Wilder Granted WBC Voluntary Defence After Povetkin Fight Postponed

So what price David Haye throwing his hat into the ring? He's rated at #8 & gets to avoid the Briggs nonsense plus we might actually get an interesting fight. I don't think for a minute that Wilder will take it though. Pulev is #3 and would probably be a much easier fight for Deontay. He's already beaten Stiverne (#2) and Duhaupas (#4). Takam & Parker were at #5 & #6 so in theory either could be pencilled in but it'd be a while before they're ready given they've both done a (fairly hard) 12-rounder and Parker's already contracted for his next fight.

Maybe Wilder will go further down the list and produce a less-worthy challenger: Step forward the following from #20, #22 & #24: Alexander "No Show for Shannon" Dimitrenko, Dillian "I need a name" Whyte and David "The Chin" Price. It'd be a payday for each of them if nothing else.

So who's it gonna be?

I'd imagine he will be looking around the 20 mark. Decent pay day zero risk. Before a big fight next.

And I for one won't begrudge him, he was willing to go to Russia and fight the cheat, even after people were saying he'd vacate the title instead.

Let him have his easy defence and get back some of that money he's now lost because Povetkin was cheating,

I like Wilder and actually think he's willing to fight the best in the division, hopefully him, Fury and Joshua get it on at some point

Bit harsh labelling a heavyweight a cheat.......

Bit like making Armstrong give his Tours back........and singling out Ben Johnson..

He is a cheat though mate, what would you call him?

He's cost Wilder a fortune, not to mention people who were going to go over there and watch him,

Don't get me started on Lance Armstrong!

Maybe I'm too harsh but I can't stand people who cheat sport

Yet another poster who seems a bit ignorant to the ongoing Meldonium saga.

Is that aimed at me hammer?

The accusations of Povetkin being a stone cold cheat are a bit wide of the mark, the whole fiasco with Meldonium is a mess at the moment.

The whole sport is a bit of a mess at the minute mate, if a substance is banned you don't take it in my opinion, his physical condition and comeback after the Klitschko loss has been nothing short of remarkable, maybe he's just putting the "hard work and dedication" into his training

Hammersmith

He cheated along with sharapova and the rest of the Russian athletes who gained an advantage by taking something they knew would boost performance it's irrelevant that it was not banned you only need water and eggs to be an athlete

Hammersmith

He cheated along with sharapova and the rest of the Russian athletes who gained an advantage by taking something they knew would boost performance it's irrelevant that it was not banned you only need water and eggs to be an athlete

tommyhearnsprodigalson wrote:The whole sport is a bit of a mess at the minute mate, if a substance is banned you don't take it in my opinion, his physical condition and comeback after the Klitschko loss has been nothing short of remarkable, maybe he's just putting the "hard work and dedication" into his training

Just like Shannon Briggs. Recently 400lbs and now knocking out everyone in a round...incredible.

Let's go, Champ!

tommyhearnsprodigalson wrote:The whole sport is a bit of a mess at the minute mate, if a substance is banned you don't take it in my opinion, his physical condition and comeback after the Klitschko loss has been nothing short of remarkable, maybe he's just putting the "hard work and dedication" into his training

It wasn't banned for any of those fights so he wasn't doing anything wrong, they're also unsure of how long it remains in the system and has they have confirmed it was trace amounts seem to collaborate with his reasoning that he took it last year.

It wouldn't surprise me with him either Dave to be honest

Hammersmith harrier wrote:

tommyhearnsprodigalson wrote:The whole sport is a bit of a mess at the minute mate, if a substance is banned you don't take it in my opinion, his physical condition and comeback after the Klitschko loss has been nothing short of remarkable, maybe he's just putting the "hard work and dedication" into his training

It wasn't banned for any of those fights so he wasn't doing anything wrong, they're also unsure of how long it remains in the system and has they have confirmed it was trace amounts seem to collaborate with his reasoning that he took it last year.

What was his reason for taking it?

The same reason why any athlete takes a supplement, are they all cheating too?

DAVE667 wrote:

tommyhearnsprodigalson wrote:The whole sport is a bit of a mess at the minute mate, if a substance is banned you don't take it in my opinion, his physical condition and comeback after the Klitschko loss has been nothing short of remarkable, maybe he's just putting the "hard work and dedication" into his training

Just like Shannon Briggs. Recently 400lbs and now knocking out everyone in a round...incredible.

Let's go, Champ!

to be fair he regularly knocked people out in a round before he was 400lbs... and losing weight is easy. Granted, he looks in pretty remarkable shape for a man his age, but so do I dave  and I do it naturally

you're just getting your excuses in early for when ex two time world champion shannon the cannon lets go champ briggs knocks out your lover boy (whose bulk has raised  eyebrows too)!

If they're taking banned substances then yeah, wasn't Povetkin checked three times and nothing was found then all of a sudden it was found on the 4th time of checking, I'm calling bullpats

Don't be defensive, I've asked the question as I don't know why he was taking it in the first place. I gather Sharapova said she had some medical condition, is this what Povetkin was taking it for?

milkyboy wrote:

DAVE667 wrote:

tommyhearnsprodigalson wrote:The whole sport is a bit of a mess at the minute mate, if a substance is banned you don't take it in my opinion, his physical condition and comeback after the Klitschko loss has been nothing short of remarkable, maybe he's just putting the "hard work and dedication" into his training

Just like Shannon Briggs. Recently 400lbs and now knocking out everyone in a round...incredible.

Let's go, Champ!

to be fair he regularly knocked people out in a round before he was 400lbs... and losing weight is easy. Granted, he looks in pretty remarkable shape for a man his age, but so do I dave  and I do it naturally

you're just getting your excuses in early for when ex two time world champion shannon the cannon lets go champ briggs knocks out your lover boy (whose bulk has raised  eyebrows too)!

Losing weight is easy, so is putting it on and Haye doesn't look anywhere near as conditioned as he did previously so I'm not overly suspicious of someone who puts on a stone in weight and loses muscle tone

Sharapova also claimed to have not read numerous emails regarding it's change of status, basically admitted to using it after it was banned.

Povetkin like everyone else will have used to gain an edge but whilst it wasn't banned it's hard to accuse him of cheating. WADA have handled the whole situation terribly especially considering its benefits are unknown whilst the period of time it stays in the system is unknown.

Hammers you state elsewhere that there's a bit of ignorance re the Meldonium saga. Given ignorance is basically being unaware of something, surely you'd be better served enlightening us as to what it is, what it's for and why people claim to have taken it instead of being a **** and a smart ar$e about it.

I genuinely don't know if Povetkin gave reasons as to why it would be in his system but seeing as you seem to be in the know, I asked if you could provide some answers yet you seem to be doing nothing of the sort.

You're completely missing the point I'm making. Povetkin claims to have taken it last September (was not banned), the sheer number of failed tests since January suggests he may be telling the truth.

Those claiming he's a cheat know neither it's benefits nor do the experts agree upon that nor do they know how long it stays in the system.

DAVE667 wrote:

milkyboy wrote:

DAVE667 wrote:

tommyhearnsprodigalson wrote:The whole sport is a bit of a mess at the minute mate, if a substance is banned you don't take it in my opinion, his physical condition and comeback after the Klitschko loss has been nothing short of remarkable, maybe he's just putting the "hard work and dedication" into his training

Just like Shannon Briggs. Recently 400lbs and now knocking out everyone in a round...incredible.

Let's go, Champ!

to be fair he regularly knocked people out in a round before he was 400lbs... and losing weight is easy. Granted, he looks in pretty remarkable shape for a man his age, but so do I dave  and I do it naturally

you're just getting your excuses in early for when ex two time world champion shannon the cannon lets go champ briggs knocks out your lover boy (whose bulk has raised  eyebrows too)!

Losing weight is easy, so is putting it on and Haye doesn't look anywhere near as conditioned as he did previously so I'm not overly suspicious of someone who puts on a stone in weight and loses muscle tone

if he doesn't tone up a bit are you going back to Rachel?

FFS sake Hammers, I can't wait around for an answer, I'm going for a dump then for my lunch. Hopefully there'll be a reasoned response when I get back...unless anyone else can shed any light on the subject.

What reasons did Povetkin give for why he was taking meldonium? Anyone?

milkyboy wrote:

DAVE667 wrote:

milkyboy wrote:

DAVE667 wrote:

tommyhearnsprodigalson wrote:The whole sport is a bit of a mess at the minute mate, if a substance is banned you don't take it in my opinion, his physical condition and comeback after the Klitschko loss has been nothing short of remarkable, maybe he's just putting the "hard work and dedication" into his training

Just like Shannon Briggs. Recently 400lbs and now knocking out everyone in a round...incredible.

Let's go, Champ!

to be fair he regularly knocked people out in a round before he was 400lbs... and losing weight is easy. Granted, he looks in pretty remarkable shape for a man his age, but so do I dave  and I do it naturally

you're just getting your excuses in early for when ex two time world champion shannon the cannon lets go champ briggs knocks out your lover boy (whose bulk has raised  eyebrows too)!

Losing weight is easy, so is putting it on and Haye doesn't look anywhere near as conditioned as he did previously so I'm not overly suspicious of someone who puts on a stone in weight and loses muscle tone

if he doesn't tone up a bit are you going back to Rachel?

No I'm happy to cuddle up to either. Really Milky, you're a very shallow person.

DAVE667 wrote:FFS sake Hammers, I can't wait around for an answer, I'm going for a dump then for my lunch. Hopefully there'll be a reasoned response when I get back...unless anyone else can shed any light on the subject.

What reasons did Povetkin give for why he was taking meldonium? Anyone?

Why does he have to give reasons for taking a substance that WAS NOT banned.

It's fairly simple.

Meldonium was taken apparently by a lot of athletes, particularly Russians. As such WADA got suspicious and banned it, even though actual evidence of it being a PED is disputed. Nonetheless, it seems unlikely that so many top level sportsmen decided to take a supplement for no apparent benefit. However, it was only banned as of this year, so athletes were well entitled to take it last year, and don't need to give any reason.

There have been a lot of positive tests for meldonium this year, again a lot of them Russian athletes. However, questions have been raised regarding how long the drug stays in the system, and as such athletes caught with trace amounts are saying that it's a carry-on from when they were - legally - taking it last year. This is Povetkin's defence, but also the swimmer Efimova (and probably others, haven't followed all of the cases).

Sharapova was one of the earlier ones caught out, and decided to come clean and say she had been taking the drug, and didn't know it had been banned. Her excuse was she was taking it for a medical condition, but most people think this is a load of bunkum, and done to decrease a possible ban. Taking an illegal PED for a medical condition but not declaring it is a mitigating circumstance, whereas not knowing that it's banned isn't, hence the Sharapova defence. Worth noting she probably right now is wishing she hadn't admitted to taking it, in light of other cases and the above discussion on how long it stays in the system.

Where people are doubtful of the Povetkin case is that he tested negative for meldonium on a few occasions this year BEFORE testing positive, which makes people wonder how the drug could have suddenly "appeared" in his system. I don't know enough of the methodology involved, and how all this works, to pass judgement on that, but imagine it will be discussed at the hearing...

I just want to know who people think Wilder will fight. Right now Povetkin is irrelevant.

Charles Martin ??........After all these days when you're an ex champ you get a few freebie title shots regardless of talent...Based on the fact they can sell you as an ex champion...

Well, he is rated Truss so...
Perhaps it's Chisora. For some crazy reason he's rated in the top 15

Charles Martin is a good bet, Truss. He's average as the day is long but has a championship attached to his name. Low risk, high reward for Wilder.

Mad for Chelsea wrote:It's fairly simple.

Meldonium was taken apparently by a lot of athletes, particularly Russians. As such WADA got suspicious and banned it, even though actual evidence of it being a PED is disputed. Nonetheless, it seems unlikely that so many top level sportsmen decided to take a supplement for no apparent benefit. However, it was only banned as of this year, so athletes were well entitled to take it last year, and don't need to give any reason.

There have been a lot of positive tests for meldonium this year, again a lot of them Russian athletes. However, questions have been raised regarding how long the drug stays in the system, and as such athletes caught with trace amounts are saying that it's a carry-on from when they were - legally - taking it last year. This is Povetkin's defence, but also the swimmer Efimova (and probably others, haven't followed all of the cases).

Sharapova was one of the earlier ones caught out, and decided to come clean and say she had been taking the drug, and didn't know it had been banned. Her excuse was she was taking it for a medical condition, but most people think this is a load of bunkum, and done to decrease a possible ban. Taking an illegal PED for a medical condition but not declaring it is a mitigating circumstance, whereas not knowing that it's banned isn't, hence the Sharapova defence. Worth noting she probably right now is wishing she hadn't admitted to taking it, in light of other cases and the above discussion on how long it stays in the system.

