Mayweather & USADA

First topic message reminder :

http://www.sbnation.com/longform/2015/9/9/9271811/can-boxing-trust-usada

That's the thing with a lot of the journalists who write about drug taking in sport, all they do is speculate using small snippets of gossip or information, in reality they know no more about the situation than you or I. Kimmage knows more than most when it comes to doping in Cycling but a lot of his writing is supposition based on an array of assumptions, it's a bit different when Tyler Hamilton comes and says categorically 'this happened and it happened then'.

Hammersmith harrier wrote:It's all a load of nothing, Hauser has a real hard on for trying to discredit Mayweather and his opinions on the matter should be treated as such.

Woods: Floyd fans tell me on Twitter they dismiss such allegations as hating and say Hauser has it out for Floyd. Your response?

Hauser: The issue isn’t Thomas Hauser. The issue is USADA’s handling of PED testing in relation to Floyd Mayweather and other fighters. People are entitled to defend USADA and Floyd if they want to. But the fact that they aren’t specifically and intelligently rebutting the points made in the article speaks to the accuracy of the article. I would urge everyone on both sides of the issue to read the entire article carefully. I know it’s long, but the issues raised are important. That reading would contribute to an intelligent constructive dialogue.

Hauser blowing his own trumpet proves what exactly?

Hammersmith harrier wrote:Hauser blowing his own trumpet proves what exactly?

Hauser: The issue isn’t Thomas Hauser. The issue is USADA’s handling of PED testing in relation to Floyd Mayweather and other fighters. People are entitled to defend USADA and Floyd if they want to. But the fact that they aren’t specifically and intelligently rebutting the points made in the article speaks to the accuracy of the article. I would urge everyone on both sides of the issue to read the entire article carefully. I know it’s long, but the issues raised are important. That reading would contribute to an intelligent constructive dialogue.

You could post that same paragraph a million times and it still isn't going to change anything, the whole article is Hauser making assumptions that have been refuted by all the concerned parties.

Hammersmith harrier wrote:You could post that same paragraph a million times and it still isn't going to change anything, the whole article is Hauser making assumptions that have been refuted by all the concerned parties.

Refuted but not addressed.

So removing after removing all the noise:
.
Floyd used an iv post weigh in. It's not banned under usada. Manny wanted to use a pain killing injectable which is banned, they didn't let him. Neither broke the rules, neither failed a drug test.

hazharrison wrote:

Hammersmith harrier wrote:You could post that same paragraph a million times and it still isn't going to change anything, the whole article is Hauser making assumptions that have been refuted by all the concerned parties.

Refuted but not addressed.

This made me genuinely laugh.

jimdig wrote:So removing after removing all the noise:
.
Floyd used an iv post weigh in. It's not banned under usada. Manny wanted to use a pain killing injectable which is banned, they didn't let him. Neither broke the rules, neither failed a drug test.

Not quite mate.

Hammersmith harrier wrote:

hazharrison wrote:

Hammersmith harrier wrote:You could post that same paragraph a million times and it still isn't going to change anything, the whole article is Hauser making assumptions that have been refuted by all the concerned parties.

Refuted but not addressed.

This made me genuinely laugh.

Denied but not adequately addressed/refuted!

I merely forgot that USADA answer to journalists.

Haz are you Bob Arum??

AdamT wrote:Haz are you Bob Arum??

Not last time I looked. On the topic of Arum, though, this does shine some light on the 2011 impasse:

http://en.espn.co.uk/boxing/sport/story/100115.html

Funny how Floyd has so little power.

He would be really weak without drugs.

Speaking of power. Isn't it odd Manny lost his, when allegations were made??

Not accusing Manny. Maybe it is just coincidence. I'm pretty sure he was always randomly tested.

GGG is another natural power house.

If Floyd done what these two guys do, like stay away from fat burger and eat his spinach, he wouldn't need to cheat.

anyway I now hate Mayweather. He is another Lance Armstrong.

I love Manny Pacquiao. He reminds me of Mother Teresa.

By the way his tattoos are actually miracles from God. He is afraid of needles, but anything is possible with enough prayer and salt water.

We spend so much time having to discus Flloyd on here
I think we lose track of what constitutes news. This is a genuine story going down here. USADA have a lot to answer to. For them to break their own rules for Flloyd and not notify PACs team is pretty unfair.

Although on the other hand who cares. Enough time was wasted talking about two rich guys pretending to be fighters. Time to move on

AdamT wrote:Funny how Floyd has so little power.

He would be really weak without drugs.

See, this focus is such a narrow viewpoint.

