Pac - Marquez V - drug testing

It looks like if this fight is to take place, Pacquiao's team are to mandate VADA testing as has been standard protocol in his recent fights (Rios and Bradley).
 

Whilst Manny is a freak of a Flyweight and Marquez could probably play Arnie in Predator 3...

Best to remember you are Innocent till proven Guilty.........and to watch the libellous statements.

If Pacquiao mandates VADA testing I guarantee there'll be no 5th fight.

Shame Ricky Hatton didn't mandate VADA testing.

hazharrison wrote:If Pacquiao mandates VADA testing I guarantee there'll be no 5th fight.

Shame Ricky Hatton didn't mandate VADA testing.

If Ricky had, he might have lasted a few more rounds. Imo Pacquaio was definitley not clean. Funny how his power and a bit of his freakish speed disappered when the rumours started.

AdamT wrote:

hazharrison wrote:If Pacquiao mandates VADA testing I guarantee there'll be no 5th fight.

Shame Ricky Hatton didn't mandate VADA testing.

If Ricky had, he might have lasted a few more rounds. Imo Pacquaio was definitley not clean. Funny how his power and a bit of his freakish speed disappered when the rumours started.

maybe it is just due to age......

Love it. He's seen as the only threat to Floyd, Floyd's father accuses him of PEDs and now everyone believes it. Reliable source n all

To be fair john, pac did settle out of court re failed A samples. Allegedly. Oh no, that was floyd, allegedly, my bad.

AdamT wrote:

hazharrison wrote:If Pacquiao mandates VADA testing I guarantee there'll be no 5th fight.

Shame Ricky Hatton didn't mandate VADA testing.

If Ricky had, he might have lasted a few more rounds. Imo Pacquaio was definitley not clean. Funny how his power and a bit of his freakish speed disappered when the rumours started.

The timeline of him working with Alex Ariza is interesting (the guy Freddie Roach stated used to give Pacquiao a drink each day which neither of them knew what it consisted of).

Jebus. At 16 I weighed 9stone. Now I weigh 12.5 12 years later just through a change in metabolism and muscle ratio. I'm much stronger and just as fast. Why is Pacquiao constantly forced into this argument? Age brings weight in most cases. Do you ever hear of boxers consistently going down in weight? No.

So, be quiet with the allegations, its ridiculous.

It doesn't happen all that much in boxing Jabby which is why their are rumblings of discontent and with the feeble testing in place it's more than likely that doping is rife in Boxing.

Thing is, loads of people have been caught lately, and yet it's Pacquiao's legacy that will be stigmatised the most. All because the Mayweathers couldn't handle not being top of the heap for a little while.

Nothing to do with the Mayweather's JBW, he has himself to blame with his refusal to accept more stringent testing that will lead to suspicions. As for those who have been caught well they won't be remembered in years to come will they which Pacquiao will.

Mayweather wasn't a bastien of fair play, advocating more stringent drug tests and cleaning up the sport before the Pacquiao fight came up.

I'm not suggesting he was JBW but the moment somebody refuses more stringent testing then immediately you start to question their motives.

For some reason Mayweather was a little suspicious of a flyweight hitting like a middle..

Don't know why ??   

And Floyd is still running from that little flyweight today, bless him.

cheers Rodders

Funny, thing is, Floyd isn't/wasn't actually asking for stringent testing. USADA is not the bastion of drug testing. I don't know or understand why we choose to pretend otherwise.

Any testing is better than no testing and USADA is still pretty stringent.

Nineteen athletes caught in 2009 via USADA. 36 the following year. Given the sheer scope of tested athletes, hardly impressive figures.

Would actually be interested to see how many boxers tested positive in 2009.

Hitting like a middle? Truss have you fought Pacquiao or is that conjecture? Not like you to make a completely unfounded claim is it? Evidence?

Pacquiao is yet to be caught "doping" - I'm sure he's been tested throughout the years. Maybe he's just not been caught, maybe its not been stringent enough but we know one thing - he is yet to be caught, therefore any claim otherwise is absolutely unfounded bullsh*t is it not?

Cycling has taught me one thing that nobody is above suspicion.

kingraf wrote:Funny, thing is, Floyd isn't/wasn't actually asking for stringent testing. USADA is not the bastion of drug testing. I don't know or understand why we choose to pretend otherwise.

Did floyd want the most stringent testing? There is a theory he was merely asking for testing he knew he would pass and thought his opponent might not. The same theory that has him only fighting in Vegas... paying a settlement to manny etc. Not saying its correct, just a theory.

I haven't a clue whether either of floyd or manny are on  PEDS, but floyd asking  for testing  means nothing when the chemists are bragging they can best any test. As hammy says, no one is above suspicion, unfortunately

If I had a gun to my head i'd say they were both on something but I don't think it's a coincidence that Pacquiao splits with Ariza and his performances go downhill. The way Pacquiao fights I imagine would benefit more from PED's than Mayweather who's style is more down to technical attributes rather than physical ones.

Look, it is of course possible that either, or possibly both are doping. But you'll excuse me if I don't crucify Manny under this mountain of evidence.

USADA isn't the worst doping watchdog, but they certainly aren't the cream, and more importantly in 2009, hardly had vastly differing figures from boxing. Also, key to note Floyd wasn't asking for Olympic Style Drug Testing. OSDT means year round, anytime. What Floyd was asking for was some testing during camp, and leading into the fight. Imagine that, a fighter who fights once a year, who keeps himself in shape year round, only getting tested for 30-60 days. Sure, he was desperately worried about doping.

I've removed some of the comments in this thread, please be aware of the pain in the arse it is to clean a thread up after someone makes a stupid, and potentially libellous comments.

Just wondered why other boxing dont seem to remove libellous comments all that much. With 606 is it less about libel and more to do with maintaining standards and reputation? Whichever, its right to remove stupid comments - mine included.

It's down to each site I guess, but we had an issue last year which wasn't easy to deal with and don't want to deal with again.

hampo171 wrote:I've removed some of the comments in this thread, please be aware of the pain in the arse it is to clean a thread up after someone makes a stupid, and potentially libellous comments.

I take it that it was my post you were talking about, don't think that it was potentially libelous, certainly didn't intend it to be, apologies for it though & I understand your position on the issue.

No mate, there were several posts that had quoted the comment I'm referring to. Easier to get rid of them all

Thing is if I said the same on twitter and it got retweeted and everyone got on the bandwagon with their own comments would they delete all the posts?

Thought that's what terms and conditions were for I.e. To absolve the owners of responsibility as this is a free to join, non vetoed forum where the comments made aren't a reflection on the owners own views.

Pacquiao will be found out at some stage, and he won't be the first nor the last. His fans will be distraught when the truth comes out he is actually from Vietnam...!

Izzi it's your choice, either accept the house rules or don't I don't care.

It hurts boxing every time a random accusation is made for no real reason.

Izzi wrote:Thought that's what terms and conditions were for I.e. To absolve the owners of responsibility as this is a free to join, non vetoed forum where the comments made aren't a reflection on the owners own views.

By moderating they take some responsibility. If the site was unmoderated it would be a different matter.

So what is your argument Izzi, by having terms and conditions it completely absolves the mods from any responsibility and gives users carte Blanche to say what they want.

If you follow that theory would suggest you could just say someone was a paedo irrespective of whether you had any evidence or not? Does that seem likely?

Suggest some of you would do well to try and find an interview from boxing monthly with frank warren from a few months ago. He is suing forums and users for telling lies about him. Can assure you that is not happening on here. If it is a choice between a couple of you getting peed off about how we run the place or Adam and Hampo ending up in court there is no decision to be made.

Might be why boxrec replace his name with Allegedly, and Eastside blank his name. But they have been doing that for years.