Where people are doubtful of the Povetkin case is that he tested negative for meldonium on a few occasions this year BEFORE testing positive, which makes people wonder how the drug could have suddenly "appeared" in his system. I don't know enough of the methodology involved, and how all this works, to pass judgement on that, but imagine it will be discussed at the hearing...

Thank You...seems Hammers could learn a thing or two from you...namely giving a straight answer to a straight f*cking question without automatically assuming that the sole purpose is the label someone a cheat.

So is Meldonium, in the main, a drug used to treat medical conditions or something else?

Not sure if you're being deliberately obtuse or just being your usual c***ish self but I fail to see the difference between that post and mine.

Believe Dave it is mainly used around heart related problems. This was the point (reasonable imo) Andy Murray made when Maria was done, why would 20 odd year old athletes trained to physical perfection be using a heart drug , be it banned or otherwise. Is the idea that they are all suffering heart issues really plausible.

It has a much nicer tone to it for a bloody start. It also mentions a few things you omitted...

"Meldonium was taken apparently by a lot of athletes, particularly Russians. As such WADA got suspicious and banned it, even though actual evidence of it being a PED is disputed. Nonetheless, it seems unlikely that so many top level sportsmen decided to take a supplement for no apparent benefit"

Maybe WADA have over-reacted "We don't know what it is, let's ban it"...if loads of athletes started eating Revels suddenly would they start banning them...but it does seem strange that there was something of a surge in the number of people found to be taking a supplement with no apparent benefits so you can surely appreciate why suspicions were raised.

Yes, it would be nice to know if his previous tests were absolutely free of the "drug" or if the traces were so minute they weren't worth mentioning so there is some grey area as to why it's suddenly appeared in his system. However, this raises the question as to why a number of athletes began taking a drug/supplement without having any idea how long it remained in their system. It's stupidity or arrogance to assume that because something isn't banned, it won't be in the future and leave yourself open to suggestion.

You're taking supplements to give you and edge, an advantage a leg up on your opponents...how long before the line gets blurred between looking for an advantage and cheating?

Rowley wrote:Believe Dave it is mainly used around heart related problems. This was the point (reasonable imo) Andy Murray made when Maria was done, why would 20 odd year old athletes trained to physical perfection be using a heart drug , be it banned or otherwise. Is the idea that they are all suffering heart issues really plausible.

"I'm taking this drug to treat a heart complaint caused by prolonged drug use"

Anyway, there go again Hammers, Rowley offers an answer to my question.

That's no answer to the question at all considering Povetkin himself has not stated why he was taking it, the Sharapova excuse doesn't envelope everyone.

Hammersmith harrier wrote:That's no answer to the question at all considering Povetkin himself has not stated why he was taking it, the Sharapova excuse doesn't envelope everyone.

That's all I wanted to know, no need to get all defensive and, to be frank, unnecessarily rude!

Wilder will never fight someone decent in a voluntary gimme. He'll go feast on the same bums & stiffs that have made up 99% of his career to date.


Though I think the WBC stance is fair given the Povetkin debacle.

DAVE667 wrote:Don't be defensive, I've asked the question as I don't know why he was taking it in the first place. I gather Sharapova said she had some medical condition, is this what Povetkin was taking it for?

He excuse was as pony as any I've heard.

It can be legally prescribed by a doctor.......for angina. And the manufacturer and Drs guidance is a 6-8 week programme, no more. Yet Shara took it for sevel years....... hmmmmmmmm.......

TopHat24/7 wrote:

DAVE667 wrote:Don't be defensive, I've asked the question as I don't know why he was taking it in the first place. I gather Sharapova said she had some medical condition, is this what Povetkin was taking it for?

He excuse was as pony as any I've heard.

It can be legally prescribed by a doctor.......for angina.  And the manufacturer and Drs guidance is a 6-8 week programme, no more.  Yet Shara took it for sevel years....... hmmmmmmmm.......

Agreed, yet whilst Hammers is critical of the ignorance surrounding the meldonium issue, he's also critical of those wishing to be enlightened. I sought only to know what/if any reason Povetkin had offered for the traces found in his system and Hammers inexplicably leapt to his defence asking why he should offer an explanation for the presence of a drug that wasn't banned by the authorities but subsequently has been. Obviously just saying "well there's no smoke without fire" isn't hard evidence that nefarious deeds were got up to but as mentioned above, why would so many athletes start taking a supplement that appears to have no benefits?

