Can non-threshold susbtances have threshold type tests

[travestyny]

GO READ AT THE START. That is the ONLY place that we AGREED to the SCOPE and EXCLUSION!!!!

We both said stuff BEFORE the initial statement. Was there an agreement at that point? NOT REALLY.

PAY THOSE POINTS YOU OWE, YOU HEAR, BOY????!!!

[ADP02]

PAY THOSE POINTS YOU OWE, YOU HEAR, BOY????!!!

[/CENTER]

So we were agreeing or disagreeing?

Did you say, ADP02, you are right?

Did you say, ADP02, did you mean what I thought you meant? You do misinterpret things a lot!!!


Poor dude is trying to change where we BOTH AGREED and thinks he can stop sweating!!!


First of all, if you back to that thread, you would see that I identify where we BOTH AGREED and it is the place in which I keep on posting to you. So sorry, you misinterpreted this AGAIN!!!!


That is, the agreement made by BOTH of us was, the post that includes T/E RATIO SCREENING example.




These arguments came up because YOU will NOT STOP at anything to limit the SCOPE. Like I said, you tried to even remove criteria that was IN the document that you are CRYING about.

The above is even though you said there are NO thresholds, ratios, scores ….. none of that....Not even for the SCREENING NOR THE CONFRIMATION test!!!!


FLASH FORWARD:
- You were trying to remove from the SCOPE EVERYTHING THAT YOU MADE A MISTAKE ABOUT....

You basically said there are no threshold type tests related to EPO testing.


DID YOU SAY ALL THOSE THINGS? YES




Lets see you admit to that!!! DEFLECTOR!!!



DEFLECTOR,

WE are on 50+ pages

and I am still waiting on the

DUCKER to ACCEPT the CHALLENGE as PER this thread!!!!




.

[travestyny]

So we were agreeing or disagreeing?

Did you say, ADP02, you are right?

Did you say, ADP02, did you mean what I thought you meant? You do misinterpret things a lot!!!


Poor dude is trying to change where we BOTH AGREED and thinks he can stop sweating!!!


First of all, if you back to that thread, you would see that I identify where we BOTH AGREED and it is the place in which I keep on posting to you. So sorry, you misinterpreted this AGAIN!!!!


That is, the agreement made by BOTH of us was, the post that includes T/E RATIO SCREENING example.




These arguments came up because YOU will NOT STOP at anything to limit the SCOPE. Like I said, you tried to even remove criteria that was IN the document that you are CRYING about.

The above is even though you said there are NO thresholds, ratios, scores ….. none of that....Not even for the SCREENING NOR THE CONFRIMATION test!!!!


FLASH FORWARD:
- You were trying to remove from the SCOPE EVERYTHING THAT YOU MADE A MISTAKE ABOUT....

You basically said there are no threshold type tests related to EPO testing.


DID YOU SAY ALL THOSE THINGS? YES




Lets see you admit to that!!! DEFLECTOR!!!



DEFLECTOR,

WE are on 50+ pages

and I am still waiting on the

DUCKER to ACCEPT the CHALLENGE as PER this thread!!!!


.

YOU ARE THE BIGGEST PIECE OF SHlT EVER. Was that the best you could do????

DID I SAY YOU WERE RIGHT????? LMAOOOO.

DID YOU OR DID YOU NOT SAY EXACTLY WHERE THE SCOPE CAME FROM?????????? YOU CAN'T KEEP CHANGING THE SCOPE! I TOLD YOU WHAT I THOUGHT THE SCOPE WAS...AND IT WAS EXACTLY AS YOU HAD STATED. EXACTLY!

Unless I'm mistaken, the topic is now whether WADA labs have a threshold criteria that must be met for an adverse analytical finding of EPO.

but the above should not be confused with my point. my point was about epo testing includes specific threshold criteria that must be passed in order to conclude a positive result.