PEDS aren't all about brute strength and muscle bound steroid users. Not every PED user looks like Ben Johnson.

They are more often used for conditioning, muscle recovery, oxygen supply etc. Armstrong was stick thin. But his recovery, and oxygen supply were ridiculous.

Serious post this time.

Floyd weighs 150 on fight night m, why does he need an IV to rehydrate.

It's 3 bloody pounds. A couple of good sports drinks and a couple of litres of water and he is better than ever.

To be honest, it is very strange.

You would have to wonder what the point of a drug testing agency who are paid fees by the athletes they are testing is anyway. Tobacco industry sponsoring cancer research etc

Forget Mayweather and the numerous other boxers who are all probably cheating. The point of the article is calling USADAs credibility and the cheating in boxing into focus. Its a good read and doesnt look good for USADA (or any of the boxers mentioned in the article).

To be honest, an IV isn't the most damning revelation. The article seems more concerning in general for USADA than Mayweather.

But there is a complete inconsistency in general in boxing testing. There's no money set aside for it. If Mayweather gets to pay a company to conduct testing, is it any wonder he gets leeway?

The whole governance around boxing is a complete mess.

Why would he be masking a ped that close to the fight?
Manny had 13 tests before and after the fight so I'd guess Floyd had something similar. Maybe Usada wouldn't say but if he'd had a positive test in the lead up to the fight we'd find out at some point.
Basically, I'm trying to say that it would be too late by fight time to mask anything as he'd already have been tested on the lead up to the fight for any ped.
I'm no expert on personal but I'd assume there's not much that could  work the day before the fight.

The article was a bit of an eye opener and it's obviously going to cause a lot of damage to Usada. Floyd will have to make a statement at some point.
He'll probably sell a few more ppvs if he says he'll make a statement in the ring after the fight. Joking but it's eagerly awaited and I don't think it can be swept under any carpets this time.

AdamT wrote:Funny how Floyd has so little power.

He would be really weak without drugs.

Speaking of power. Isn't it odd Manny lost his, when allegations were made??

Not accusing Manny. Maybe it is just coincidence. I'm pretty sure he was always randomly tested.

GGG is another natural power house.

If Floyd done what these two guys do, like stay away from fat burger and eat his spinach, he wouldn't need to cheat.

anyway I now hate Mayweather. He is another Lance Armstrong.

I love Manny Pacquiao. He reminds me of Mother Teresa.

By the way his tattoos are actually miracles from God. He is afraid of needles, but anything is possible with enough prayer and salt water.

I think this was the type of intelligent constructive dialogue Hauser was referring to.

catchweight wrote:You would have to wonder what the point of a drug testing agency who are paid fees by the athletes they are testing is anyway. Tobacco industry sponsoring cancer research etc

Forget Mayweather and the numerous other boxers who are all probably cheating. The point of the article is calling USADAs credibility and the cheating in boxing into focus. Its a good read and doesnt look good for USADA (or any of the boxers mentioned in the article).

The stat showing how many fighters VADA had busted in comparison was damning. Wasn't it USADA that lost Quillin's samples before his fight with Winky Wright?

I couldn't care much either way. Paulie Malinaggi was on video recently, blatantly calling Manny a drug user.

Before anyone gets their knickers in a twist, Paulie is saying it. I believe Manny is completely natural.

Bob,Koncz and Freddie all stand up guys, as is Manny.

Paulie is full of it.Manny moved up weights the right way. God gave him his physical tools around 08-10.

Hauser is overly selective in his information, he says that Jeff Novitzky, the federal prosecutor that brought down Armstrong says that conte now "has a platform for anti doping" and has now "come over to the good side".
He completely skipped the fact that the purpose of the joe rogan interview was to talk to Jeff Novitzky about his new role as head of UFC drug testing. Who have the UFC employed to carry out their testing???? You guessed it, USADA. The UFC have also decided to ban iv, according to Jeff not because of ped's but because of blood doping. Atheletes taking their own blood out and putting it back in again. UFC athletes have been hitting back that they use iv's legitametly for rehydration (less divisions, huge weight cuts).

jeff also in the same joe rogan interview talks about mistrust of conte. Hauser talks of him as the sports white night.

Hauser went completely off on a tangent and filled the article with conte quotes. Hauser really cut his cloth to suit himself and the writing of this article.

If your looking for the joe rogan interview, it's a 3 hour podcast, iTunes joe rogan experience. It's worth subscribing to.

Even the mainstream media are starting to pick up on this...

Floyd Mayweather did not follow the rules correctly when seeking approval for an intravenous drip before his victory over Manny Pacquiao, the Nevada State Athletic Commission (NSAC) says.

