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

[travestyny]

Are you serious?

THINK!!!

As I stated, from my end, there was always a criteria that had a threshold type test for EPO. So from the start, I was discussing that ..... you from the start you were discussing something else. You were discussing threshold substances!

That was always the conflict up to this day.

You didn't realize that until we got to the dome. Even then, you still wanted to be sure it wasn't about threshold substances. I said NO .... from my end.


AGAIN THINK!!!!

How could it be about threshold substances? The document related to that didn't have EPO!!! So how can I be going there (Dome) to argue about that! It didn't make any sense ... well except for you!



.

Then answer to this:

You said it must be a partial list because EPO wasn’t there. So that shows that you believed EPO was a threshold substance, didn’t you?
Admit you are wrong.

IS EPO A THRESHOLD SUBSTANCE?????? YES OR NO. HOW MANY TIMES DO I HAVE TO ASK YOU?

IS.....EPO....A....THRESHOLD...SUBSTANCE!!!!!! LOOK AT YOU ****ING SQUIRMING.

IS EPO A THRESHOLD SUBSTANCE? Yes or no???

Is EPO a threshold substance? Yes or no. The list of ducks is growing!

Let's try this yet again. Is EPO a threshold substance? This requires a simple "yes" or "no." Are you ever going to stop ducking and deflecting so that you can answer this question?

you still won't answer my simple question?
IS EPO A THRESHOLD SUBSTANCE? YES OR NO?

OH I'M WRONG, HUH? LET'S SEE YOU PUT YOUR ACCOUNT WHERE YOUR MOUTH IS.

do you want to have someone unbiased look at the WADA documents that I linked you to and decide if EPO is a threshold substance?

Sure, go ahead.

THEN WE GET TO THE THUNDERDOME AND....HE GETS AMNESIA

I was thinking and here is the problem that I think that we will both have. What are we actually arguing about?

I asked you the question that many times and specifically challenged you to the thunderdome based on it.......

and then when you get there, you didn't know what the discussion was about????

Deflector!

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

[ADP02]

Are you serious?

THINK!!!

As I stated, from my end, there was always a criteria that had a threshold type test for EPO. So from the start, I was discussing that ..... you from the start you were discussing something else. You were discussing threshold substances!

That was always the conflict up to this day.

You didn't realize that until we got to the dome. Even then, you still wanted to be sure it wasn't about threshold substances. I said NO .... from my end.


AGAIN THINK!!!!

How could it be about threshold substances? The document related to that didn't have EPO!!! So how can I be going there (Dome) to argue about that! It didn't make any sense ... well except for you!



.

Then answer to this:

THEN WE GET TO THE THUNDERDOME AND....HE GETS AMNESIA

I asked you the question that many times and specifically challenged you to the thunderdome based on it.......

and then when you get there, you didn't know what the discussion was about????

Deflector!

I did say THINK but you didn't!

Thank you for proving my point. You understood what you wanted to and let the important details fly right over your head.






.

[travestyny]

I did say THINK but you didn't!

Thank you for proving my point. You understood what you wanted to and let the important details fly right over your head.


.

I understand that you deflected when you got there and still got decapitated.


Give up your obsession. It's over.

[ADP02]

Here is proof that you were WRONG!!!! Man are you WRONG!!!!



You have been quoting this to mean that there are no threshold type tests for EPO and other non-threshold substances since they are not threshold substances.

- 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

You have also used this quote to think that there cannot be threshold type tests:

"The mere presence in the athlete's sample constitutes an anti-doping violation. "

Here is you telling me to show you proof and stating that only threshold substances have threshold type criteria:

NO I DIDN'T MORON. YOU ARE THE ONE WHO KEEPS TALKING ABOUT THRESHOLDS WHEN THE CAS SAID THERE ARE NO THRESHOLDS. LMAOOOOOOOOOO. YOU CLAIM TO BE SMART BUT YOU STILL CAN'T UNDERSTAND THIS SIMPLE CONCEPT!!!!! I TOLD YOU AT THE BEGINNING...

GOOD LUCK PROVING THAT A NON-THRESHOLD SUBSTANCE RELIES ON THRESHOLD TESTS...YOU MORON!!!