THEN YOU WANTED TO CHANGE IT AND FOUGHT ME TOOTH AND NAIL OVER PAGES AND PAGES SAYING THAT THE TRUE SCOPE WAS THIS:

SCOPE that YOU agreed on: Does the EPO technical document refer to threshold criteria?

NOW YOU ARE SAYING THAT ALSO WASN'T THE SCOPE. UNBELIEVABLE. ARE YOU EMBARRASSED YET?????

ANSWER!!!! DID YOU SAY EXACTLY WHAT WAS THE SCOPE....AND DID YOU SAY THAT BEFORE THAT POINT THERE WASN'T AN AGREEMENT!!!!!

YOU DID AND YOU KNOW YOU DID. YOU HAVE NO WIGGLE ROOM, SON!

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

YOU GOT EXPOSED YOU CHEATING PIECE OF SHlT. AND BEING THAT WAS THE BEST YOU COULD DO TO DEFEND YOURSELF, YOU SHOULD ADMIT THAT YOU GOT EXPOSED AND GIVE ME THOSE POINTS!!!!!

EVERYTHING I POSTED CAME DIRECTLY FROM YOU, CLOWN. SO WHO IS TRYING TO DEFLECT, DEFLECTOR? WHO IS TRYING TO CHEAT? WHO IS LYING? WHO IS DUCKING. IT'S YOU!

[travestyny]

DUCKER to ACCEPT the CHALLENGE as PER this thread!!!![/SIZE][/B]
.

OH, YOU MEAN THE VAGUE CHALLENGE THAT IS IN FACT ABOUT THE BAP THAT YOU SAID IS IRRELEVANT AND OUT OF SCOPE.

Oh, yea, that's right. The one that you said was out of scope. The one that I told you a year ago that I have 2 nooses around your neck if you want to DEFLECT and LIE about the scope AGAIN because:

1. 2 CAS Panels stated that it isn't a threshold.

2. IT IS NOT A PART OF THE RELEVANT DOCUMENT.


but the funny part is...ACCORDING TO YOU EVEN, IT IS OUT OF SCOPE.

YOU KEEP TALKING ABOUT THE "WILLY WANKER CHALLENGE." TALKING ABOUT I CHEATED YOU TO GET HIS VOTE. EXPLAIN YOUR POINT WHEN YOU SAID THIS:

2) WHILE OUT OF SCOPE, this specific criteria had an "and/OR" in which the panel was describing. In that if there were "additional evidence" that can be used to show evidence that the athlete was using EPO, it can be used.

I'LL WAIT.....

YOUR DEFLECTIONS DON'T WORK ON ME SON. I KNOW HOW YOU WORK YOU CHEATING SCUMBAG AND I'M NOT ****** ENOUGH TO FALL FOR IT. YOU DIDN'T EVEN WANT TO SAY IT WAS ABOUT THE BAP BECAUSE YOU KNOW I HAD YOU ON IT.


BUT THE FUNNIEST PART IS WHEN SPOON TRIED TO GET YOU TO AGREE TO THE REMATCH. WHAT DID YOU SAY?

DO YOU ACCEPT OR NOT???????? FVVCKING ACCEPT AND LET'S GET IT OVER WITH!

NO!!!

SO WHO IS TRYING TO BE SLICK AND THOUGHT I'D LET THAT NOOSE LOOSE BY YOUR VAGUE TRICK. LMAOOOO. SORRY FOOL, NOT HAPPENING. I TOLD YOU A YEAR AGO WHEN YOU TRIED THIS THAT I HAD YOU IN TWO WAYS. NOW YOU TRIED TO BE VAGUE AND BRING THIS UP AGAIN TRYING TO CHANGE THE SCOPE. UNBELIEVABLE. I SAW YOU COMING A MILE AWAY.

BUT WHO IS DUCKING THE REMATCH BECAUSE HIS OWN WORDS ARE ABSOLUTELY OBLITERATING HIM. YOU!!!!!!


