Re: The definitive Mayweather/Pac article
Quote:
Originally Posted by
miron_lang
Quote:
Originally Posted by
eagle
Quote:
Originally Posted by
miron_lang
anyone who has common sense must be thinking the same.
Your the last person who should be telling people what common sense is, considering how ridiculously biased and irrational you are.
You're talking out of your ass here.
Bias? Irrational?
I support Pac you hate him just live with it.
I dont hate Pac at all, i do not like a lot of his Pactard supporters such as yourself. Common sense would tell anyone that a guy walking away from a 40 million + payday all due to not wanting to take random drug tests seems a bit suspicious. Surely even the most deluded fan of Pac would agree that i seemed a very strange move?
Re: The definitive Mayweather/Pac article
Quote:
Originally Posted by
JazMerkin
Quote:
Originally Posted by
fan johnny
That is just like an educator to state the obvious. It's common sense and not the behavior of someone with something to hide. Not only that, it's not an accurate scenario. If my neighbor was shot to death, why the hell would I let the neighbor watch go through my house to look for a gun when I don't even fukn own one. Besides, as a boxer, I would have beat his ass to death rather than shoot him. I'd tell their dumb ass to go to the police and ask them to get a search warrant.
You are a truly god-awful poster. So you attack his profession, even if his points are better than yours, particularly his 'inaccurate' scenario, which is far more feasible than the garbled one you put up.
I assume you mean the neighbourhood watch,
but they generally don't take on investigations in instances of murder, the police do.
Now if the police had truly inefficient methods of investigating, then would you object if the family of the victim hired a more effective private investigator and do you not think not allowing him into your home might make you look suspicious? Why would you not allow him to look for a gun that was not used in the murder if you were innocent?
Your sentence about you being a boxer indicates that you're someone who almost certainly doesn't box, because if you did you wouldn't feel the need to hype yourself as some kind of tough guy with it. You can tell most of the people who box on here because they don't feel the need to mention it to indicate what hard men or women they are. That or you are just a gigantic douche who likes picking on people less able to defend themselves.
If you weren't so busy looking for pactards to argue with, you might notice the correlation you so moronically point out. i.e. "Mayweather" and the "Neighborhood watch" yank spelling not Brit. and the "police" being the "commission". I was being contemptuous with the rest of it. :rolleyes:
I take it your one of those fools that beleive guns kill people or that speed kills. Hell you might even blame the pen for failing those tests.
Re: The definitive Mayweather/Pac article
Quote:
Originally Posted by
eagle
Quote:
Originally Posted by
miron_lang
Quote:
Originally Posted by
eagle
Your the last person who should be telling people what common sense is, considering how ridiculously biased and irrational you are.
You're talking out of your ass here.
Bias? Irrational?
I support Pac you hate him just live with it.
I dont hate Pac at all, i do not like a lot of his Pactard supporters such as yourself. Common sense would tell anyone that a guy walking away from a 40 million + payday all due to not wanting to take random drug tests seems a bit suspicious. Surely even the most deluded fan of Pac would agree that i seemed a very strange move?
If you can provide a link of my post that would say that pac is correct or right in refusing the test then i will admit that you are correct.
But it seems that you need common sense to understand what im saying. Im just stating 'reasons' why pac didnt take the test. You might find it very hard to understand maybe because it needs common sense ;)
Re: The definitive Mayweather/Pac article
Quote:
Originally Posted by
fan johnny
Quote:
Originally Posted by
JazMerkin
Quote:
Originally Posted by
fan johnny
That is just like an educator to state the obvious. It's common sense and not the behavior of someone with something to hide. Not only that, it's not an accurate scenario. If my neighbor was shot to death, why the hell would I let the neighbor watch go through my house to look for a gun when I don't even fukn own one. Besides, as a boxer, I would have beat his ass to death rather than shoot him. I'd tell their dumb ass to go to the police and ask them to get a search warrant.
You are a truly god-awful poster. So you attack his profession, even if his points are better than yours, particularly his 'inaccurate' scenario, which is far more feasible than the garbled one you put up.
I assume you mean the neighbourhood watch,
but they generally don't take on investigations in instances of murder, the police do.
Now if the police had truly inefficient methods of investigating, then would you object if the family of the victim hired a more effective private investigator and do you not think not allowing him into your home might make you look suspicious? Why would you not allow him to look for a gun that was not used in the murder if you were innocent?