The US Anti-Doping Agency (Usada) gave retrospective permission after Mayweather had the drip of saline and vitamins on the eve of his 2 May fight.
But the NSAC says only it could approve the drip, and not Usada.
Unbeaten American Mayweather has denied any wrongdoing.

Usada said it granted the 38-year-old a Therapeutic Use Exemption (TUE) for the infusion, in accordance with NSAC regulations.

But NSAC executive director Bob Bennett told BBC Sport: "Anyone should know worldwide, if you fight in the state of Nevada we are the sole authority for approving a TUE.

"Usada has been known historically as the premier performance-enhancing drugs-testing organisation and they have an outstanding record. But they do not have the authority to authorise a TUE to a fighter in the state of Nevada."

If he hadn't cheated, Manny would of won.

Mayweather needs banned.

The NSAC having their nose put out of joint and trying to divert away from the ineptness of their drug testing procedures, as the Armstrong case showed USADA would eat them for breakfast.

An honest question, as I have no idea.

What was the drug testing like a few years back??

That's the whole point with NSAC, the drug testing now is the same as it was 15/20 years ago and it's damning that it's only Chavez jnr I remember them catching and even then they pretty much overlooked it.

If USADA have retrospectively cleared the use of the IV then this becomes a big non-issue.

Fair enough but why did Floyd need the IV.

Does he not walk around 150 or 152?

Hammersmith harrier wrote:That's the whole point with NSAC, the drug testing now is the same as it was 15/20 years ago and it's damning that it's only Chavez jnr I remember them catching and even then they pretty much overlooked it.

If USADA have retrospectively cleared the use of the IV then this becomes a big non-issue.

The issue is: why did USADA issue a TUE for an otherwise banned procedure.

hazharrison wrote:

Hammersmith harrier wrote:That's the whole point with NSAC, the drug testing now is the same as it was 15/20 years ago and it's damning that it's only Chavez jnr I remember them catching and even then they pretty much overlooked it.

If USADA have retrospectively cleared the use of the IV then this becomes a big non-issue.

The issue is: why did USADA issue a TUE for an otherwise banned procedure.

Because he had drugs in his system??

Well you can't issue a TUE for something that isn't otherwise banned which USADA have stated isn't banned by the NSAC so I really am failing to see what the issue is aside from it concerning Floyd Mayweather.

Hammersmith harrier wrote:Well you can't issue a TUE for something that isn't otherwise banned which USADA have stated isn't banned by the NSAC so I really am failing to see what the issue is aside from it concerning Floyd Mayweather.

Mayweather's IV was illegal (due to the quantities involved) under World Anti-Doping Agency guidelines, even though the contents - saline and vitamins - are legal.

This isn't really the crux of the issue, however. The relationship between USADA and Mayweather is more of a concern.

Haz you do a lot of Cat footing. Do you believe he is cheating??

You're reading what you want to read, USADA gave the TUE presumably over concerns about dehydration something which isn't prohibited by the NSAC so why they are now getting involved is anyone's guess. The crux of the issue is this, Mayweather notified USADA about the drip prior to using it and USADA then approved it, whether that is before or after is of no relevance and as such no rules were broken so it is smoke without fire.

The way USADA hunted down Armstrong makes me think that taking down Mayweather would be right up their street, another high profile catch would be perfect for their image.

I've no doubt hauser was selective in his information. He was writing an article to make a point. We'll have to see what the counterpoints produced by others are, before we can see how unfair or unbalanced it was.

It is fascinating how defensive of their beloved floyd some can get whilst being quite happy to spread the muck on pacquaio. We've all read countless times how unbelievable it is for a flyweight to knock out ricky hatton. Now we're all outraged that someone might dig some dirt on floyd whilst there isn't a smoking gun on manny.  

I'm not aware of anyone on here, claiming that pacquaio is some kind of white knight.  Unless i'm mistaken, pacquaio himself hasn't accused mayweather of any wrongdoing, although he did receive an out of court settlement when mayweather, during his crusade to clean up the sport made accusations against him. Maybe Manny he thinks he's on thin ice dishing out allegations, maybe its just not his style, maybe he signed a gagging clause in said settlement, maybe he thinks floyd is clean. Who knows, who cares, but its floyd that's positioned himself as Mr 'do the test to fight the best'.

Mayweather is at the pinnacle of the sport, if you're looking at drug abuse, you are going to start at the top, because that gets you the coverage. Should mayweather become the next armstrong and be the figurehead that lays open abuse throughout the sport, does he deserve our sympathy? Some will say yes, because they're all at it.