Here is that CAS disagreeing with you on all fronts:

"Exogenous Testosterone is a Non-Threshold substance. Meaning, the mere presence in the athlete's sample constitutes an anti-doping violation.

BUT because Testosterone can be generated Exogenously or Endogenously, the confirmation of the Exogenous of the Testosterone is the task of the IRMS testing. The confirmation procedure does not end, however, with the determination that the exogenous testosterone is also present in the urine of the athlete.

WADA prescribes that the results of an IRMS test will be reported as consistent with the exogenous administration of a steroid when the carbon-13 to carbon 12 value measured for the metabolite differs significantly, by 3 delta units or more from the chosen ERC.

In addition, the ratio measured for the metabolite must lie below -28% of that ERC. Even the LAB in applying these thresholds works with varying uncertainty factors in evaluating the results of the IRMS testing.

It is clear, therefore, on the basis of the TD2004EAAS that thresholds are indeed present and must be taken into account in the IRMS testing for the presence of Non-Threshold Substances."

So as you can read above, Non-Threshold substances can have threshold tests!!!! Ooops!!!

But you should have realized all that many moons ago! I even gave you simple examples such as T/E RATIO test is a threshold type test!!!!



KABADABINGABOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOM!!!!!


That in of itself shoots down everything you have been preaching. As I stated, YOU TRAVESTNY ARE WRONG!!!!!!




Also in the case, there are supposedly 4 criteria tested. The athlete says that several of the threshold tests are off so the test results are useless. BUT the panel agreed with USADA that other criteria are just as reliable so the athlete was wrong and USADA was right

The panel agreed with USADA that only 1 of the following 4 criteria have to be satisfied for an athlete's sample to be found positive for the presence of exogenous testosterone:
1. Was the 11OH-Andor difference greater than 3 delta units?
2. Was the 11OH-Etio difference greater than 3 delta units?
3. Was the delta value of Andro by itself below -28 units?
4. Was the delta value of Etio by itself below -28 units?

Next WRONG point by TRAVESTYNY - You keep on stating, if it is a Qualitative test then there are no threshold type tests.

"There are WADA experts in court stating that EPO testing is qualitative.
A. Okay, it is of qualitative nature.
Is the WADA expert wrong? You love that line.

OWNED."
Travestyny

I didn't deflect. I agreed that they are qualitative in nature but

ADP02
"It's more qualitative I agree. I said this early on, remember? As a whole the EPO testing is qualitative since there are numerous types of tests and variables to consider but there are quantitative test results and threshold type test!!!"

Travestyny
"And you just merked yourself by admitting it's qualitative"

The case agrees with both of us that it's qualitative but remember that they also said that there can be threshold type tests for non-threshold substances!!! Say what?

"- Identification capability: Since the results for Non-Threshold Substances are not quantitative, the Laboratory should establish criteria for ensuring that a substance representative of the class of Prohibited Substances can be repeatedly identified and detected as present in the sample at the MRPL."

Here is one more thing that you said:

travestyny - "But they don't state that there are thresholds in the document"

As I stated, by reading and understanding the criteria one can tell that it is implied.

The panel referred to a document for the threshold tests but if you were to look at the document, they are not referred to as threshold type tests! The document never refers them as thresholds but rather "deltas" and "ratios". Ooops!!!


So as you should finally realize, you are WRONG TRAVESTYNY and the WADA EXPERTs were right.



You misinterpreted what the CAS panel was trying to state and much much more!!!!

YOU were comparing apples to oranges. The panel told the athlete and YOU that there is not just a single criteria named BAP test for EPO testing so it's not like testing "threshold substances". There can be other tests as well if they are just as reliable. The panel agreed.


But you should have realized all of this when the WADA EXPERTS called it a threshold type test.


Both sides called it a threshold test!




In this post alone, I identified several of your statements being WRONG Travestyny. I lost track on how many!!!! Care to count?




.

[travestyny]

Here is proof that you were WRONG!!!! Man are you WRONG!!!!



You have been quoting this to mean that there are no threshold type tests for EPO and other non-threshold substances since they are not threshold substances.




You have also used this quote to think that there cannot be threshold type tests:


Here is you telling me to show you proof and stating that only threshold substances have threshold type criteria:


Here is that CAS disagreeing with you on all fronts:




So as you can read above, Non-Threshold substances can have threshold tests!!!! Ooops!!!

But you should have realized all that many moons ago! I even gave you simple examples such as T/E RATIO test is a threshold type test!!!!



KABADABINGABOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOM!!!!!


That in of itself shoots down everything you have been preaching. As I stated, YOU TRAVESTNY ARE WRONG!!!!!!




Also in the case, there are supposedly 4 criteria tested. The athlete says that several of the threshold tests are off so the test results are useless. BUT the panel agreed with USADA that other criteria are just as reliable so the athlete was wrong and USADA was right





Next WRONG point by TRAVESTYNY - You keep on stating, if it is a Qualitative test then there are no threshold type tests.





I didn't deflect. I agreed that they are qualitative in nature but










The case agrees with both of us that it's qualitative but remember that they also said that there can be threshold type tests for non-threshold substances!!! Say what?





Here is one more thing that you said:


As I stated, by reading and understanding the criteria one can tell that it is implied.

The panel referred to a document for the threshold tests but if you were to look at the document, they are not referred to as threshold type tests! The document never refers them as thresholds but rather "deltas" and "ratios". Ooops!!!


So as you should finally realize, you are WRONG TRAVESTYNY and the WADA EXPERTs were right.



You misinterpreted what the CAS panel was trying to state and much much more!!!!

YOU were comparing apples to oranges. The panel told the athlete and YOU that there is not just a single criteria named BAP test for EPO testing so it's not like testing "threshold substances". There can be other tests as well if they are just as reliable. The panel agreed.


But you should have realized all of this when the WADA EXPERTS called it a threshold type test.


Both sides called it a threshold test!




In this post alone, I identified several of your statements being WRONG Travestyny. I lost track on how many!!!! : Care to count?




.

You tried really hard Go find out what the WADATD2004EAAS document was all about. Better yet, update to the WADA TD2014EAAS document. LMAOOOOO. Keep trying to connect this to the ABP. Dosumpthin already schooled you on that. And stop writing me novels.


I'm not reading anything from you until you answer these questions in order.

Until you are ready to answer these questions, stop writing to me.

1. What is the threshold for the BAP?

2. Is the BAP in the WADA TD2014 EPO document?

3. Did the court say the BAP specifically is not a threshold? (Keep in mind the answer to Question #1).

4. Did the court say specifically that there is NO THRESHOLD for EPO?

5. Did the court’s statement contradict your statement?

EPO drug when it exceeds or just human EPO if it does not exceed!

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

Game over!

R.I.P.

[TonyGe]

Spoon is right, videos are great tools for re-watching and assessing events to determine what happened.
However watching edited videos that extract selected excerpts and only show a percentile of the fight is an intellectually dishonest practice.
Why pick and choose moments to watch and base your decision on those, when you can just watch the full fight and make a judgement from that?
Face reality man, you have successfully brainwashed yourself into believing a fantasy based off of carefully selected moments and not the whole picture.
Seriously, seek help man, this is so concerning.

He's not wrong.. Floyd lost that fight.

[Spoon23]

He's not wrong.. Floyd lost that fight.

Then I told Craigus1990 this.

This is not edited, 3 minute of every round is shown and documented here. NO splicing. Watch before you give judgement.

Yup, and what's even more glaring. These Floyd fans didn't even watch the videos and assume it was edited and spliced when every second of every round is recorded and unspliced. Telling the whole story who connected more and who truly put the hurt in the hurt business, bringing out the truth of among the 2 truly deserve the W in this supposed super fight.




P4P best of today has this to say after the fight.

lomachenko after watching the fight LIVE: Manny Pacquiao beat floyd Mayweather

[ADP02]

Here is proof that you were WRONG!!!! Man are you WRONG!!!!



You have been quoting this to mean that there are no threshold type tests for EPO and other non-threshold substances since they are not threshold substances.

