Should Floyd be allowed to use xylocaine for his hands?

I know some people will bring Pacman into this discussion but I want to keep this about Floyd. He's got brittle hands (or so he says) so he numbs them with xylocaine before each fight (training too). My question is, while he's so concerned with his opponents using drugs to give themselves an advantage, isn't this the same thing? Granted not near to the degree that steroids or HGH would give you, but he doesn't feel a thing on his hands when he throws punches with that stuff on them. His opponents however get the full feeling of impact on their hands when they throw at him. Granted they're mostly hitting his elbows and shoulders etc...But they're hands get weaker as the fight goes on while the effects on his hands are delayed until the next day. You could argue that this is the reason why Floyd rarely fights outside of Las Vegas, its one of the only places (or maybe the only place) where it's legal to use this stuff on fight night. If your opponents can't shoot up (and they shouldn't) you shouldn't be able to medicate your hands for a fight. Let me know what you guys think.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 15rounder

I know some people will bring Pacman into this discussion but I want to keep this about Floyd. He's got brittle hands (or so he says) so he numbs them with xylocaine before each fight (training too). My question is, while he's so concerned with his opponents using drugs to give themselves an advantage, isn't this the same thing? Granted not near to the degree that steroids or HGH would give you, but he doesn't feel a thing on his hands when he throws punches with that stuff on them. His opponents however get the full feeling of impact on their hands when they throw at him. Granted they're mostly hitting his elbows and shoulders etc...But they're hands get weaker as the fight goes on while the effects on his hands are delayed until the next day. You could argue that this is the reason why Floyd rarely fights outside of Las Vegas, its one of the only places (or maybe the only place) where it's legal to use this stuff on fight night. If your opponents can't shoot up (and they shouldn't) you shouldn't be able to medicate your hands for a fight. Let me know what you guys think.

---

To my knowledge he's only used it once against Castillo and that was after having surgery on his hands, if you could provide documentation of any other time he used it that would be great.

I would have no problem with the NSAC banning Xylocaine, but if it's not against the rules and his opponents are free to use it as well, I can't really say why HE should specifically be banned from using it. To add to that using their current testing methods there would be no way to detect it anyway, so the ban is kind of moot.

If it's a banned substance then no he shouldn't use it. If it's not on the bannd substance list then yes it's fine.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hornfinger

If it's a banned substance then no he shouldn't use it. If it's not on the bannd substance list then yes it's fine.

---

it's not banned in Nevada, hence any fighter being able to use it.....in Nevada

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ElTerribleMorales

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hornfinger

If it's a banned substance then no he shouldn't use it. If it's not on the bannd substance list then yes it's fine.

---

it's not banned in Nevada, hence any fighter being able to use it.....in Nevada

---

If it's not banned in Nevada, then any fighter can use it in Nevada .............. hmmmm.
........... so, if something is not required in Nevada, can anybody demand that it be in Nevada?

What? What? ......... I didn't mention any name. I was just curious and do not want to start a new thread.

Okey, just disregard the above comment and pretend that it doesn't exist (my computer keys are jammed and I'm not able to delete).

Now, to answer the above question ... if it's not banned, then Floyd should be allowed to use it. But if he wants a level playing field, then he would not be using it.

killersheep brings up a good point, if anyone can prove he used it in any other fight, I would welcome that and it might be somewhat brow raising. It is only known that he has used it in that one fight and bottomline is it is not illegal. So that kind of puts a halt to the argument

Yeah, this isn't really a question about Mayweather. He is following the rules. Xylocaine isn't banned in Nevada. And we have no idea how many fighters actually use it. Almost all fighters have hand problems at some point. And its not like he is doing something tricky. Mayweather's camp was open and honest about it. I don't see how Floyd should be banned from using it if its not banned. If its banned no one can use it. If its not banned then anyone can use it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by InTheNeutralCorner

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ElTerribleMorales

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hornfinger

If it's a banned substance then no he shouldn't use it. If it's not on the bannd substance list then yes it's fine.

---

it's not banned in Nevada, hence any fighter being able to use it.....in Nevada

---

If it's not banned in Nevada, then any fighter can use it in Nevada .............. hmmmm.
........... so, if something is not required in Nevada, can anybody demand that it be in Nevada?

What? What? ......... I didn't mention any name. I was just curious and do not want to start a new thread.

Okey, just disregard the above comment and pretend that it doesn't exist (my computer keys are jammed and I'm not able to delete).

Now, to answer the above question ... if it's not banned, then Floyd should be allowed to use it. But if he wants a level playing field, then he would not be using it.

---

If it was viewed as giving an unfair advantage then it would be banned wouldn't it. so it's not making it an unlevel playing field.

All it really does is allow you to not feel as much pain...Not as if it will make you faster, stronger, hit harder, etc...It benefits the fighter in no way but really after the fight.....In fact it actually can cause the user more harm then good because it does not allow then to correctly judge the extent of an injury in the ring...

Hell in the 70's and 80's cortisone shots were common especially among heavyweights

There are also several different types of xylocaine...Only certain ones are allowed the type Floyd uses (I am guessing because Floyd though an asshole does not take me as the type to put junk in his body) is epinephrine free xylocaine......

I mean this stuff can be and is given to children who suffer from arthritis so there is no real in ring advantage

What exactly is it?

I know that footballers over here are always using painkilling injections before a game when they have injuries. If this xylocaine is a pain killer then yes I think he should be able to use it, providing it's legal!!

I'm gonna go and look it up and see what I can find out about it.

When you consider that Xylocaine is used by Floyd to numb his hands, it's really not bad at all because it doesn't exactly enhance his abilities in the ring.

True, xylocaine does not enhance a boxer's abilities. But the opponent, who did not use xylocaine, is capable of injuring his hands during the fight thus rendering them ineffective. Now, does that look like a level playing field?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by InTheNeutralCorner

True, xylocaine does not enhance a boxer's abilities. But the opponent, who did not use xylocaine, is capable of injuring his hands during the fight thus rendering them ineffective. Now, does that look like a level playing field?

---

because the guy who isn't using is gonna feel the pain and know his limitations, while the guy who was injected is only gonna cause further damage

I spoke to someone today about Xylocaine actually and they seemed to think that as much as you try to localize the effects of it, apparently it has slight pain killing effects all over the body.

If this were true, I'd question whether it should be allowed..But then again if you take a shot on the chin or temple, you can be on any kind of pain killer you want right? You would involuntarily be disorientated.

Then again, not sure if this is true so just food for thought more than anything

I don't see how anyone could argue that a pain killer wouldn't enhance your performance????

Didn't Clottey essentially lose the Margarito fight because he broke his hand? Didn't Vitali lose the Byrd fight due to a shoulder injury?
Pain killers are performance enhancers. It should be illegal and would certainly not be a "level" playing field if you are numbed up and the other guy isn't. Paulie M. fought many fights basically 1 handed because his hands were hurt. If he were able to take a pain killer and not feel the pain of landing a punch he wouldn't have favored his hurt hand, thus enhancing his performance.

I would almost argue that a pain killer has a more direct impact enhancing your performance than steroids would. Steriods cannot improve your boxing ability, only your strenght and stamina. And actually the accusations from Sr. are that Pac is on something that makes him impervious to pain???? Maybe it's a full body xylocaine shot.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by InTheNeutralCorner

True, xylocaine does not enhance a boxer's abilities. But the opponent, who did not use xylocaine, is capable of injuring his hands during the fight thus rendering them ineffective. Now, does that look like a level playing field?

---

The opponent has the option of using it though, he is not doing something his opponent is not allowed to do.

Like I said before, I would be fine with the NSAC banning Xylocaine, but I don't think Floyd should be singled out as not being allowed to use it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by luvfightgame

I don't see how anyone could argue that a pain killer wouldn't enhance your performance????

Didn't Clottey essentially lose the Margarito fight because he broke his hand? Didn't Vitali lose the Byrd fight due to a shoulder injury?
Pain killers are performance enhancers. It should be illegal and would certainly not be a "level" playing field if you are numbed up and the other guy isn't. Paulie M. fought many fights basically 1 handed because his hands were hurt. If he were able to take a pain killer and not feel the pain of landing a punch he wouldn't have favored his hurt hand, thus enhancing his performance.

I would almost argue that a pain killer has a more direct impact enhancing your performance than steroids would. Steriods cannot improve your boxing ability, only your strenght and stamina. And actually the accusations from Sr. are that Pac is on something that makes him impervious to pain???? Maybe it's a full body xylocaine shot.

---

Strength and stamina are direct factors in boxing ability. The only purpose of taking PEDs is to enhance ability, which it does in many ways, otherwise they would be rendered useless to athletes. And Mayweather beat Jesus Chavez with a broken hand. Roy Jones beat Hopkins with a broken hand. Margarito also hurt his hand during the Clottey fight. It wasn't Clottey's hand problem it was his no heart problem.:p

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by blegit

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by luvfightgame

I don't see how anyone could argue that a pain killer wouldn't enhance your performance????

Didn't Clottey essentially lose the Margarito fight because he broke his hand? Didn't Vitali lose the Byrd fight due to a shoulder injury?
Pain killers are performance enhancers. It should be illegal and would certainly not be a "level" playing field if you are numbed up and the other guy isn't. Paulie M. fought many fights basically 1 handed because his hands were hurt. If he were able to take a pain killer and not feel the pain of landing a punch he wouldn't have favored his hurt hand, thus enhancing his performance.

I would almost argue that a pain killer has a more direct impact enhancing your performance than steroids would. Steriods cannot improve your boxing ability, only your strenght and stamina. And actually the accusations from Sr. are that Pac is on something that makes him impervious to pain???? Maybe it's a full body xylocaine shot.

---

Strength and stamina are direct factors in boxing ability. The only purpose of taking PEDs is to enhance ability, which it does in many ways, otherwise they would be rendered useless to athletes. And Mayweather beat Jesus Chavez with a broken hand. Roy Jones beat Hopkins with a broken hand. Margarito also hurt his hand during the Clottey fight. It wasn't Clottey's hand problem it was his no heart problem.:p

---

While I agree that PEDS only purpose would be to enhance performance, I think xylocaine is the same. My brother just got surgery after cutting his arm with a saw and they gave him xylocaine. He was able to have a conversation while they are giving him stitches and not feel the pain. How can anyone argue that not feeling any pain in your hands wouldn't enhance your ability to punch someone with full force and not holding back if you have an injury?

My argument is xylocaine has a direct impact on the ability of a fighter to not feel pain. People quit in fights because of pain. If you eliminate pain, it enhances your performance.

The argument that it will hurt him in the long run is irrelevant because PEDS will hurt you in the long run also. Your liver will be damaged and you may die sooner. Both substances will allow a person to perform better than they would without them.

Also the argument that it's ok cause the other boxer could do it also is irrelevant. If a boxer is taking a PED that is not detectable by urine test, and only urine tests are required, both boxers could use the PED and then it would be a level playing field??

Bottom line to my argument. Xylocaine is a drug and it shouldn't be legal before a fight because it would give a fighter an advantage over the other.

Floyd is a bitch. Can't suck up the pain like Donaire.

Well if Manny has some mud he'd like to sling at Floyd then that's just great. Two of the worlds best fighters in a political bitch fight FUCKIN BUS STOP WANKERS!!!!!!!! :mad: :bawling: :mad:











:foruml10gc5: :bananna8:











:vd: God, Jimmy... Get a grip man.... Get-a-Grip :-\

Okay i'm back in the room. But seriously I'm sick of this shit man. I really am.

In all fairness, this thread has been started much in the same way Floyd started his slanderous accusations of Manny.
Neither hold much water with out documented facts but in Floyds current defence, this nonsense is complete and utter unfounded drivell and with out any basis of fact, documented fact (or fiction for that matter), logic or folklore. If you ask me, this thread should be condemned to the realms of spoof.



So there. :p

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by luvfightgame

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by blegit

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by luvfightgame

I don't see how anyone could argue that a pain killer wouldn't enhance your performance????

Didn't Clottey essentially lose the Margarito fight because he broke his hand? Didn't Vitali lose the Byrd fight due to a shoulder injury?
Pain killers are performance enhancers. It should be illegal and would certainly not be a "level" playing field if you are numbed up and the other guy isn't. Paulie M. fought many fights basically 1 handed because his hands were hurt. If he were able to take a pain killer and not feel the pain of landing a punch he wouldn't have favored his hurt hand, thus enhancing his performance.

I would almost argue that a pain killer has a more direct impact enhancing your performance than steroids would. Steriods cannot improve your boxing ability, only your strenght and stamina. And actually the accusations from Sr. are that Pac is on something that makes him impervious to pain???? Maybe it's a full body xylocaine shot.

---

Strength and stamina are direct factors in boxing ability. The only purpose of taking PEDs is to enhance ability, which it does in many ways, otherwise they would be rendered useless to athletes. And Mayweather beat Jesus Chavez with a broken hand. Roy Jones beat Hopkins with a broken hand. Margarito also hurt his hand during the Clottey fight. It wasn't Clottey's hand problem it was his no heart problem.:p

---

While I agree that PEDS only purpose would be to enhance performance, I think xylocaine is the same. My brother just got surgery after cutting his arm with a saw and they gave him xylocaine. He was able to have a conversation while they are giving him stitches and not feel the pain. How can anyone argue that not feeling any pain in your hands wouldn't enhance your ability to punch someone with full force and not holding back if you have an injury?

My argument is xylocaine has a direct impact on the ability of a fighter to not feel pain. People quit in fights because of pain. If you eliminate pain, it enhances your performance.

The argument that it will hurt him in the long run is irrelevant because PEDS will hurt you in the long run also. Your liver will be damaged and you may die sooner. Both substances will allow a person to perform better than they would without them.

Also the argument that it's ok cause the other boxer could do it also is irrelevant. If a boxer is taking a PED that is not detectable by urine test, and only urine tests are required, both boxers could use the PED and then it would be a level playing field??

Bottom line to my argument. Xylocaine is a drug and it shouldn't be legal before a fight because it would give a fighter an advantage over the other.

---

My thoughts exactly, you were just ahead of me. This answers killersheep's comment to my previous post.

Although I am against the use of xylocaine in a fight, like what I have stated in an earlier post, Floyd should be allowed it's use because it is not banned. But there has been this talk about him wanting a level playing field that's why he demanded a blood drug test. He can do this by not using the xylocaine. However, is there even a way we would know whether he uses it or not?

I agree that Floyd should not be singled out for using it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by InTheNeutralCorner

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by luvfightgame

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by blegit

Strength and stamina are direct factors in boxing ability. The only purpose of taking PEDs is to enhance ability, which it does in many ways, otherwise they would be rendered useless to athletes. And Mayweather beat Jesus Chavez with a broken hand. Roy Jones beat Hopkins with a broken hand. Margarito also hurt his hand during the Clottey fight. It wasn't Clottey's hand problem it was his no heart problem.:p

---

While I agree that PEDS only purpose would be to enhance performance, I think xylocaine is the same. My brother just got surgery after cutting his arm with a saw and they gave him xylocaine. He was able to have a conversation while they are giving him stitches and not feel the pain. How can anyone argue that not feeling any pain in your hands wouldn't enhance your ability to punch someone with full force and not holding back if you have an injury?

My argument is xylocaine has a direct impact on the ability of a fighter to not feel pain. People quit in fights because of pain. If you eliminate pain, it enhances your performance.

The argument that it will hurt him in the long run is irrelevant because PEDS will hurt you in the long run also. Your liver will be damaged and you may die sooner. Both substances will allow a person to perform better than they would without them.

Also the argument that it's ok cause the other boxer could do it also is irrelevant. If a boxer is taking a PED that is not detectable by urine test, and only urine tests are required, both boxers could use the PED and then it would be a level playing field??

Bottom line to my argument. Xylocaine is a drug and it shouldn't be legal before a fight because it would give a fighter an advantage over the other.

---

My thoughts exactly, you were just ahead of me. This answers killersheep's comment to my previous post.

Although I am against the use of xylocaine in a fight, like what I have stated in an earlier post, Floyd should be allowed it's use because it is not banned. But there has been this talk about him wanting a level playing field that's why he demanded a blood drug test. He can do this by not using the xylocaine. However, is there even a way we would know whether he uses it or not?

I agree that Floyd should not be singled out for using it.

---

No his post doesn't answer my question, however your comment basically restates what I said. If Xylocaine was a concern for Pac's camp they could have stated something for it not to be used in their private contract. And you're right how would they test for it? :confused:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by killersheep

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by InTheNeutralCorner

True, xylocaine does not enhance a boxer's abilities. But the opponent, who did not use xylocaine, is capable of injuring his hands during the fight thus rendering them ineffective. Now, does that look like a level playing field?

---

The opponent has the option of using it though, he is not doing something his opponent is not allowed to do.

Like I said before, I would be fine with the NSAC banning Xylocaine, but I don't think Floyd should be singled out as not being allowed to use it.

---

I wasn't refering to luvfightgame's entire post but to a statement he made:
Also the argument that it's ok cause the other boxer could do it also is irrelevant. If a boxer is taking a PED that is not detectable in urine test, and only urine tests are required, both boxers could use the PED and then it would be a level playing field??
I find this to be a good response to your comment above.

I don't think anybody here even mentioned that xylocaine was a concern for the Pac's camp. My comments are in response to the general question in the title of this thread.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by InTheNeutralCorner

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by killersheep

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by InTheNeutralCorner

True, xylocaine does not enhance a boxer's abilities. But the opponent, who did not use xylocaine, is capable of injuring his hands during the fight thus rendering them ineffective. Now, does that look like a level playing field?

---

The opponent has the option of using it though, he is not doing something his opponent is not allowed to do.

Like I said before, I would be fine with the NSAC banning Xylocaine, but I don't think Floyd should be singled out as not being allowed to use it.

---

I wasn't refering to luvfightgame's entire post but to a statement he made:
Also the argument that it's ok cause the other boxer could do it also is irrelevant. If a boxer is taking a PED that is not detectable in urine test, and only urine tests are required, both boxers could use the PED and then it would be a level playing field??
I find this to be a good response to your comment above.

I don't think anybody here even mentioned that xylocaine was a concern for the Pac's camp. My comments are in response to the general question in the title of this thread.

---

The point of this thread we agree on. That the NSAC should ban Xylocaine, but Floyd is not doing anything wrong, until that happens.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by killersheep

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by InTheNeutralCorner

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by killersheep

The opponent has the option of using it though, he is not doing something his opponent is not allowed to do.

Like I said before, I would be fine with the NSAC banning Xylocaine, but I don't think Floyd should be singled out as not being allowed to use it.

---

I wasn't refering to luvfightgame's entire post but to a statement he made:
Also the argument that it's ok cause the other boxer could do it also is irrelevant. If a boxer is taking a PED that is not detectable in urine test, and only urine tests are required, both boxers could use the PED and then it would be a level playing field??
I find this to be a good response to your comment above.

I don't think anybody here even mentioned that xylocaine was a concern for the Pac's camp. My comments are in response to the general question in the title of this thread.

---

The point of this thread we agree on. That the NSAC should ban Xylocaine, but Floyd is not doing anything wrong, until that happens.

---

Good to know that we can agree on something (I think this is just the 2nd time after disagreeing with each other for more times than I can count with my fingers and toes, and I have extra fingers and toes ..... just kidding with you, mate.).