Re: 'Roids' - now it's Jeff Mayweather's turn - what's their problem?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
DaxxKahn
Quote:
Originally Posted by
generalbulldog
Quote:
Originally Posted by
DaxxKahn
In what way does he throw any accusation towards Manny? He speaks about the sport as a whole and makes it a point to mention "I do not know what Pacquiao is or is not putting in his system" and further goes on to say Sr is not the only one to say that Manny is on something possibly because he gets more and more shredded....
No where in that article does he state he believes personally Manny is on Roids and no where does he back up SR's accusations all he says is that it is funny how when other people say it its ignored but when his brother says it all of a sudden its big news.....
Sorry I dont see where Jeff accused Manny at all.....He just staed anything is possible and in a cut throat sport some guys are willing to do anything to get ahead......
As usual Jeff remains respectful and his words ones worth listening to because without proof he is not throwing mud at anyone
He didn't throw any accusations at Manny DIRECTLY, but in a more back handed way by stating,
Quote:
“To be honest there are a lot of other people who feel Pacquiao is taking something as well,” Jeff says without hesitation. “They are basing this on the fact that no other fighter has been able to rise so many weight classes while getting that ripped and muscular. Typically when you put on weight on your body you are going to get toned, not completely shredded like Pacquiao was when he fought Oscar De La Hoya. People are looking at Pacquiao’s physique and asking how is this possible?”
He's just doing it an indirect way by saying "other people" as in people in the fight game, be it boxers or trainers. The implication is there that Manny is on something.
People in this thread have stated that he's a good and standup guy, but he's still a Mayweather and it's his brother (Sr.) making the accusations. He's not going to go against blood.
Please explain any of your statements because in no way whatsoever has he implicated Manny.....Shit I know a ton of other writers that believed Roy Jones was on steroids and a bunch that believed Holyfield was on Roids at one point in time but they did not write articles about it it was just personal opinion....
A back handed accusation does not include the comments
"I don't know what Pacquiao is or isnt on".......
And by the way your theory on Jeff not going against what his brother says is worth about as much as a $3 bill because he has gone against every member of the Mayweather family's statements at one point in time...
In fact he has thrown PBF under the bus on more then one occassion
I already pointed out and made clear where he implicated Manny in my last response to you, the quote I highlighted. It's an appeals to authority logical fallacy when used in arguing or for debates. It is a backhanded accusation and also to make it seem like he's neutral he states, "I’m not here to accuse the man of anything but all I can say is that numerous people feel he has been taking something illegal these past fights."
How many times have I seen this trick used in everyday speech or argumentative prose? It's the oldest trick in the book. To paraphrase Jeff Mayweather, "Look I'm not accusing Manny, but a lot of people have been saying he's using steroids."
That is an accusation, not an direct one but it is one. It is the oldest trick in the book in argumentative prose. There are many various forms of it. Here's let's use this as an example, "Look I'm not against immigrants, but I heard they cause trouble, leech off welfare, commit crimes, and are detrimental to American society."
One just needs to read between the lines to see the clear meaning.
Re: 'Roids' - now it's Jeff Mayweather's turn - what's their problem?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Wacko3205
Does everyone really REALLY not see that the Floyd's are trying to push buttons leading up into the next two mega-matches?
Floyd vs Pacquiao is round the corner...especially after Marquez blasts Mayweather into next year & Cotto hammers Pac the F out...I mean...that's the only fight either of them can get...outside of the immediate rematches...
That's the best of the two outcomes...atleast in my world.
Heh heh heh. :lickish:
One can only hope.
Looks like they ain't the only ones that likes to push buttons.;D
Re: 'Roids' - now it's Jeff Mayweather's turn - what's their problem?
Isn't the Examiner a tabloid?
Re: 'Roids' - now it's Jeff Mayweather's turn - what's their problem?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
generalbulldog
Quote:
Originally Posted by
DaxxKahn
Quote:
Originally Posted by
generalbulldog
He didn't throw any accusations at Manny DIRECTLY, but in a more back handed way by stating, He's just doing it an indirect way by saying "other people" as in people in the fight game, be it boxers or trainers. The implication is there that Manny is on something.
People in this thread have stated that he's a good and standup guy, but he's still a Mayweather and it's his brother (Sr.) making the accusations. He's not going to go against blood.
Please explain any of your statements because in no way whatsoever has he implicated Manny.....Shit I know a ton of other writers that believed Roy Jones was on steroids and a bunch that believed Holyfield was on Roids at one point in time but they did not write articles about it it was just personal opinion....
A back handed accusation does not include the comments
"I don't know what Pacquiao is or isnt on".......
And by the way your theory on Jeff not going against what his brother says is worth about as much as a $3 bill because he has gone against every member of the Mayweather family's statements at one point in time...
In fact he has thrown PBF under the bus on more then one occassion
I already pointed out and made clear where he implicated Manny in my last response to you, the quote I highlighted. It's an appeals to authority logical fallacy when used in arguing or for debates. It is a backhanded accusation and also to make it seem like he's neutral he states,
"I’m not here to accuse the man of anything but all I can say is that numerous people feel he has been taking something illegal these past fights."
How many times have I seen this trick used in everyday speech or argumentative prose? It's the oldest trick in the book. To paraphrase Jeff Mayweather, "Look I'm not accusing Manny, but a lot of people have been saying he's using steroids."
That is an accusation, not an direct one but it is one. It is the oldest trick in the book in argumentative prose. There are many various forms of it. Here's let's use this as an example, "Look I'm not against immigrants, but I heard they cause trouble, leech off welfare, commit crimes, and are detrimental to American society."
One just needs to read between the lines to see the clear meaning.
Yeah thats it i'm not reading between the lines, I guess I have not seen this trick used in everyday speech and arguementative prose....:rolleyes:
Silly me....:LOLATYOU:
Re: 'Roids' - now it's Jeff Mayweather's turn - what's their problem?
Jeff Mayweather is the only Mayweather that doesnt annoy the sh@t outta me. He shared his opinion and didnt throw out a blant accusation against Pacquiao. Just his opinion in in attempt to defend his brother. He wasnt an @ss about it. And there are a lot of people that question Mannys going up in weight being completely natural. Im not one of them, but there are people out there. Besides, Jeff lasted 40+ years listening to his two clown brothers delusional ramblings. I respect him for that alone.
Re: 'Roids' - now it's Jeff Mayweather's turn - what's their problem?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
DaxxKahn
Quote:
Originally Posted by
generalbulldog
Quote:
Originally Posted by
DaxxKahn
Please explain any of your statements because in no way whatsoever has he implicated Manny.....Shit I know a ton of other writers that believed Roy Jones was on steroids and a bunch that believed Holyfield was on Roids at one point in time but they did not write articles about it it was just personal opinion....
A back handed accusation does not include the comments
"I don't know what Pacquiao is or isnt on".......
And by the way your theory on Jeff not going against what his brother says is worth about as much as a $3 bill because he has gone against every member of the Mayweather family's statements at one point in time...
In fact he has thrown PBF under the bus on more then one occassion
I already pointed out and made clear where he implicated Manny in my last response to you, the quote I highlighted. It's an appeals to authority logical fallacy when used in arguing or for debates. It is a backhanded accusation and also to make it seem like he's neutral he states,
"I’m not here to accuse the man of anything but all I can say is that numerous people feel he has been taking something illegal these past fights."
How many times have I seen this trick used in everyday speech or argumentative prose? It's the oldest trick in the book. To paraphrase Jeff Mayweather, "Look I'm not accusing Manny, but a lot of people have been saying he's using steroids."
That is an accusation, not an direct one but it is one. It is the oldest trick in the book in argumentative prose. There are many various forms of it. Here's let's use this as an example, "Look I'm not against immigrants, but I heard they cause trouble, leech off welfare, commit crimes, and are detrimental to American society."
One just needs to read between the lines to see the clear meaning.
Yeah thats it i'm not reading between the lines, I guess I have not seen this trick used in everyday speech and arguementative prose....:rolleyes:
Silly me....:LOLATYOU:
You ask for a clarification on my comments you got it. If you can't make a rebuttal then go back to engaging in ad hominem criticism and this silly emoticon. :LOLATYOU:
Peace out!
Re: 'Roids' - now it's Jeff Mayweather's turn - what's their problem?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
generalbulldog
Quote:
Originally Posted by
DaxxKahn
Quote:
Originally Posted by
generalbulldog
He didn't throw any accusations at Manny DIRECTLY, but in a more back handed way by stating, He's just doing it an indirect way by saying "other people" as in people in the fight game, be it boxers or trainers. The implication is there that Manny is on something.
People in this thread have stated that he's a good and standup guy, but he's still a Mayweather and it's his brother (Sr.) making the accusations. He's not going to go against blood.
Please explain any of your statements because in no way whatsoever has he implicated Manny.....Shit I know a ton of other writers that believed Roy Jones was on steroids and a bunch that believed Holyfield was on Roids at one point in time but they did not write articles about it it was just personal opinion....
A back handed accusation does not include the comments
"I don't know what Pacquiao is or isnt on".......
And by the way your theory on Jeff not going against what his brother says is worth about as much as a $3 bill because he has gone against every member of the Mayweather family's statements at one point in time...
In fact he has thrown PBF under the bus on more then one occassion
I already pointed out and made clear where he implicated Manny in my last response to you, the quote I highlighted. It's an appeals to authority logical fallacy when used in arguing or for debates. It is a backhanded accusation and also to make it seem like he's neutral he states,
"I’m not here to accuse the man of anything but all I can say is that numerous people feel he has been taking something illegal these past fights."
How many times have I seen this trick used in everyday speech or argumentative prose? It's the oldest trick in the book. To paraphrase Jeff Mayweather, "Look I'm not accusing Manny, but a lot of people have been saying he's using steroids."
That is an accusation, not an direct one but it is one. It is the oldest trick in the book in argumentative prose. There are many various forms of it. Here's let's use this as an example, "Look I'm not against immigrants, but I heard they cause trouble, leech off welfare, commit crimes, and are detrimental to American society."
One just needs to read between the lines to see the clear meaning.
That's exactly my point. He used that punchline 'many people have been saying he's using steroids' several times in that interview as if trying to say, 'hey listen up, fellas, I tell you the kids on 'roids and many people believe so,' and on the other hand he said absolutely nothing about the possibility of Pac being innocent of the accusation. If some of you folks thinks otherwise, that's all right, you can be right, who knows. But for me, that's the way I see it...
Re: 'Roids' - now it's Jeff Mayweather's turn - what's their problem?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
pacfan
Quote:
Originally Posted by
generalbulldog
Quote:
Originally Posted by
DaxxKahn
Please explain any of your statements because in no way whatsoever has he implicated Manny.....Shit I know a ton of other writers that believed Roy Jones was on steroids and a bunch that believed Holyfield was on Roids at one point in time but they did not write articles about it it was just personal opinion....
A back handed accusation does not include the comments
"I don't know what Pacquiao is or isnt on".......
And by the way your theory on Jeff not going against what his brother says is worth about as much as a $3 bill because he has gone against every member of the Mayweather family's statements at one point in time...
In fact he has thrown PBF under the bus on more then one occassion
I already pointed out and made clear where he implicated Manny in my last response to you, the quote I highlighted. It's an appeals to authority logical fallacy when used in arguing or for debates. It is a backhanded accusation and also to make it seem like he's neutral he states,
"I’m not here to accuse the man of anything but all I can say is that numerous people feel he has been taking something illegal these past fights."
How many times have I seen this trick used in everyday speech or argumentative prose? It's the oldest trick in the book. To paraphrase Jeff Mayweather, "Look I'm not accusing Manny, but a lot of people have been saying he's using steroids."
That is an accusation, not an direct one but it is one. It is the oldest trick in the book in argumentative prose. There are many various forms of it. Here's let's use this as an example, "Look I'm not against immigrants, but I heard they cause trouble, leech off welfare, commit crimes, and are detrimental to American society."
One just needs to read between the lines to see the clear meaning.
That's exactly my point. He used that punchline '
many people have been saying he's using steroids' several times in that interview as if trying to say, 'hey listen up, fellas, I tell you the kids on 'roids and many people believe so,' and on the other hand he said absolutely nothing about the possibility of Pac being innocent of the accusation. If some of you folks thinks otherwise, that's all right, you can be right, who knows. But for me, that's the way I see it...
I'm not a fan of Pac because I felt he took some of my favorite fighters when they were on the downside of their career such as Morales, and I've been critical of him because of some of the crazy Pac fans, but things like accusing the guy of taking steroids without any proof is a low blow by the Mayweathers.
This accusation is almost as bad as when other critics accused the guy earlier this year of being racist because he doesn't fight black fighters or something like that. Some shit are just ridiculous accusations.
Re: 'Roids' - now it's Jeff Mayweather's turn - what's their problem?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
generalbulldog
Quote:
Originally Posted by
pacfan
Quote:
Originally Posted by
generalbulldog
I already pointed out and made clear where he implicated Manny in my last response to you, the quote I highlighted. It's an appeals to authority logical fallacy when used in arguing or for debates. It is a backhanded accusation and also to make it seem like he's neutral he states, "I’m not here to accuse the man of anything but all I can say is that numerous people feel he has been taking something illegal these past fights."
How many times have I seen this trick used in everyday speech or argumentative prose? It's the oldest trick in the book. To paraphrase Jeff Mayweather, "Look I'm not accusing Manny, but a lot of people have been saying he's using steroids."
That is an accusation, not an direct one but it is one. It is the oldest trick in the book in argumentative prose. There are many various forms of it. Here's let's use this as an example, "Look I'm not against immigrants, but I heard they cause trouble, leech off welfare, commit crimes, and are detrimental to American society."
One just needs to read between the lines to see the clear meaning.
That's exactly my point. He used that punchline '
many people have been saying he's using steroids' several times in that interview as if trying to say, 'hey listen up, fellas, I tell you the kids on 'roids and many people believe so,' and on the other hand he said absolutely nothing about the possibility of Pac being innocent of the accusation. If some of you folks thinks otherwise, that's all right, you can be right, who knows. But for me, that's the way I see it...
I'm not a fan of Pac because I felt he took some of my favorite fighters when they were on the downside of their career such as Morales, and I've been critical of him because of some of the crazy Pac fans, but things like accusing the guy of taking steroids without any proof is a low blow by the Mayweathers.
This accusation is almost as bad as when other critics accused the guy earlier this year of being racist because he doesn't fight black fighters or something like that. Some shit are just ridiculous accusations.
You're right, this has got nothing to do with pac-fan issues. Because of my name, I usually get misunderstood but I usually don't engage myself in the usual crap-talks here (some guys try to bait me once in awhile but I usually don't bite), and I've seen couple of them just yesterday. It's a case of boxing, or of any other sports for that matter, at its lowest when the top man, so they say, or any of his relatives, tries to pull down his closest competitor at all cost. I think at the position they're in, they should show a bit more class. The only consolation I get is to think that for the first time, the Mayweathers probably feel really threatened by someone, real or imagined, and their action clearly shows that. So I just hope the threat pac pose to them is real. At least, it gives them the chills;D;).
Re: 'Roids' - now it's Jeff Mayweather's turn - what's their problem?
