Re: A neutrals perspective on the Manny debate ..........
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Zilla
Quote:
Originally Posted by
josef4334
Quote:
Originally Posted by
miron_lang
You almost had a fair post until the bolded one. :-\
i guess he forgot how that pre fight negotiations went. how erik got all his demands. like using the winning gloves, blood drawn 2 days before the fight. i guess if you lose to a completely shot morales you dont deserve to win anymore after that huh?
So Manny
can have blood drawn shortly before a fight then. So there's even less of an excuse for him to not agree to the random testing.
he agreed to that. his main point is not having his blood draw so close to the fight based on personal experience in the first morales fight. having blood draw after the fight wont affect his performance anymore right?
Re: A neutrals perspective on the Manny debate ..........
Quote:
Originally Posted by
josef4334
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Zilla
Quote:
Originally Posted by
josef4334
i guess he forgot how that pre fight negotiations went. how erik got all his demands. like using the winning gloves, blood drawn 2 days before the fight. i guess if you lose to a completely shot morales you dont deserve to win anymore after that huh?
So Manny
can have blood drawn shortly before a fight then. So there's even less of an excuse for him to not agree to the random testing.
he agreed to that. his main point is not having his blood draw so close to the fight based on personal experience in the first morales fight. having blood draw after the fight wont affect his performance anymore right?
That sounded more like an excuse of why he lost to Morales to me. The blood was taken 48 hours before the fight, are you saying that 4 mL of blood taken two days ago would weaken you today?
Re: A neutrals perspective on the Manny debate ..........
Quote:
Originally Posted by
josef4334
Quote:
Originally Posted by
miron_lang
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Kirkland Laing
Manny beating Oscar I can understand. Oscar was a shell of his former self fighting at a weight he hadn't been at for a decade. He was dead at the weight, couldn't rehydrate and was basically a mobile punchbag. Hatton wasn't quite that far gone but far enough gone and from the first post in the thread it looks like the rumours about him getting beaten up by his sparring partners were true. But it's the Cotto fight that got me. Cotto definitely was on the slide but it's the way he got beaten up for the duration of the fight. It's like Cotto was the ex-106 pounder and Manny was the guy whose normal weight is over 160. I can accept the weight gain over the past five years, I'm aware he weighed around 140 in the ring for fights five years ago. I can accept he's improved a lot as a boxer over the last five years. But I'm having trouble accepting that he's kept his power and can beat up big elite welters. You just don't go from losing to a completely shot Erik Morales at 129 five years ago to beating up top welterweights without something going on.
You almost had a fair post until the bolded one. :-\
i guess he forgot how that pre fight negotiations went. how erik got all his demands. like using the winning gloves, blood drawn 2 days before the fight. i guess if you lose to a completely shot morales you dont deserve to win anymore after that huh?
There was nothing in any negotiations to have blood drawn two days before the fight. The Vegas people lost his test and retested him but the test wasn't even for PEDs, it was for HIV and hepatitis, they didn't blood test him for drugs and never have for any fighter. Manny then used the blood test as an excuse for getting his arse handed to him by a shot featherweight, realised he had nothing at featherweight level and decided to go on the juice for the rest of his career.
Re: A neutrals perspective on the Manny debate ..........
Quote:
Originally Posted by
josef4334
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Zilla
Quote:
Originally Posted by
josef4334
i guess he forgot how that pre fight negotiations went. how erik got all his demands. like using the winning gloves, blood drawn 2 days before the fight. i guess if you lose to a completely shot morales you dont deserve to win anymore after that huh?
So Manny
can have blood drawn shortly before a fight then. So there's even less of an excuse for him to not agree to the random testing.
he agreed to that. his main point is not having his blood draw so close to the fight based on personal experience in the first morales fight. having blood draw after the fight wont affect his performance anymore right?
Um, I'm gonna need you to know something about PEDs before we continue this conversation.
Re: A neutrals perspective on the Manny debate ..........
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Zilla
Quote:
Originally Posted by
josef4334
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Zilla
So Manny can have blood drawn shortly before a fight then. So there's even less of an excuse for him to not agree to the random testing.
he agreed to that. his main point is not having his blood draw so close to the fight based on personal experience in the first morales fight. having blood draw after the fight wont affect his performance anymore right?