- 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

You have also used this quote to think that there cannot be threshold type tests:

"The mere presence in the athlete's sample constitutes an anti-doping violation. "

Here is you telling me to show you proof and stating that only threshold substances have threshold type criteria:

NO I DIDN'T MORON. YOU ARE THE ONE WHO KEEPS TALKING ABOUT THRESHOLDS WHEN THE CAS SAID THERE ARE NO THRESHOLDS. LMAOOOOOOOOOO. YOU CLAIM TO BE SMART BUT YOU STILL CAN'T UNDERSTAND THIS SIMPLE CONCEPT!!!!! I TOLD YOU AT THE BEGINNING...

GOOD LUCK PROVING THAT A NON-THRESHOLD SUBSTANCE RELIES ON THRESHOLD TESTS...YOU MORON!!!

Here is that CAS disagreeing with you on all fronts:

"Exogenous Testosterone is a Non-Threshold substance. Meaning, the mere presence in the athlete's sample constitutes an anti-doping violation.

BUT because Testosterone can be generated Exogenously or Endogenously, the confirmation of the Exogenous of the Testosterone is the task of the IRMS testing. The confirmation procedure does not end, however, with the determination that the exogenous testosterone is also present in the urine of the athlete.

WADA prescribes that the results of an IRMS test will be reported as consistent with the exogenous administration of a steroid when the carbon-13 to carbon 12 value measured for the metabolite differs significantly, by 3 delta units or more from the chosen ERC.

In addition, the ratio measured for the metabolite must lie below -28% of that ERC. Even the LAB in applying these thresholds works with varying uncertainty factors in evaluating the results of the IRMS testing.

It is clear, therefore, on the basis of the TD2004EAAS that thresholds are indeed present and must be taken into account in the IRMS testing for the presence of Non-Threshold Substances."

So as you can read above, Non-Threshold substances can have threshold tests!!!! Ooops!!!

But you should have realized all that many moons ago! I even gave you simple examples such as T/E RATIO test is a threshold type test!!!!



KABADABINGABOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOM!!!!!


That in of itself shoots down everything you have been preaching. As I stated, YOU TRAVESTNY ARE WRONG!!!!!!




Also in the case, there are supposedly 4 criteria tested. The athlete says that several of the threshold tests are off so the test results are useless. BUT the panel agreed with USADA that other criteria are just as reliable so the athlete was wrong and USADA was right

The panel agreed with USADA that only 1 of the following 4 criteria have to be satisfied for an athlete's sample to be found positive for the presence of exogenous testosterone:
1. Was the 11OH-Andor difference greater than 3 delta units?
2. Was the 11OH-Etio difference greater than 3 delta units?
3. Was the delta value of Andro by itself below -28 units?
4. Was the delta value of Etio by itself below -28 units?

Next WRONG point by TRAVESTYNY - You keep on stating, if it is a Qualitative test then there are no threshold type tests.

"There are WADA experts in court stating that EPO testing is qualitative.
A. Okay, it is of qualitative nature.
Is the WADA expert wrong? You love that line.

OWNED."
Travestyny

I didn't deflect. I agreed that they are qualitative in nature but

ADP02
"It's more qualitative I agree. I said this early on, remember? As a whole the EPO testing is qualitative since there are numerous types of tests and variables to consider but there are quantitative test results and threshold type test!!!"

Travestyny
"And you just merked yourself by admitting it's qualitative"

The case agrees with both of us that it's qualitative but remember that they also said that there can be threshold type tests for non-threshold substances!!! Say what?

"- Identification capability: Since the results for Non-Threshold Substances are not quantitative, the Laboratory should establish criteria for ensuring that a substance representative of the class of Prohibited Substances can be repeatedly identified and detected as present in the sample at the MRPL."

Here is one more thing that you said:

travestyny - "But they don't state that there are thresholds in the document"

As I stated, by reading and understanding the criteria one can tell that it is implied.

The panel referred to a document for the threshold tests but if you were to look at the document, they are not referred to as threshold type tests! The document never refers them as thresholds but rather "deltas" and "ratios". Ooops!!!


So as you should finally realize, you are WRONG TRAVESTYNY and the WADA EXPERTs were right.



You misinterpreted what the CAS panel was trying to state and much much more!!!!

YOU were comparing apples to oranges. The panel told the athlete and YOU that there is not just a single criteria named BAP test for EPO testing so it's not like testing "threshold substances". There can be other tests as well if they are just as reliable. The panel agreed.


