyd fanboys are having a terrible time trying really hard defending Floyd while I was gone, working hard patching all those loop holes to save their hero from disgrace.





A testimony on how epic this thread has come about in shedding a light in exposing the obvious truth that this thread has brought forth, whether you're for Floyd or for Manny, there was no clear conclusion to who was truly the better man in this fight, as this thread has truly shown how fans are very much divided on who truly believes, deserves the win or if anyone actually deserves a win for that forgetful performance, especially for the defensive boxer who were playing it safe by running and hugging for 12 ***** rounds.

This thread also brings about the corruption in boxing and brings in focus the what not to do in a super fight of this magnitude. As we have realised in this fight, running around hugging for 12 rounds left a bad taste in most of the fans who felt robbed and cheated for watching this game of tag for 12 rounds of a lacklustre performance by the sports best boxers, and seeing that this was also riddled with PED IV gate scandal, post TUE given to the running hugging bigger man shows the extent of corruption in boxing. This fight will always be the model blueprint of what not to do in a Super Fight as It has become a fight that remains a constant reminder to us that nothing was truly concluded on who was the better man that night.

This thread proves that the fact that it has reached far and wide and gone 500,000 plus viewers, is now a testament to one of the most read epic threads in NSB. Showing how very much disappointed fans are for both sides. It brings about the underlying truth that fans that are left feeling robbed and empty after watching this farce of a a fight.

That said, these 2 boxers are still the most popular athletes of this generation. Yes they are old, yes they are not in their prime, but there is no mistake, there is no argument here, that to this day the biggest money fight out there in boxing is still Floyd Pac 2, since both of them have massive fan bases. The question is.. Does Floyd have the balls to finish this rivalry to a decisive conclusion and step up to the plate, and close the curtain one final time? I clearly doubt Floyd has the balls to finally conclude this by having a rematch with no doubts, since I truly believe this thread has shown with one healthy arm, Pac toyed with Floyd as he played cat and mouse in a ring while Floyd was ridden with IV drips. Floyd knows a 2nd rodeo will be too risky. A fake win is better than officially losing to Manny so I highly doubt he will tempt fate and risk throwing his fake win.

This EPIC thread will always be a constant reminder to us all that boxing fans are very much divided to this day on who truly won that night, and it will never have a clear cut definitive winner unless both men find away to conclude this. Is it too late for a rematch? Perhaps? Who to blame? It only shows that we as boxing fans have been robbed of a true conclusion. Imagine, Marvin Hagler vs Leonard never having a rematch? That's what this is about. A Floyd Vs Manny is still the biggest fight in PPV to make. Can Clearly make 2 Million buys easily, and yet the one they call Money May doesn't want a 2nd Rodeo. That speaks volumes who's having second thoughts.

Legacy will always be defined by an athletes actions. They maybe old and washed up, but what this thread has exposed. We fans were deprived of a true winner. That's just how the truth has taken us for a ride. A fake win is a fake win and will forever be a fake win, and to finish of with no definitive conclusion shows who is really ***** of being called a true Legend of the game.


Listen to Your Uncle Roger, Floyd. He seems to know what's best for you..


Jenna J: If Floyd does that, where does that put him amongst the greats?

Roger Mayweather: That would put him amongst the greatest fighters, but Floyd had a good, long legacy anyways. He will be amongst some of the greatest fighters but hes got to close the thing with Pacquiao before he ever does that, because thats one of the known guys that people respect and I think thats the guy that he's gonna have to beat or have to show something with.

Even Roger Mayweather knows Floyd didn't conclude anything that night.






A MESSAGE FROM FLOYD TO HIS FANS.

Straight from the horses mouth:

Floyd Mayweather: " I owe them for the Pacquiao fight "







Floyd was in Manila to talk to Manny? Has Floyd grown a pair? Only time will tell..



This Is How Floyd Mayweather Jr Will be Remembered against Manny if he doesn't find his way to man up for a rematch.




Lomachenko the best P4P fighter of today after watching the fight LIVE: Manny Pacquiao beat floyd Mayweather

[Scopedog]

[travestyny]

YOU WERE WRONG!!!! You misinterpreted what the panel stated.

Oh really? Explain, ADP.

2) The resulting data is validated against specific threshold criteria, when artificial EPO, in relation to naturally occurring EPO, exceeds threshold limits.

COURT OF ARBITRATION FOR SPORT:

there is no threshold above which it can be said there is non-human production of the substance

That directly contradicts your information. You won't discuss this because you know you are wrong.

How are those WADA EXPERTs WRONG?????

You have NEVER EVER ANSWERED THIS QUESTION DEFLECTOR!!!!
.

I don't have to prove them wrong. That's the beauty of my position. Though I've posted to you over and over that they specifically state the BAP is not a threshold, the BAP is also IRRELEVANT. This is why you won't answer to it not being a part of the WADA TD2014EPO document. You and I both know it leaves you with nothing.

The only thing they ever labeled a threshold was a criteria dating back to 2003 that hasn't been used for years. Do you deny this????

I've asked you this over 10 times. Let me ask it a different way. Stop ducking it, ADP.

What criteria in the WADA TD2014EPO have the WADA experts said is a threshold? Quote it specifically for us all to see.

If you can't....lol....you lose. There is a reason you won't answer that question. You know it, and I know it.

ABP has Thresholds and as WADA points out, there is an ABP module that is geared for EPO testing!

WADA says specifically that the ABP does not detect EPO. You know we were talking about testing for EPO specifically. Just another deflection that won't work. No one is ****** enough to believe your squirming, ADP. Again, tell me where in the WADA TD2014 EPO document it says that the ABP can be used to test for EPO. You keep ducking this as well, though you said specifically that document is the scope. Ooops.


I just want you to answer those two questions instead of ducking them. Is there any reason that you won't answer, hmmmm?

By the way, rematch whenever you like. You won't even respond to my offers for a rematch, because you know you don't stand a chance. Give up.


By the way...your court case is what destroys you.

"See, e.g., IAAF v SEGAS & Kokkinariou, CAS 2012/A/2773, award dated 30 November 2012
(), para 114 ('association of high haemoglobin with low reticulocytes is a strong evidence of artificial inhibition of reticulocyte formation caused by the suspension of an ESA (or, less likely, by reinfusion of multiple blood bags). It is an indicator of the so-called OFF phase, which is seen when an ESA has been suspended one to three weeks before, such as is observed in doped athletes before important competitions. When the ESA is stopped, hemoglobin remains high for at least two to three weeks, depending on the dosage, while reticulocytes are reduced because the high hemoglobin inhibits endogenous EPO production')."

Soooooo.....is there a chance it was a blood infusion instead of EPO doping???? OWNED. YOU FAIL

[travestyny]

Hmmm...if he ducks this again...Deflection Count: 11. Why won't he answer???


ADP, STOP BRINGING UP YOUR 2003 BAP CRITERIA UNLESS YOU ANSWER THE QUESTION YOU KEEP DUCKING AND DEFLECTING FROM. I'M WAITING!!!! I WONDER WHY YOU WON'T JUST ANSWER!!!!

1.

SHOW ME THAT OLD BAP CRITERIA THAT YOU KEEP BRINGING UP IN THE TD2014EPO DOCUMENT!!!!!!

2.

IS THE BAP IN THE TD2014 EPO DOCUMENT? YES OR NO, ADP? WATCH YOU IGNORE THIS!

3.

ANSWER THIS FUVCCKING QUESTION: DOES THE BAP CRITERIA EVEN EXIST IN THE TD2014 DOCUMENT?

4.

DOES THE BAP CRITERIA EXIST IN THE WADA TD2014EPO DOCUMENT OR NOT ADP??????

5.

How long are you going to duck this? Is the BAP in the WADA TD2014EPO document?????? Yes or no?

6.

IS THE BAP CRITERIA IN THE WADA TD2014EPO DOCUMENT? YES OR NO?????

7.