If the best defence you have is, 'well mayweather might be a cheat, but its only being pointed out because a journalist has it in for him... and everyone else is a probably a cheat too, especially. allegedly, possibly, maybe his last opponent'... well that's not going to get you taking home a rosette at your next debating competition... unless they give one out for incessant repetition of a morally bankrupt argument.

AdamT wrote:Haz you do a lot of Cat footing. Do you believe he is cheating??

I think there are a number of red flags in the report which require further testing/investigation. Hopefully we'll find out more once the details of his settlement with Pacquiao becomes public record (should that occur).

My main issue is the relationship between USADA and Mayweather (including the possibility of Mayweather receiving retroactive TUEs without NSAC or the opponent knowing about it).

milkyboy wrote:well that's not going to get you taking home a rosette at your next debating competition... unless they give one out for incessant repetition of a morally bankrupt argument.

Our trophy cabinet would need to be bigger than Ryan Giggs' if they did milky.

Hammersmith harrier wrote:You're reading what you want to read, USADA gave the TUE presumably over concerns about dehydration something which isn't prohibited by the NSAC so why they are now getting involved is anyone's guess. The crux of the issue is this, Mayweather notified USADA about the drip prior to using it and USADA then approved it, whether that is before or after is of no relevance and as such no rules were broken so it is smoke without fire.

The way USADA hunted down Armstrong makes me think that taking down Mayweather would be right up their street, another high profile catch would be perfect for their image.

1. Floyd Mayweather received banned intravenous vitamin injections the day before his fight with Manny Pacquiao which failed to comply with World Anti-Doping Agency guidelines.
2. NSAC executive director Bob Bennett told BBC Sport: "Anyone should know worldwide, if you fight in the state of Nevada we are the sole authority for approving a TUE. "Usada...do not have the authority to authorise a TUE to a fighter in the state of Nevada."
3. USADA officials found evidence that Mayweather had been administered an IV drip after they visited Mayweather's home to conduct a random drug test after the fight’s weigh-in on Friday May 1.
4. The TUE was not issued until three weeks after the fight.

Like I said Haz you're reading exactly what you want to read.

1. It being banned becomes irrelevant once the TUE is issued, it then becomes legal.
2. The NSAC have nothing to do with this, under their guidelines the IV drip is not illegal so why would they need to issue a TUE.
3. Retrospective action on the TUE is a non-issue, if there was a problem with it USADA wouldn't have done it.

I love it when people like Hauser try and act like they know more than the actual drug testers and in turn people like you get taken in by it and suddenly his voice of bias means more than the government recognised drugs authority.

Hammersmith harrier wrote:Like I said Haz you're reading exactly what you want to read.

Facts? Yeah, I'm a bugger for that.

Does anyone know what testing is used for GGG?

You couldn't make it up.

This doesn't look good for USADA however you spin it.

What's GGG got to do with it? Can you only acknowledge three modern boxers when trying to pretend you are younger than you are

Fernando wrote:Even the mainstream media are starting to pick up on this...

Floyd Mayweather did not follow the rules correctly when seeking approval for an intravenous drip before his victory over Manny Pacquiao, the Nevada State Athletic Commission (NSAC) says.

The US Anti-Doping Agency (Usada) gave retrospective permission after Mayweather had the drip of saline and vitamins on the eve of his 2 May fight.
But the NSAC says only it could approve the drip, and not Usada.
Unbeaten American Mayweather has denied any wrongdoing.

Usada said it granted the 38-year-old a Therapeutic Use Exemption (TUE) for the infusion, in accordance with NSAC regulations.

But NSAC executive director Bob Bennett told BBC Sport: "Anyone should know worldwide, if you fight in the state of Nevada we are the sole authority for approving a TUE.

"Usada has been known historically as the premier performance-enhancing drugs-testing organisation and they have an outstanding record. But they do not have the authority to authorise a TUE to a fighter in the state of Nevada."

Probably the biggest load of rubbish on this thead.

pretend you are younger than you are[/quote]

Pretend I am younger??

You have given the game away very clearly in this thread. It's not hard to get round IP addresses these days.

If I wanted I could use three accounts with three different IPs. One on laptop, one on tablet connected to next doors Wi-Fi and one on phone. It's pathetic

Lance wrote:You have given the game away very clearly in this thread. It's not hard to get round IP addresses these days.

If I wanted I could use three accounts with three different IPs. One on laptop, one on tablet connected to next doors Wi-Fi and one on phone. It's pathetic

Are you o drugs??

Will I phone Wada to test you??