Your sentence about you being a boxer indicates that you're someone who almost certainly doesn't box, because if you did you wouldn't feel the need to hype yourself as some kind of tough guy with it. You can tell most of the people who box on here because they don't feel the need to mention it to indicate what hard men or women they are. That or you are just a gigantic douche who likes picking on people less able to defend themselves.
If you weren't so busy looking for pactards to argue with, you might notice the correlation you so moronically point out. i.e. "Mayweather" and the "Neighborhood watch" yank spelling not Brit. and the "police" being the "commission". I was being contemptuous with the rest of it. :rolleyes:
I take it your one of those fools that beleive guns kill people or that speed kills. Hell you might even blame the pen for failing those tests.
I don't need to look for Pactards to argue with, I was well aware of the analogy, hence why I drew it. You of course chose to completely ignore any questions raised by it, instead trying to divert the topic onto something else.
As for your last paragraph, yes guns clearly do kill people when in the hands of an idiot, as does speed when in a car driven by an incapable driver. Although none of that has anything to do with what we're talking about. Oh and I've never failed any tests, and unless you have a PhD (which I'm sure you now will :rolleyes:), I will have an education at least equal to yours if not better.
Again, none of that has anything to do with the topic, which seems to be your aim when you can't deal with difficult questions. Just try and slander them personally and see if you can change the issue, rather than deal with any difficult points raised.
Re: The definitive Mayweather/Pac article
Quote:
Originally Posted by
miron_lang
Quote:
Originally Posted by
eagle
Quote:
Originally Posted by
miron_lang
You're talking out of your ass here.
Bias? Irrational?
I support Pac you hate him just live with it.
I dont hate Pac at all, i do not like a lot of his Pactard supporters such as yourself. Common sense would tell anyone that a guy walking away from a 40 million + payday all due to not wanting to take random drug tests seems a bit suspicious. Surely even the most deluded fan of Pac would agree that i seemed a very strange move?
If you can provide a link of my post that would say that pac is correct or right in refusing the test then i will admit that you are correct.
But it seems that you need common sense to understand what im saying. Im just stating 'reasons' why pac didnt take the test. You might find it very hard to understand maybe because it needs common sense ;)
the reasons Pacman said are the purest bullshit I've ever seen "I'll become weak" "needle superstition thing", come on, I have had 20 bloodtests once in the same damn day and I was feeling top shape, this argument or weakening is just ludicrously mediocre, Pac never gave other arguments for it.
Re: The definitive Mayweather/Pac article
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Nameless
Quote:
Originally Posted by
miron_lang
Quote:
Originally Posted by
eagle
I dont hate Pac at all, i do not like a lot of his Pactard supporters such as yourself. Common sense would tell anyone that a guy walking away from a 40 million + payday all due to not wanting to take random drug tests seems a bit suspicious. Surely even the most deluded fan of Pac would agree that i seemed a very strange move?
If you can provide a link of my post that would say that pac is correct or right in refusing the test then i will admit that you are correct.
But it seems that you need common sense to understand what im saying. Im just stating 'reasons' why pac didnt take the test. You might find it very hard to understand maybe because it needs common sense ;)
the reasons Pacman said are the purest bullshit I've ever seen "I'll become weak" "needle superstition thing", come on, I have had 20 bloodtests once in the same damn day and I was feeling top shape, this argument or weakening is just ludicrously mediocre, Pac never gave other arguments for it.
Can you imagine if the boot was on the other foot and Floyd wasn't agreeing to mayweathers demands and refusing testing? Pac fans would be going mental. They'd be calling him coward, cheat and the rest of it.
Re: The definitive Mayweather/Pac article
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Nameless
Quote:
Originally Posted by
miron_lang
Quote:
Originally Posted by
eagle
I dont hate Pac at all, i do not like a lot of his Pactard supporters such as yourself. Common sense would tell anyone that a guy walking away from a 40 million + payday all due to not wanting to take random drug tests seems a bit suspicious. Surely even the most deluded fan of Pac would agree that i seemed a very strange move?
If you can provide a link of my post that would say that pac is correct or right in refusing the test then i will admit that you are correct.
But it seems that you need common sense to understand what im saying. Im just stating 'reasons' why pac didnt take the test. You might find it very hard to understand maybe because it needs common sense ;)
the reasons Pacman said are the purest bullshit I've ever seen "I'll become weak" "needle superstition thing", come on, I have had 20 bloodtests once in the same damn day and I was feeling top shape, this argument or weakening is just ludicrously mediocre, Pac never gave other arguments for it.