But you should have realized all of this when the WADA EXPERTS called it a threshold type test.


Both sides called it a threshold test!




In this post alone, I identified several of your statements being WRONG Travestyny. I lost track on how many!!!! Care to count?




.

You tried really hard Go find out what the WADATD2004EAAS document was all about. Better yet, update to the WADA TD2014EAAS document. LMAOOOOO. Keep trying to connect this to the ABP. Dosumpthin already schooled you on that. And stop writing me novels.


I'm not reading anything from you until you answer these questions in order.

Until you are ready to answer these questions, stop writing to me.

1. What is the threshold for the BAP?

2. Is the BAP in the WADA TD2014 EPO document?

3. Did the court say the BAP specifically is not a threshold? (Keep in mind the answer to Question #1).

4. Did the court say specifically that there is NO THRESHOLD for EPO?

5. Did the court’s statement contradict your statement?

stop writing long posts ?

I feel your pain! It must have hurt reading all those WRONGs of Travestyny!!!


DEFLECTION CITY!!!!

What else could I have expected by the one the call the DEFLECTOR!!!!


Can you not read? YOU HAVE BEEN WRONG ALL ALONG!!!!



You have equated threshold substances as apples and EPO testing as NOT apples but how can you compare threshold to non-threshold susbtances!!!! It is a different beast.

Not the same. Poor Travesytny cannot get it even if the door just hit him in the face!!!


According to the LAB, the test for BAP was 80% as that is what has been used as precedence by CAS and that was the rules according to WADA/IOC up to that point. The UCI federation accepted any and all criteria.

The lab's head dude named Dr Catlin said that there is a BAP threshold of 80% but the LAB now have other criteria that can also be used and are reliable. The panel agreed since WADA's upcoming document has this change anyhoot!


Even the current EPO document works that way! There are multiple criteria. One can be sufficient but a threshold criteria is not the end all .... it's just 1 of several (depending on the test) and they also have 2nd opinions and so on .... but the question was all along, was there a threshold type criteria.

Well, it is useless asking you because you are too far gone, too lost, too confused!!!

Go back to posting threshold substances!!!


1) So do you still think that non-threshold substances cannot have threshold type tests?

2) So do you still think that if it's a qualitative result that there cannot be threshold type tests?

3) So do you still think that if another criteria is used that it then means that none of the criteria are threshold type criteria?

4) So do you still think that they were discussing to the athlete that because there is just a mere presence required of the substance, no threshold tests are in the picture?

5) You still think that the panel was discussing apples (threshold substances) to oranges (non-threshold substances) to state that only threshold substances have threshold type tests? How does it feel now that you had this WRONG??? I feel for you!!!



Man, I can go on ..... OK, OK, I will!!! LOL

6) You still think that there are no Ratios, scores, none of that?

7) It was not about the intensity of the bands?

8) The CUT-OFF Line is not calculated?

9) ABP hematological module is not used in the detection of EPO?

10) I better stop because you will say that I found too many mistakes made by you (stop writing long posts)


.

[Spoon23]

We have breaking news!!

Travestyny has been disqualified according to a judge. Travestyny lost by disqualification in the Bobby Deez challenge thread!

The bet was a signature bet and all his points. And yet this slime ball hasn't paid up and haven't even surrendered his sig. What an Eff'ng cvnt. No credibility, and no honor. As a public service, pls refrain from dealing with this fraud. She is a member of the fl0mo fraudster mafia club. IF you are offered a deal with this person. Be aware that she will not honor any future dealings, and will always be a menace to society. Be on your guard.

[travestyny]

We have breaking news!!

Travestyny has been disqualified according to a judge. Travestyny lost by disqualification in the Bobby Deez challenge thread!

The bet was a signature bet and all his points. And yet this slime ball hasn't paid up and haven't even surrendered his sig. What an Eff'ng cvnt. No credibility, and no honor. As a public service, pls refrain from dealing with this fraud. She is a member of the fl0mo fraudster mafia club. IF you are offered a deal with this person. Be aware that she will not honor any future dealings, and will always be a menace to society. Be on your guard.

Keep trying, fat Buboy

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