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

[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?




.



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)


.

You have two options:


1. Answer my questions posted.


2. Ask for a rematch if you think you have anything.


I'll wait

[Spoon23]

Keep trying, fat Buboy

Wow.. Now I'm fat boy lame AF!! haha!!

Now to EXPOSED YOU EVEN MORE. Straight from the judges mouth who has ruled you Disqualified.

Enjoy. You busted flush LEMON.

Judge GhostofDempsey has spoken. Pay up!

He lost by disqualification in the Bobby Deez challenge thread!

Travesty was only supposed to have five posts to state his case, yet he went on for endless pages. There is also a rule that prohibits mentioning race and Travesty injected race into the thread at post #298. So, by my understanding of the rules, he should be disqualified for both violations.[/QUOTE]

I see. So based on official challenge rules. No race baiting which he did in post #298 and the rule was Travesty only had 5 posts to state his case and went over it, thus, he got Disqualified for those 2. What's the consequence for losing? Eviction from the site?

Yes. The bet was a signature bet plus all his points. He won't concede as predicted because he never admits when he is wrong or defeated.

Travesty is BUSTED again!!

The fun never ends!!

Time to pay up!!

[travestyny]

Wow.. Now I'm fat boy lame AF!! haha!!

Now to EXPOSED YOU EVEN MORE. Straight from the judges mouth who has ruled you Disqualified.

Enjoy. You busted flush LEMON.

Judge GhostofDempsey has spoken. Pay up!



Travesty was only supposed to have five posts to state his case, yet he went on for endless pages. There is also a rule that prohibits mentioning race and Travesty injected race into the thread at post #298. So, by my understanding of the rules, he should be disqualified for both violations.







Travesty is BUSTED again!!

The fun never ends!!

Time to pay up!!

Too bad the other two judges didn't see it that way


Go out and run, Buboy. It's over.

[Spoon23]

Too bad the other two judges didn't see it that way


Go out and run, Buboy. It's over.

lol seems to me.. You are not listening. Before a debate there are rules. You clearly violated the rules, but off course you didn't get that either you slimy cuvt.

Time to pay up LOSER.

He lost by disqualification in the Bobby Deez challenge thread!

Yes. The bet was a signature bet plus all his points. He won't concede as predicted because he never admits when he is wrong or defeated.

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

[travestyny]

lol seems to me.. You are not listening. Before a debate there are rules. You clearly violated the rules, but off course you didn't get that either you slimy cuvt.

Time to pay up LOSER.

You're trying too hard, Buboy


How's Pac doing?

[Spoon23]

You're trying too hard, Buboy


How's Pac doing?

Here have some credibility in your life. Some Food for thought. Read this a million times might open your eyes bwahahaha!!

He lost by disqualification in the Bobby Deez challenge thread!

Yes. The bet was a signature bet plus all his points. He won't concede as predicted because he never admits when he is wrong or defeated.

[travestyny]

Here have some credibility in your life. Some Food for thought. Read this a million times might open your eyes bwahahaha!!

Get your fat ass on a track, Buboy


Maybe you'll find Bobby laid out somewhere out there

[Spoon23]

Get your fat ass on a track, Buboy

So lame.. Buboy? SMDH

Going back.. since it's so much fun.

He lost by disqualification in the Bobby Deez challenge thread!

Yes. The bet was a signature bet plus all his points. He won't concede as predicted because he never admits when he is wrong or defeated.

It's time..

[GhostofDempsey]

So lame.. Buboy? SMDH

Going back.. since it's so much fun.






It's time..

He is in denial. Can't believe he DQ'd himself.

[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)


.

You have two options:


1. Answer my questions posted.


2. Ask for a rematch if you think you have anything.


I'll wait

WHAT A DEFLECTOR!!!!!


Hmmm, lets see. I already answered your questions and YOU FAILED!!!!


So only one option left!

Maybe #2 option sounds better anyways.


Lets see, who is right on this?

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

Travestyny

Oh, that one will be difficult! LOL




Your only hope is to get back the MAYWEATHER MAFIA and company team that let everything slide!!!

EXAMPLES:

"There is no concentration, no ratio, no threshold, none of that."
Travestyny

"It's not even about measuring the intensity of the bands."
Travestyny

DEFLECTOR .... TICK TOCK .......

it is time to admit that,

YOU ARE WRONG, TRAVESTYNY!!!





.