I think this generally raises an interesting question around the whole issue of PED’s and supplements. As someone who prides himself on his lack of fitness and athletic ability it is a subject I am woefully unqualified to comment on, but that never stopped anyone round here! I have no issue with people taking legal supplements, because to object to that raises interesting questions as to where you end. Arguably eating the right sort of food is a supplement to improve performance, not sure anyone would argue high protein foods should be banned.

However I think there is a distinction to be made between taking something such as vitamins or Whey Protein which is designed to aid performance/recovery but also designed to be compliant with regulations and taking something that is designed for a purpose wholly unrelated to improving athletic performance such as that taken by Sharapova and Povetkin, whether banned or otherwise.

I appreciate the argument that as the substance may not be banned those taking it are not doing anything wrong, but for me I am not overly sold on the argument. For me if you’re taking stuff like this you’re clearly trying to gain an advantage by whatever means necessary and even if you’re not breaking the rules you’re bending them about as far as humanly possible. In my opinion, and I should stress it is just my opinion if you’re taking something clearly designed for another non sporting basis to improve performance you’re trying it on. Find myself largely in agreement with Andy Murray on this whole issue. Whilst you’re not cheating for me that is only a consequence of those looking to gain an advantage being one step ahead of those charged with keeping the sport clean than any innocence on your part.

Rowley wrote:I think this generally raises an interesting question around the whole issue of PED’s and supplements. As someone who prides himself on his lack of fitness and athletic ability it is a subject I am woefully unqualified to comment on, but that never stopped anyone round here! I have no issue with people taking legal supplements, because to object to that raises interesting questions as to where you end. Arguably eating the right sort of food is a supplement to improve performance, not sure anyone would argue high protein foods should be banned.  

However I think there is a distinction to be made between taking something such as vitamins or Whey Protein which is designed to aid performance/recovery but also designed to be compliant with regulations and taking something that is designed for a purpose wholly unrelated to improving athletic performance such as that taken by Sharapova and Povetkin, whether banned or otherwise.

I appreciate the argument that as the substance may not be banned those taking it are not doing anything wrong, but for me I am not overly sold on the argument. For me if you’re taking stuff like this you’re clearly trying to gain an advantage by whatever means necessary and even if you’re not breaking the rules you’re bending them about as far as humanly possible. In my opinion, and I should stress it is just my opinion if you’re taking something clearly designed for another non sporting basis to improve performance you’re trying it on. Find myself largely in agreement with Andy Murray on this whole issue. Whilst you’re not cheating for me that is only a consequence of those looking to gain an advantage being one step ahead of those charged with keeping the sport clean than any innocence on your part.

Agreed wholeheartedly, generally the warning on medicines suggest side effects may include bloating, nausea, tiredness etc not increased speed, stamina and core strength.

Gerald Washington linked with the fight on sky sports. He is with Haymon as well so would be easy to make. Wilder would be favourite but it would be decent fight.

A wee tip for you guys, while we are on the subject.

Vitamin D3 at high dose and d-aspartic acid are great supplements. You don't have to lift weights or train to get a good effect.

Both cheap and really do lift ones mood.

Not really relevant to boxing, but thought I would share.

spencerclarke wrote:Gerald Washington linked with the fight on sky sports. He is with Haymon as well so would be easy to make. Wilder would be favourite but it would be decent fight.

Not sure on the "decent" fight bit. Washington is a late arrival in the sport (only started as a pro in 2012) and a former American Football player so he's a big lad. Not much in the way of opponents on his record (he, like Breazeale struggled with Amir Mansour, only getting a draw) and he hasn't got huge power. Seems the perfect opponent for Wilder though. All American fight, both unbeaten so someone's "0" has to go, they can hype this up massively for the home crowd. Should be signed and sealed then...

Relative to what's out there. If we went through the top 50 heavyweights there are probably two or three good ones. Add to that a couple of ones that were regarded as alright have since been banned then I think you have to lower the bar as to what makes a decent fight. Yeah it's not great but it will be watchable.

Maybe someone with more knowledge than me can help here.

Is the makeup of steroids similar to legal highs, as in can the ingredients be adjusted to create a different product?

As soon as one is banned they mess a little with the formula and have something new.

Moving as quickly as this however and the level of testing of the 'new' product is probably not there and the product could be very dangerous.

Things couldnt have worked out better for Wilder here.