They were weak excuses from Pacquiao. But I'm still waiting for the smoking gun. Where is the hard evidence? Especially the Emails from the NY Times that Teddy Atlas reported. If the NY Times can print the Pentagon Papers surely they can print Emails that boxing's biggest draw is a cheat? No one has answered this question. Any physical evidence? ANy testimonial evidence? I'm still waiting. Not hearsay, not innuendo, but hard evidence.
So I'm still waiting for the emails from the New York Times. That is hard evidence.
Re: The definitive Mayweather/Pac article
Atlas could be senile for all anyone knows, who knows if those emails are legit. What is legit is Pacquiao obviously pussy-footing around with the testing. Talk to any expert on the subject of testing, and they don't need to know boxing to know Pacquiao is hiding something.
Re: The definitive Mayweather/Pac article
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Greig
Hauser excels himself yet again. The man tells it like it is :o
Boxing - Thomas Hauser - Mayweather-Pacquiao, PEDs, and Boxing
"Golden Boy can take the lead on the issue of PEDs in boxing and become a beacon of integrity by requiring its fighters to submit to Olympic-style drug testing before each major fight. And in order to fight on a Golden Boy card (remember; Golden Boy has a lot of dates on HBO), it could require opponents to do the same.
In fact, Golden Boy could start by testing Shane Mosley to protect Shane from unknowingly using PEDs again. It’s interesting how Shane looked very old when he fought Ricardo Mayorga in 2008 and then improved with age when he fought Antonio Margarito in 2009.
And speaking of age; let’s have a round of applause for another Golden Boy fighter; Bernard Hopkins. People talk a lot about what great shape Bernard is in and how remarkable it is that a fighter well into his forties can perform the way he does.
I consider Hopkins a great fighter. Other fighters have moved up in weight and excelled in the manner of Manny Pacquiao. But there is no precedent for a fighter performing as agelessly as Bernard has. I’m aware of no proof whatsoever that Hopkins has used illegal performance enhancing drugs at any time in his career. Of course, to my knowledge, Bernard hasn’t undergone USADA testing.
WBA heavyweight champion David Haye is another Golden Boy fighter. David was a cruiserweight less than two years ago. His body has filled out nicely since then. Very nicely. Now Haye wants to fight Vitali and Wladimir Klitschko. Vitali tested positive for a banned substance while training for the 1996 Olympics and was removed from the Ukrainian national team. He later acknowledged using steroids, saying that he had done so after aggravating an old leg injury previously sustained during a kick-boxing bout. Wladimir’s body is even more imposing than Vitali’s.
If Haye fights one of the Klitschko brothers, a Golden Boy-implemented USADA-like testing plan would assure the world that everything is on the up and up.
Will Golden Boy take the lead in across-the-board PED testing?
My guess is that there’s a better chance of Tiger Woods becoming Pope."
Ok so I guess we should now look at where all this started. Mosley has no problem taking a random test, as a matter of fact a MORE strict test than the 14 day cut-off Mayweather's final negotiation was with Pacquiao. Mayweather (regardless of why) is going to require this of all future opponents.
Re: The definitive Mayweather/Pac article
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Nameless
Quote:
Originally Posted by
miron_lang
Quote:
Originally Posted by
eagle
I dont hate Pac at all, i do not like a lot of his Pactard supporters such as yourself. Common sense would tell anyone that a guy walking away from a 40 million + payday all due to not wanting to take random drug tests seems a bit suspicious. Surely even the most deluded fan of Pac would agree that i seemed a very strange move?
If you can provide a link of my post that would say that pac is correct or right in refusing the test then i will admit that you are correct.
But it seems that you need common sense to understand what im saying. Im just stating 'reasons' why pac didnt take the test. You might find it very hard to understand maybe because it needs common sense ;)
the reasons Pacman said are the purest bullshit I've ever seen "I'll become weak" "needle superstition thing", come on, I have had 20 bloodtests once in the same damn day and I was feeling top shape, this argument or weakening is just ludicrously mediocre, Pac never gave other arguments for it.
1st
let me say that i want Pac to take the test so that we'll have our super fight.
2nd.
I agree that when Pac and company open their mouths it got worse for them.
3rd.
Jimmy G's opening post covers everything from a neutral point of view w/c i think is the exact case.
http://www.saddoboxing.com/boxingfor...ny-debate.html