IS THAT CRITERIA IN THE WADA TD2014EPO DOCUMENT OR NOT? YES OR NO?

8.

THAT IS NOT AN ANSWER. DOES THE WADA TD2014EPO DOCUMENT HAVE THE CRITERIA THAT YOU ARE REFERRING TO, ADP? WHY WON'T YOU ANSWER?????

9.

is the criteria that you claim the wada experts are rightly referring to as a threshold a part of the wada td2014epo document???????? Answer the question, adp!!!

10.

Is the BAP in the TD2014EPO document. I forgot how many times I asked you this, but I'll update the list.
ANSWER PLEASE!

11.

What criteria in the WADA TD2014EPO have the WADA experts said is a threshold? Quote it specifically for us all to see.

A Deflecting PIECE OF SHlT AT IT AGAIN!!!!!

[travestyny]

One more...I couldn't resist.

The test criteria for EPO testing is different. For one test, it verifies the intensity of the bands.If the bands are more intense than those bands for the endogenous then that would be an indication of synthetic EPO. This is still a ratio test and therefore a threshold test since the intensity ratio is being verified against a threshold ratio as stated in the criteria.

.

It's not going to work! You know I have enough information about this to shut you down at any time, right?

The man who designed the test:
Dr. Francoise Lasne: NO THRESHOLD FOR EPO ANALOGUE CERA BECAUSE IT IS QUALITATIVE.

"The Criterion for CERA (one of the EPO analogues) identification is not quantitative. The criterion is qualitative, being the presence of at least 4 bands in the area corresponding to CERA. It is only possible to statistically establish a risk of error for a threshold quantitative criterion."

Oh, and this one is particularly important. Tells us not only about your intensity being qualitative, but also, tells us more about the BAP that you keep talking about

In January 2005, WADA recommended that the 80% basic bands criterion should no longer be used, and that a more qualitative systemshould be used:

1. In the basic area there must be at least 3 acceptable, consecutive bands assigned as 1, 2, 3 or 4 in the corresponding reference preparation.

2. The 2 most intense bands either measured by densitometry or assessed visually in the basic area must be consecutive and the most intense band must be 1, 2 or 3.

3. The two most intense bands in the basic area must be more intense than any other band in the endogenous area either measured by densitometry or assessed visually.

There are WADA experts in court stating that EPO testing is qualitative.

Dr. Reihlen: HEAD OF THE EPO DEPARTMENT IN A WADA LAB.

Ms. Reilly: Mr. Reilhlen, the question ought to have been is the testing for recombinant EPO a quantitative or a qualitative analysis?

A. Okay, it is of qualitative nature.

Is the WADA expert wrong? You love that line.

OWNED.

Now for the last time....these criteria are NOT threshold criteria. It says it here clearly!

Court of Arbitration for Sport!

• The criterion for EPO is not a measurement over the threshold that must occur
  
  
• The fact is that the BAP and the other interpretative criteria are used to declare not a threshold of human body production but rather an image from the electropherogram as indicating the presence of non-human EPO.
  
  
• there is no threshold above which it can be said there is non-human production of the substance

I explained this to your dumb ass before. A threshold is an allowance. I can smoke a little marijuana and be below the threshold. I can smoke more and be at the threshold. I can smoke even more and exceed it. EPO doesn't work that way. They test the urine and the image reveals if rEPO is there or not. That's it. Nothing is moving. Nothing is approaching and exceeding a threshold, which is how you described it!

2) The resulting data is validated against specific threshold criteria, when artificial EPO, in relation to naturally occurring EPO, exceeds threshold limits.

exceed | ikˈsēd |
verb [with object]
go beyond what is allowed

The criteria don't show something "going beyond what is allowed." It simply shows what the thing is.

In EVERY SINGLE CASE of a threshold criteria, the thing that is being measured can exceed or be below the threshold. Above you said rEPO exceeds the threshold. Now tell me. Has there EVER been a case where WADA tested an athlete and said rEPO was BELOW the threshold in accordance with the WADA TD2014EPO criteria????? You idiot.