Um, I'm gonna need you to know
something about PEDs before we continue this conversation.
zilla, pac lost that fight with morales. i'm not saying he lost because of the blood test but he did say it weakened him in an interview done after the fight. would you like the same excuse for this fight? i wish both fighters could come to a compromise for an effective test and won't give anybody an excuse as far as drug usage or testing is concern in case they loses.
Re: A neutrals perspective on the Manny debate ..........
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Zilla
Quote:
Originally Posted by
josef4334
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Zilla
So Manny can have blood drawn shortly before a fight then. So there's even less of an excuse for him to not agree to the random testing.
he agreed to that. his main point is not having his blood draw so close to the fight based on personal experience in the first morales fight. having blood draw after the fight wont affect his performance anymore right?
Um, I'm gonna need you to know
something about PEDs before we continue this conversation.
so you're some kind of PEDS expert i suppose. he said the blood draw two days before the fight weakened him. do you want him to give the same excuse if he loses to mayweather?
Re: A neutrals perspective on the Manny debate ..........
how much blood do they take for a drug test? When I give blood I can be weak for a little while but that is way more blood being taken out then a little drug test.
I don't see the problem with having the test in the locker room right after the fight just make it if manny tests positive he then loses his purse and floyd gets it. that easy.
Re: A neutrals perspective on the Manny debate ..........
Quote:
Originally Posted by
josef4334
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Zilla
Quote:
Originally Posted by
josef4334
he agreed to that. his main point is not having his blood draw so close to the fight based on personal experience in the first morales fight. having blood draw after the fight wont affect his performance anymore right?
Um, I'm gonna need you to know
something about PEDs before we continue this conversation.
so you're some kind of PEDS expert i suppose. he said the blood draw two days before the fight weakened him. do you want him to give the same excuse if he loses to mayweather?
If you think Manny losing to Erik Morales had anything to do with blood being drawn you are on crack. Worse yet, why didn't Pac say that after losing? Fighters love making excuses for why they lost. Why wasn't this said by anyone after that fight?
I am no expert, but I'm pretty sure taking PEDs before a fight makes you stronger.
Re: A neutrals perspective on the Manny debate ..........
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Doot
how much blood do they take for a drug test? When I give blood I can be weak for a little while but that is way more blood being taken out then a little drug test.
I don't see the problem with having the test in the locker room right after the fight just make it if manny tests positive he then loses his purse and floyd gets it. that easy.
Less than you lose with a bad shaving cut. An entire set of random blood tests would require 9ml of blood, or less than one-third of one US fluid ounce.
"The amount of blood taken is so small it will have zero effect on performance," said Dr. Gary Wadler, the World Anti-Doping Agency chairman of the Prohibited List Committee. "It's really inconsequential when you take into account the total blood volume in the human body. It's not a valid argument."
Floyd Mayweather's request for Manny Pacquiao to be drug tested is matter of boxing ethics
Re: A neutrals perspective on the Manny debate ..........
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Zilla
Quote:
Originally Posted by
josef4334
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Zilla
Um, I'm gonna need you to know something about PEDs before we continue this conversation.
so you're some kind of PEDS expert i suppose. he said the blood draw two days before the fight weakened him. do you want him to give the same excuse if he loses to mayweather?
If you think Manny losing to Erik Morales had anything to do with blood being drawn you are on crack. Worse yet,
why didn't Pac say that after losing? Fighters love making excuses for why they lost. Why wasn't this said by anyone after that fight?
I am no expert, but I'm pretty sure taking PEDs
before a fight makes you stronger.
he did say it in an interview in 2005 after the morales fight. if you search for it in youtube you'd easily find it.
ok, here it is:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_97MccjZwV4
Re: A neutrals perspective on the Manny debate ..........
Floyd Mayweather Snr is now stating the dude on the far right is on some sort of PED's. Honestly, I want to see proof.
http://www.grimmemennesker.dk/data/media/1/steroids.jpg
Re: A neutrals perspective on the Manny debate ..........
Re: A neutrals perspective on the Manny debate ..........
Manny must be really greedy, not sharing his roids to Bobby.
Great post Jimmy.
Re: A neutrals perspective on the Manny debate ..........
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Jimmy G-Force
Floyd Sr is still on crack. If he really believes that, then why Manny only grew 5 pounds (fight night) from 2006 to 2009?
Re: A neutrals perspective on the Manny debate ..........
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Jimmy G-Force
:coolclick:
