- Joined
- Aug 26, 2010
- Messages
- 19,232
- Reaction score
- 2,351
Might be a stupid question but does anyone know if this ban is retroactive back to his positive results? If so we're conveniently still on track for September. Not complaining, btw.
I'm not saying false positives don't exist, not at all.
So you're saying that there's no such thing as a false positive despite the fact that the actual doctors and scientists who work for anti-doping agencies recognize their existence and specifically have an appeals and exoneration policy to deal with false positives?
Might be a stupid question but does anyone know if this ban is retroactive back to his positive results? If so we're conveniently still on track for September. Not complaining, btw.
they dont exist.
this was not a false positive. a false positive suggests analysis finds something that isnt actually there. that is not possible.
the clenbuterol was 1000000% present. that is not a false positive,.
show me a single peice of evidence of a single doctor working for an anti doping agency admitting false positives exist?
false positive, would involve analysis detecting something that isnt actually present..
just because something has an explanation, or a reason, does not make it a false positive.
*(im not sure you actuallyt know what the phrase false positive means)
I didn't even bring up false positives, that guy did. I only said I didn't mention them.they dont exist.
this was not a false positive. a false positive suggests analysis finds something that isnt actually there. that is not possible.
the clenbuterol was 1000000% present. that is not a false positive,.
show me a single peice of evidence of a single doctor working for an anti doping agency admitting false positives exist?
false positive, would involve analysis detecting something that isnt actually present..
just because something has an explanation, or a reason, does not make it a false positive.
*(im not sure you actuallyt know what the phrase false positive means)
It's pretty clear what he meant (not a false positive, but a positive test with extenuating circumstances).
It wouldn't really be huge. Saunders doesn't have a considerable following in the UK and it's not a particularly interesting fight.
that is not a false positive
Clearly you're not a boxing fan, Saunders is the undefeated WBO middleweight champion 26-0, wins over Chris Eubanks Jr, Andy Lee, David Lemieux... Gennady holds the rest of the belts and already beat Danny Jacobs and Draw with Canelo which clearly GGG won. This fight is by far the most exciting match up for Gennady when you think about what's on the line. 2 undefeated champions both with multiple defenses. I'd rather see GGG fight the only other champion in his division than fight another super welterweight moving up in weight or rather than Gennady moving up to super middleweight.
You're not fooling anyone with that Floyd Mayweather avatar.Yeah, I don't really follow the sport. Thanks for info!
Do we actually know the amounts found in both samples? I have only heard his promoter say trace amounts.. does anybody have a SOURCE indicating otherwise?
6 months isn't bad at all.
Do we know what the second test was? Who releases the numbers you just said?The first test was .8 ng/ml. Anything under 1 ng/ml can be considered to be consistent with meat contamination as per WADA. The amounts were consistent with contamination. The big question is whether or not you think someone with Canelo's resources (and with the awareness of the fact that Mexican beef is often contaminated with clenbuterol) would risk eating contaminated beef when he knew that he could have been randomly tested.