Originally posted by mathed
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Mayweather's IV injection (Master thread)
Collapse
-
Originally posted by radioraheem View PostUSADA already refuted the Hauser account that they didn't inform NYSAC
You will notice that they also are sketchy about what they reported. When they say that they reported to the NSAC they dont say if that was just the plosive A sample or the previous positive A and B samples. They only say that by late friday they had informed the NSAC about the previous positive samples.
You should have a better eye so you can see when some lawyer is giving you bull****.
You will also notice that they frame their time frame around when the articles were published online. Not once does USADA say when they became aware. If you think that USADA's first news of this was when the articles were published I have some oceanfront property in Arizona to sell you.Last edited by GTTofAK; 10-02-2015, 06:01 PM.
Comment
-
Let me breakdown for you how USADA tells some very clever lies.
The Halestorm Sports story referenced by Mr. Hauser can be accessed
at ... and appears to have been posted on the evening of October 18, 2012. By then, both fighters, the promoter, and the New York State Athletic Commission (NYSAC) had already all been advised
The article they reference says that USADA AND THE NYSAC had been contacted by Halestrom.
Halestormsports.com tried to reach the NYSAC and USADA for a statement; New York State Athletic Commission (NYSAC), who is sanctioning the fight, has no comment. Were still waiting on the United States Anti-Doping Agency (USADA) for comment.
by USADA of Mr. Morales' positive test.
This information is incorrect. By the afternoon of Friday, October 19,
2012, USADA had reported out to the NYSAC the A and B sample
results for the October 3 sample and the preliminary A sample results
for the October 10 and October 16 samples.
What USADA wrote is what is known in law as a response. You have to respond to every allegation in a law suit or the allegation is taken by the court as true. When you are reading these kind of responses you have to pay close attention to what they are actually saying and more importantly what they are not saying.Last edited by GTTofAK; 10-02-2015, 06:32 PM.
Comment
-
-
-
-
Originally posted by DeadLikeMe View PostMedical confidentiality isn't some kind of trick from Floyd numbnuts.
That is why Floyd hired USADA so they could keep his tests secret. That is what USADA does. Just like the Morales case if you test positive they sit on the results and dont report it to the commission.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Mayabang View PostYou should be banned for making such valid points! Don't you know that you're not allowed to have common sense in here?
Here is a guy that claims to train for 6-8 hours a day and seems to have endless energy, then you throw in all the red flags, well yeah, all the pieces fall into place....unless you aren't cool with the picture it paints.
Comment
-
Originally posted by GTTofAK View PostActually they didn't. They gave a vague time frame that could have been before or after the story about the positive A and B samples broke but definitely after the first story of Morales testing positive broke. The fact remains that they had been sitting on the results for weeks.
You will notice that they also are sketchy about what they reported. When they say that they reported to the NSAC they dont say if that was just the plosive A sample or the previous positive A and B samples. They only say that by late friday they had informed the NSAC about the previous positive samples.
You should have a better eye so you can see when some lawyer is giving you bull****.
You will also notice that they frame their time frame around when the articles were published online. Not once does USADA say when they became aware. If you think that USADA's first news of this was when the articles were published I have some oceanfront property in Arizona to sell you.
USADA informed NYSAC Chairwoman Melvina Lathan of the A sample positive, by phone, on October 17, 2012, the day prior to the publication of the Halestorm Sports story. The timing of this conversation is supported by public comments made by Richard Schaefer on October 18, 2012
Comment
Comment