[img]//media.*****.com/media/l3E6uhDAN3W7vylji/*****.gif[/img]

[Vadrigar.]

Watch and weep.

Floyd objectively lost.

[ADP02]

Oh really? Explain, ADP.




COURT OF ARBITRATION FOR SPORT:



That directly contradicts your information. You won't discuss this because you know you are wrong.



I don't have to prove them wrong. That's the beauty of my position. Though I've posted to you over and over that they specifically state the BAP is not a threshold, the BAP is also IRRELEVANT. This is why you won't answer to it not being a part of the WADA TD2014EPO document. You and I both know it leaves you with nothing.

The only thing they ever labeled a threshold was a criteria dating back to 2003 that hasn't been used for years. Do you deny this????

I've asked you this over 10 times. Let me ask it a different way. Stop ducking it, ADP.

What criteria in the WADA TD2014EPO have the WADA experts said is a threshold? Quote it specifically for us all to see.

If you can't....lol....you lose. There is a reason you won't answer that question. You know it, and I know it.




WADA says specifically that the ABP does not detect EPO. You know we were talking about testing for EPO specifically. Just another deflection that won't work. No one is ****** enough to believe your squirming, ADP. Again, tell me where in the WADA TD2014 EPO document it says that the ABP can be used to test for EPO. You keep ducking this as well, though you said specifically that document is the scope. Ooops.


I just want you to answer those two questions instead of ducking them. Is there any reason that you won't answer, hmmmm?

By the way, rematch whenever you like. You won't even respond to my offers for a rematch, because you know you don't stand a chance. Give up.


By the way...your court case is what destroys you.




Soooooo.....is there a chance it was a blood infusion instead of EPO doping???? OWNED. YOU FAIL

At the top of your posts, just say get ready to read my DEFLECTIONs!!!!

Discussion:
Who is right, Travestyny's comprehension or the WADA EXPERTs. Do not DEFLECT!!!! but you are the one that they call DEFLECTOR, so I know that you will not disappoint in your comeback, DEFLECTOR!!! LOL



I'm enjoying this and its just going to get a bit more enjoyable.


YES, YOU ARE WRONG.

Why ?

These are not just WADA EXPERTs they are WADA EPO EXPERTs who know a lot more than you do.




Please show me your credentials on EPO testing and try to compare it to this!!!!



1) They are called upon to testify and give their EPO EXTERTISE!!!


2) They are called upon to testify to prosecute the athlete because of their EPO EXPERTISE and also because they are part of the LAB that is accredited by WADA and who testing the athlete!!!


3) Dr Catlin: In case you do not know who he is or was at the time:

The director of the WADA accredited Los Angeles lab, Don Catlin,
"I have full confidence in the test. I've been doing the test for many years; I've probably done it 1,000 times. I've studied it. I've written papers about it. I've gone to court to defend our results. . . . I like the test."

4) Dr Segura: In case you do not know who he is or was at the time:

Jordi Segura, an EPO testing expert and the WADA accredited lab director in Barcelona, said the EPO test consists of 170 steps that take three days to perform.

Any minor mistake along the way can affect the quality of the result, making it effectively too "blurry" to fit into the criteria necessary for a positive result, particularly if the sample is right at the threshold.

5) Read this:
Dr Catlin actually contributed in writing WADA's EPO technical document in 2004 and 2007!!!

WADA Technical Document – TD2004EPO

Written by: D. Catlin G. Nissen-Lie C. Howe J.A. Pascual F. Lasne M. Saugy

WADA Technical Document – TD2007EPO
Written by: D. Catlin G. Nissen-Lie C. Howe J.A. Pascual F. Lasne M. Saugy

6) Dr Segura is referenced several times WADA's 2014 EPO technical document!!!!



7) Both sides in that case had stated that their are ratios/thresholds type tests.





So NO, these WADA EXPERTs are NOT WRONG. YOU Travestyny did not comprehend and consequently


Travestyny YOU ARE WRONG!!!!



KABADABOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOM!!!!


.