YOU TUCKED TAIL LIKE A BROKE DlCK DOG BECAUSE I HAVE SO MUCH TRUTH ON MY SIDE THAT YOU KNOW YOU CAN'T WIN. PAY YOUR DEBT, BlTCH. AND I DON'T EVER WANT TO HEAR YOU TALKING ABOUT BEING CHEATED AGAIN!!!!!!!!! YOUR DESPERATION HAD YOU TRYING TO CHEAT ME OVER AND OVER HERE AND YOU GOT EXPOSED EVERY DAMN TIME. HOW'S THAT FEEL, CHUMP?????!!!!

YOU ARE SO DESPERATE THAT YOU ARE TRYING THE SAME BUFFOONERY THAT FAILED IN THE PAST UNDER A DIFFERENT GUISE. AND THE FUNNY THING IS YOU'RE ONLY EXPOSING YOURSELF MORE FOR BEING SO HURT ABOUT LOSING THIS DEBATE THAT 1.5 YEARS LATER YOU'RE STILL DESPERATELY TRYING TO CHEAT YOURSELF OUT OF THAT HOLE I PUT YOU IN!!!

4-0!!!!!!

//krikya360.com/forums/s...d.php?t=740888

GO TAKE YOUR MEDS, BlTCH. YOU'RE DONE.

AND PAY YOUR DEBT YOU BELT WELCHING, LYING, DUCKING, DEFLECTING SCUMBAG!!!!

[ADP02]

OH, YOU MEAN THE VAGUE CHALLENGE THAT IS IN FACT ABOUT THE BAP THAT YOU SAID IS IRRELEVANT AND OUT OF SCOPE.

Oh, yea, that's right. The one that you said was out of scope. The one that I told you a year ago that I have 2 nooses around your neck if you want to DEFLECT and LIE about the scope AGAIN because:

1. 2 CAS Panels stated that it isn't a threshold.

2. IT IS NOT A PART OF THE RELEVANT DOCUMENT.


but the funny part is...ACCORDING TO YOU EVEN, IT IS OUT OF SCOPE.

YOU KEEP TALKING ABOUT THE "WILLY WANKER CHALLENGE." TALKING ABOUT I CHEATED YOU TO GET HIS VOTE. EXPLAIN YOUR POINT WHEN YOU SAID THIS:



I'LL WAIT.....

YOUR DEFLECTIONS DON'T WORK ON ME SON. I KNOW HOW YOU WORK YOU CHEATING SCUMBAG AND I'M NOT ****** ENOUGH TO FALL FOR IT. YOU DIDN'T EVEN WANT TO SAY IT WAS ABOUT THE BAP BECAUSE YOU KNOW I HAD YOU ON IT.


BUT THE FUNNIEST PART IS WHEN SPOON TRIED TO GET YOU TO AGREE TO THE REMATCH. WHAT DID YOU SAY?








SO WHO IS TRYING TO BE SLICK AND THOUGHT I'D LET THAT NOOSE LOOSE BY YOUR VAGUE TRICK. LMAOOOO. SORRY FOOL, NOT HAPPENING. I TOLD YOU A YEAR AGO WHEN YOU TRIED THIS THAT I HAD YOU IN TWO WAYS. NOW YOU TRIED TO BE VAGUE AND BRING THIS UP AGAIN TRYING TO CHANGE THE SCOPE. UNBELIEVABLE. I SAW YOU COMING A MILE AWAY.

BUT WHO IS DUCKING THE REMATCH BECAUSE HIS OWN WORDS ARE ABSOLUTELY OBLITERATING HIM. YOU!!!!!!


YOU TUCKED TAIL LIKE A BROKE DlCK DOG BECAUSE I HAVE SO MUCH TRUTH ON MY SIDE THAT YOU KNOW YOU CAN'T WIN. PAY YOUR DEBT, BlTCH. AND I DON'T EVER WANT TO HEAR YOU TALKING ABOUT BEING CHEATED AGAIN!!!!!!!!! YOUR DESPERATION HAD YOU TRYING TO CHEAT ME OVER AND OVER HERE AND YOU GOT EXPOSED EVERY DAMN TIME. HOW'S THAT FEEL, CHUMP?????!!!!

YOU ARE SO DESPERATE THAT YOU ARE TRYING THE SAME BUFFOONERY THAT FAILED IN THE PAST UNDER A DIFFERENT GUISE. AND THE FUNNY THING IS YOU'RE ONLY EXPOSING YOURSELF MORE FOR BEING SO HURT ABOUT LOSING THIS DEBATE THAT 1.5 YEARS LATER YOU'RE STILL DESPERATELY TRYING TO CHEAT YOURSELF OUT OF THAT HOLE I PUT YOU IN!!!

4-0!!!!!!

GO TAKE YOUR MEDS, BlTCH. YOU'RE DONE.

[/CENTER]

AND PAY YOUR DEBT YOU BELT WELCHING, LYING, DUCKING, DEFLECTING SCUMBAG!!!!

Sorry but you were fine in arguing about this for 2 months and using it in the other debate. So was it in scope or out of scope?

Read the above carefully then let me know who the SCUMBAG is?

But I will CLARIFY this again ….. even if it takes "BILLION" TIMEs.



The purpose of this CHALLENGE was to see if you would ACCEPT THE CHALLENGE.


IF you DID ACCEPT the CHALLENGE then that meant that you actually believed what you kept on posting to get those judges to vote for you.


BUT you DUCKED!!!!!!



Again, this is on something that you had votes on. Yet, you now lost all confidence on???


So that means just 1 thing. You know that YOU CANNOT WIN THIS CHALLENGE.



YOU ARE THE SCUMBAG that I KNEW YOU WERE!!!!



.

[travestyny]

Sorry but you were fine in arguing about this for 2 months and using it in the other debate. So was it in scope or out of scope?

Read the above carefully then let me know who the SCUMBAG is?

But I will CLARIFY this again ….. even if it takes "BILLION" TIMEs.



The purpose of this CHALLENGE was to see if you would ACCEPT THE CHALLENGE.


IF you DID ACCEPT the CHALLENGE then that meant that you actually believed what you kept on posting to get those judges to vote for you.


BUT you DUCKED!!!!!!



Again, this is on something that you had votes on. Yet, you now lost all confidence on???


So that means just 1 thing. You know that YOU CANNOT WIN THIS CHALLENGE.



YOU ARE THE SCUMBAG that I KNEW YOU WERE!!!!



.

NOBODY DUCKED. YOU DEFLECTED ON SOME VAGUE SHlT THINKING I WAS GOING TO FALL FOR IT. SORRY, CLOWN. I'M TOO SMART FOR YOU. NEXT TIME BE A FVVCKING MAN AND STOP TRYING TO CHEAT.

BECAUSE YOU DID SAY THIS, DIDN'T YOU:

2) WHILE OUT OF SCOPE, this specific criteria had an "and/OR" in which the panel was describing. In that if there were "additional evidence" that can be used to show evidence that the athlete was using EPO, it can be used.

EVEN SPOON WOULDN'T BACK YOU UP ON THIS. LMAOOOOO. OF COURSE, THAT'S BECAUSE HE'S TOO DUMB. HE WOULD HAVE LIED IF HE KNEW WHAT THE FVVCK WAS GOING ON.


SO YEA, YOU WERE THE ONE WHO GOT EXPOSED FOR LYING AND TRYING TO CHEAT OVER AND OVER AND OVER AGAIN....AND THE ONE WHO WELCHED ON THE POINTS THAT YOU OWE.


AND THE ONE WHO CLAIMED THE JUDGES WERE CHEATING YOU....

AND THE ONE WHO DUCKED THE REMATCH. LMAOOOOOOO!!!!!!


AND JUST FOR THE SAKE OF RUBBING THIS IN...ONE MORE TIME, YOU ALREADY TRIED THE SAME DEFLECTION A YEAR AGO, FOOL. DO YOU THINK I'M ******? EXPLAIN YOUR QUOTATION, ADP! TO THIS DAY, YOU HAVE NEVER ADDRESSED IT

2) WHILE OUT OF SCOPE, this specific criteria had an "and/OR" in which the panel was describing. In that if there were "additional evidence" that can be used to show evidence that the athlete was using EPO, it can be used.

YOU OWNED YOURSELF, AND YOUR DESPERATION ABOUT THIS 1.5 YEAR OLD DEBATE IN WHICH YOU LOST 4-0 IS EPIC. THIS **** BROKE YOU MORE THAN I EVEN IMAGINED. GOOD! I'M HAPPY I DESTROYED YOUR LIFE. PAY YOUR DEBT, BlTCH!!!!

[ADP02]

YOU ARE THE BIGGEST PIECE OF SHlT EVER. Was that the best you could do????

DID I SAY YOU WERE RIGHT????? LMAOOOO.

DID YOU OR DID YOU NOT SAY EXACTLY WHERE THE SCOPE CAME FROM?????????? YOU CAN'T KEEP CHANGING THE SCOPE! I TOLD YOU WHAT I THOUGHT THE SCOPE WAS...AND IT WAS EXACTLY AS YOU HAD STATED. EXACTLY!






THEN YOU WANTED TO CHANGE IT AND FOUGHT ME TOOTH AND NAIL OVER PAGES AND PAGES SAYING THAT THE TRUE SCOPE WAS THIS:




NOW YOU ARE SAYING THAT ALSO WASN'T THE SCOPE. UNBELIEVABLE. ARE YOU EMBARRASSED YET?????

ANSWER!!!! DID YOU SAY EXACTLY WHAT WAS THE SCOPE....AND DID YOU SAY THAT BEFORE THAT POINT THERE WASN'T AN AGREEMENT!!!!!

YOU DID AND YOU KNOW YOU DID. YOU HAVE NO WIGGLE ROOM, SON!



YOU GOT EXPOSED YOU CHEATING PIECE OF SHlT. AND BEING THAT WAS THE BEST YOU COULD DO TO DEFEND YOURSELF, YOU SHOULD ADMIT THAT YOU GOT EXPOSED AND GIVE ME THOSE POINTS!!!!!

EVERYTHING I POSTED CAME DIRECTLY FROM YOU, CLOWN. SO WHO IS TRYING TO DEFLECT, DEFLECTOR? WHO IS TRYING TO CHEAT? WHO IS LYING? WHO IS DUCKING. IT'S YOU!

SCUMBAG, respond to this.


You have been CRYING about this BUT lets hear it from you.

Was ALL of the EPO technical document in scope?



YES or NO???







.

[ADP02]

Sorry but you were fine in arguing about this for 2 months and using it in the other debate. So was it in scope or out of scope?

Read the above carefully then let me know who the SCUMBAG is?

But I will CLARIFY this again ….. even if it takes "BILLION" TIMEs.



The purpose of this CHALLENGE was to see if you would ACCEPT THE CHALLENGE.


IF you DID ACCEPT the CHALLENGE then that meant that you actually believed what you kept on posting to get those judges to vote for you.


BUT you DUCKED!!!!!!



Again, this is on something that you had votes on. Yet, you now lost all confidence on???


So that means just 1 thing. You know that YOU CANNOT WIN THIS CHALLENGE.



YOU ARE THE SCUMBAG that I KNEW YOU WERE!!!!



.

NOBODY DUCKED. YOU DEFLECTED ON SOME VAGUE SHlT THINKING I WAS GOING TO FALL FOR IT. SORRY, CLOWN. I'M TOO SMART FOR YOU. NEXT TIME BE A FVVCKING MAN AND STOP TRYING TO CHEAT.

BECAUSE YOU DID SAY THIS, DIDN'T YOU:



EVEN SPOON WOULDN'T BACK YOU UP ON THIS. LMAOOOOO. OF COURSE, THAT'S BECAUSE HE'S TOO DUMB. HE WOULD HAVE LIED IF HE KNEW WHAT THE FVVCK WAS GOING ON.


SO YEA, YOU WERE THE ONE WHO GOT EXPOSED FOR LYING AND TRYING TO CHEAT OVER AND OVER AND OVER AGAIN....AND THE ONE WHO WELCHED ON THE POINTS THAT YOU OWE.


AND THE ONE WHO CLAIMED THE JUDGES WERE CHEATING YOU....

AND THE ONE WHO DUCKED THE REMATCH. LMAOOOOOOO!!!!!!


AND JUST FOR THE SAKE OF RUBBING THIS IN...ONE MORE TIME, YOU ALREADY TRIED THE SAME DEFLECTION A YEAR AGO, FOOL. DO YOU THINK I'M ******? EXPLAIN YOUR QUOTATION, ADP! TO THIS DAY, YOU HAVE NEVER ADDRESSED IT





YOU OWNED YOURSELF, AND YOUR DESPERATION ABOUT THIS 1.5 YEAR OLD DEBATE IN WHICH YOU LOST 4-0 IS EPIC. THIS **** BROKE YOU MORE THAN I EVEN IMAGINED. GOOD! I'M HAPPY I DESTROYED YOUR LIFE. PAY YOUR DEBT, BlTCH!!!!

DEFLECTOR,

your RESPONSE was NOT even on my post. In fact, it was NOT EVEN on the correct CHALLENGE!!!! WTF!!!!

[travestyny]

SCUMBAG, respond to this.


You have been CRYING about this BUT lets hear it from you.

Was ALL of the EPO technical document in scope?



YES or NO???







.

I ALREADY ANSWERED THIS YOU ABSOLUTE MORON. IT WAS ABOUT THE TD2014EPO DOCUMENT.


YOU KNOW...THE ONE THAT YOU LET US KNOW HAS THE SAME CRITERIA AS THE TD2004EPO DOCUMENT THAT YOU SAID WERE THRESHOLD CRITERIA!!!!!


I'M NOT ******, SON. YOU CAN'T FOOL ME SO STOP TRYING! IF IT'S NOT A THRESHOLD IN THE 2004 DOCUMENT...IT DAMN SURE ISN'T A THRESHOLD IN THE 2014 DOCUMENT YOU ABSOLUTE MORON!!!!!! BUT YOU CLAIMED THAT IT WAS, DIDN'T YOU? BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA


YOU GOT OWNED BlTCH! ACCEPT YOUR LOSS AND PAY YOUR DEBT!!!!!!!

If you look at that document from 2004 its similar to the recent one of 2014. At least in what I will bring up. They both bring up Isolectric Focusing (IEF).

1 - "In the basic area there must be at least 3 acceptable, consecutive bands assigned as 1, 2, 3 or 4 ...."
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 2 most intense bands in the basic area must be MORE INTENSE than any other band in the endogenous area"

The above indicate thresholds that must be met ....... I will try to explain ....

OWNED. ARE YOU MAD YET?

BY THE WAY, THE DARK RED COLORING IN THAT QUOTATION IS YOURS. DO YOU WANT ME TO FIND THOSE CRITERIA IN THE 2014 DOCUMENT FOR YOU...SINCE..YOU KNOW...YOU THOUGHT THEY WERE THRESHOLD CRITERIA BUT THEY AREN'T. BAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAAHAHAHAHA!

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

[travestyny]

DEFLECTOR,

your RESPONSE was NOT even on my post. In fact, it was NOT EVEN on the correct CHALLENGE!!!! WTF!!!!

SHUT THE FVVCK UP, BlTCH. YOU AND I BOTH KNOW THIS WAS ABOUT THE DEBATE THAT YOU GOT MURDERED 4-0. YOU LOST. GET OVER IT SCUMBAG AND PAY YOUR DEBT. YOU GOT EXPOSED HERE JUST LIKE YOU DID 1.5 YEARS AGO. I TOLD YOU THAT I WAS GOING TO KEEP KICKING YOUR ASS ABOUT LOSING.


BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. LOSER!!!!