Comments Thread For: USADA Fires Back at Hauser Over Multiple Allegations

[Jake_Lamotta]

It was a story during fight week, nothing since then. Just like Paulie's were a story during fight week, nothing since then.

Hauser plays to the low intellectuals like yourself so you lap it up. Hauser has no more credibility than Paulie does-hence neither Floyd nor Manny sued.

SO you pick which ******ed theory you espoused that you want to run with its either

a) your connecting suing to guilt was ******ed and Floyd not suing doesn't equal guilt

or

b)your connecting credibility of the accuser to suing is correct and Floyd not suing is because Hauser has no credibility.

When you decided which it is let us know.

Damn, what an idiot.

[IR0NFIST]

Serious question. If a person about the size of FM is treated for moderate to severe dehdration with an IV, how much fluid would he receive?

Floyd was never "severely dehydrated", if he was he would have went straight to the hospital after the weigh ins instead of his house. And even if he was slightly dehydrated, it still wouldn't warrant the use of IVs containing 15 times the allowed amount of saline per 6 hour interval.

[Divine Hammer]

Floyd was never "severely dehydrated", if he was he would have went straight to the hospital after the weigh ins instead of his house. And even if he was slightly dehydrated, it still wouldn't warrant the use IVs containing a total of 15 times the allowed amount within a 6 hour interval.

yup. he was 150.5 lbs 3 weeks before weigh-in, said he could easily make 147 lbs no problem, didn't bother to go to the hospital to take an iv (he wouldn't need a tue in that case) which is closer to mgm.

iv therapy for rehydration?????? hahahahahahahahahahahahaha nope.

[ruedboy]

I get your point, I was just curious about the amount of fluid they would give to a hypothetical patient suffering from dehydration.

[mezoomozaa]

It has been absolutely hilarious watching you fckin lames rally behind Hauser lol

dumb fcks didn't even know who the fck this guy was the day before but was quick to jump on his dck and anoint him as a viable legitimate source no question!

No question! No skepticism no doubt!

It's so obvious you fckin lame.

Seriously, I had known Hauser as a biographer of Muhammed Ali, even before I knew there is a boxer called "Mayweather", senior or junior!

[BrometheusBob.]

At least in recent times, since the Cotto fight, they've announced that all samples were tested via CIR.



As far as nitpicking, I disagree. There were a lot of inaccuracies. A true journalist should never have so many inaccuracies. And they also pointed out how they relayed facts to him, but he went ahead and printed inaccuracies anyway to suit his agenda.

And also, $9M is far different from $10M, it's not even close. The figures would have to be more like $9.8 or $9.9 to justify a round up to $10M. Even pointing out little inaccuracies like that just goes to show that the writer either had an agenda, or wasn't doing their homework.

Keeping reading, they clarify that while all fighters have been CIR tested that not all samples have been CIR tested. From the wording, it is inferred that for every fight every fighter can expect some of their samples to be CIR tested but that not every sample will necessarily be CIR tested. That does not include Mayweather/Pacquiao fight, which as you pointed out had all samples from both fighters CIR tested.

EDIT: I'd like to clarify that it might not be necessary to CIR test every sample, I'm not an expert on this matter. Just pointing out that their own document suggests that they do not CIR test every sample which was part of what Hauser was suggesting. Whether that means anything is something else.

ALSO, yes $9m and $10m are far apart but not in the context Hauser was discussing them. The point was they receive millions of dollars in government funding to do a job, and that point is still valid regardless of the particular amount they receive. It is absolutely nit picking for someone to say "they receive approximately $10m annually" is wrong when they receive $8.75-10m per year.

[radioraheem]

Keeping reading, they clarify that while all fighters have been CIR tested that not all samples have been CIR tested. From the wording, it is inferred that for every fight every fighter can expect some of their samples to be CIR tested but that not every sample will necessarily be CIR tested. That does not include Mayweather/Pacquiao fight, which as you pointed out had all samples from both fighters CIR tested.

EDIT: I'd like to clarify that it might not be necessary to CIR test every sample, I'm not an expert on this matter. Just pointing out that their own document suggests that they do not CIR test every sample which was part of what Hauser was suggesting. Whether that means anything is something else.

ALSO, yes $9m and $10m are far apart but not in the context Hauser was discussing them. The point was they receive millions of dollars in government funding to do a job, and that point is still valid regardless of the particular amount they receive. It is absolutely nit picking for someone to say "they receive approximately $10m annually" is wrong when they receive $8.75-10m per year.

In Hauser's article he very clearly stated that USADA doesn't use CIR on samples, as in ANY sample. That is very inaccurate and misleading.

Yes, you can call it nitpicking, but this is journalism. It is very bad to use inaccurate figures and it ruins your credibility. It shows that the writer didn't do their homework. That's the point of the nitpicking. This is English 101. You must check that every figure, every statement, etc, is accurate. Yes, they receive millions of dollars, but you can't say 10 when it's 9 or barely 9. Again, in journalism everything has to be accurate as hell.

That's why with newspapers, articles go through teams of people reading the articles checking for inaccuracies. Over and over and over again before publishing.

[BrometheusBob.]

In Hauser's article he very clearly stated that USADA doesn't use CIR on samples, as in ANY sample. That is very inaccurate and misleading.

Yes, you can call it nitpicking, but this is journalism. It is very bad to use inaccurate figures and it ruins your credibility. It shows that the writer didn't do their homework. That's the point of the nitpicking. This is English 101. You must check that every figure, every statement, etc, is accurate. Yes, they receive millions of dollars, but you can't say 10 when it's 9 or barely 9. Again, in journalism everything has to be accurate as hell.

That's why with newspapers, articles go through teams of people reading the articles checking for inaccuracies. Over and over and over again before publishing.

Yes, I agree that Hauser was wrong about the CIR samples. But I thought I pointed that out in my original comment. EDIT: Despite the fact that he was wrong about the degree to which they use CIR testing, they did turn out not to CIR test every sample was all I was saying. Wasn't suggesting that that means Hauser was totally correct.

Again, he used the word "approximately". I don't think the fact that they generally receive $9m makes "approximately $10m" incorrect in any meaningful sense.

[b00g13man]

In Hauser's article he very clearly stated that USADA doesn't use CIR on samples, as in ANY sample. That is very inaccurate and misleading.

Yes, you can call it nitpicking, but this is journalism. It is very bad to use inaccurate figures and it ruins your credibility. It shows that the writer didn't do their homework. That's the point of the nitpicking. This is English 101. You must check that every figure, every statement, etc, is accurate. Yes, they receive millions of dollars, but you can't say 10 when it's 9 or barely 9. Again, in journalism everything has to be accurate as hell.

That's why with newspapers, articles go through teams of people reading the articles checking for inaccuracies. Over and over and over again before publishing.

Pretty much.

[kamikaze_ero]

So IYO Floyd not suing Hauser is an indication of guilt but Manny not suing Paulie is different. OK. I got it.

floyd does not sue hauser coz hauser has all the facts,specific dates to support his claims
and the former is too afraid that all his testing records will be disclosed if they sue him.the he's hiding something.
While paulie malinaggi su****ion has no facts,its just a hearsay which originated from floyd.This was the reason why pacman only sued floyd coz he was the origin of all these hearsay.No need to sue everyone, sue the roots where it originated.It was floyd and pacman sued him and won that case.