Not sure why anyone would be shocked at top boxers taking performance enhancing drugs. It's happening in every sport...and if you don't think it is...you are delusional. And forget steroids, HGH, and all that stuff. There is a whole new slew of drugs that cannot even be detected through urine and blood tests...it would take a muscle biopsy to show it is in an athlete's system (you can find plenty of articles about this from reputable, scientific sources on the net). This is just a reality of modern sports. Not pointing at any particular fighter...but just saying people are naive if they don't think it's happening.
Re: 'Roids' - now it's Jeff Mayweather's turn - what's their problem?
I think with someone like Pacquiao who started out at 107 and then had his last fight at 140 where he demolished the top fighter at that weight class...I think it shocks and surprises people to the point where they think it's like a magic trick or something so they ask "How did he really do that?" ergo they accuse him of cheating because it's the only plausable way that he could have accomplished that.
....problem is, sometimes 'they' (the doubters) are right, look at Antonio Margarito. I'm not saying Pacquiao is like him or anything, but no one thought Margarito was dirty until evidence came out that he was dirty.
I do wonder why nobody has thought that Floyd cheats though??? Maybe Floyd is the one using roids??? Maybe he has done some shady things with his hands as they used to be brittle as hell and he'd break them all the time and recently he hasn't had any trouble with them....
Just trying to prove that type of doubting can go both ways
Re: 'Roids' - now it's Jeff Mayweather's turn - what's their problem?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Lyle
I think with someone like Pacquiao who started out at 107 and then had his last fight at 140 where he demolished the top fighter at that weight class...I think it shocks and surprises people to the point where they think it's like a magic trick or something so they ask "How did he really do that?" ergo they accuse him of cheating because it's the only plausable way that he could have accomplished that.
....problem is, sometimes 'they' (the doubters) are right, look at Antonio Margarito. I'm not saying Pacquiao is like him or anything, but no one thought Margarito was dirty until evidence came out that he was dirty.
I do wonder why nobody has thought that Floyd cheats though??? Maybe Floyd is the one using roids??? Maybe he has done some shady things with his hands as they used to be brittle as hell and he'd break them all the time and recently he hasn't had any trouble with them....
Just trying to prove that type of doubting can go both ways
Lyle, the problem is...modern designer drugs are near impossible to detect with conventional tests (urine, blood). The drugs are WAY ahead of the testing. For example...we are lead to believe that something like HGH just came onto the scene in recent years. IN FACT...body builders back in the 1970's where experimenting with HGH!! As i mentioned before...some of these new drugs can only be detected through muscle biopsy...good luck having anyone enforce that kind of testing right now. This is just a reality of modern day sports. If an athlete is smart and has access to the newest drugs...it will be damn near impossible catching him/her with current testing. So who really knows who is clean and who is not? We just assume that are favorite athletes have the right morals and ethics to be clean...and some probably are...but who really knows.
Re: 'Roids' - now it's Jeff Mayweather's turn - what's their problem?
And I'm saying that's always been the case.....all you Pac fans should be honored that people think he's doing something because he has been so impressive that's the only rational way people like the Mayweather's can believe what he has done
Re: 'Roids' - now it's Jeff Mayweather's turn - what's their problem?
Manny Pacquiao has come out in print to pursue dafamation charges against Mr. Mayweather once his schedule clears up. He did not want to address the issue legally right now, for it surely will prove detrimental in his ongoing preparations for his fight against Miguel Cotto.
Likewise, it is clear that it is important to Manny that his name shall not be tainted and associated with anything but, and only of the good, and of things above the table. He has been consistent all these years regarding that.
And as of late, he has even kept activities and courses on self-improvement, all in preparation to a life outside the square ring.
I don't see Mr. Mayweather, nor his wayward mouth a part in any of this. Reason enough, to set in motion the filing of defamation charges to sever whatever it is that ties Manny with this punster.
