this is why pacquaio wants specifc test dates

[fan johnny]

They're not just looking for an EPO though.

if you're tested post fight then you can have trained with PEDs, had your body respond in a more anabolic (therefore beneficial) way to the stimulus placed on it in training camp yet show up clean because you've cycled off them before the fight.

PEDs etc are not just a case of popping them before the fight and having them charge you up like a super shot of latte or something.

Trace amounts of stuff show up in urine, but not inter cellular stuff and the amounts you get in urine... it's pretty easy to argue that they're naturally there and just slightly above average... it's also far to easy to mask things in urine and the testing being random is a bit of a no brainer...

Like 100s of people keep saying - it's all to easy to cycle or mask things if you know exactly what and when the tests will be.

That doesn't really address the question. I was pointing out that the expert in the article specifically identified EPO and why it was important for blood testing and that it be random. As an expert he knows what the effects are, what to look for, and how masking is done. So it's either the author how is intentionally changing context of the statements given by the expert or the expert is lying. Why?

I'm not try to argue that one method is better than the other and random testing has it's applications. I don't get the expert testimony having a bad conclusion with such an excellent supporting statements. Drug Tests Used in Sports - Sports and Drugs - ProCon.org

[jerome01]

They're not just looking for an EPO though.

if you're tested post fight then you can have trained with PEDs, had your body respond in a more anabolic (therefore beneficial) way to the stimulus placed on it in training camp yet show up clean because you've cycled off them before the fight.

PEDs etc are not just a case of popping them before the fight and having them charge you up like a super shot of latte or something.

Trace amounts of stuff show up in urine, but not inter cellular stuff and the amounts you get in urine... it's pretty easy to argue that they're naturally there and just slightly above average... it's also far to easy to mask things in urine and the testing being random is a bit of a no brainer...

Like 100s of people keep saying - it's all to easy to cycle or mask things if you know exactly what and when the tests will be.

That doesn't really address the question. I was pointing out that the expert in the article specifically identified EPO and why it was important for blood testing and that it be random. As an expert he knows what the effects are, what to look for, and how masking is done. So it's either the author how is intentionally changing context of the statements given by the expert or the expert is lying. Why?

I'm not try to argue that one method is better than the other and random testing has it's applications. I don't get the expert testimony having a bad conclusion with such an excellent supporting statements. Drug Tests Used in Sports - Sports and Drugs - ProCon.org

From the link you have provided the blood is only an added measure for testing and in other article a screening of athlete to determine who they deem necessary for a urine test. But the urine is sufficient for detecting EPO.

[erik_corrales]

From the link you have provided the blood is only an added measure for testing and in other article a screening of athlete to determine who they deem necessary for a urine test. But the urine is sufficient for detecting EPO.

which brings me to this video that i remember seeing earlier this month.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jGd8r...layer_embedded

based on this video, dated dec 11,team pac originally agreed with the olympic style testing. it's only when the mayweather's demanded excessive random blood sampling, which could possibly be done right before the fight, that team pac didn't want to be pulled a fast one on.

i still stand by my hair sampling compromise. it's less intrusive and more indicative if pac has ever used roids.

[killersheep]

From the link you have provided the blood is only an added measure for testing and in other article a screening of athlete to determine who they deem necessary for a urine test. But the urine is sufficient for detecting EPO.

which brings me to this video that i remember seeing earlier this month.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jGd8r...layer_embedded

based on this video, dated dec 11,team pac originally agreed with the olympic style testing. it's only when the mayweather's demanded excessive random blood sampling, which could possibly be done right before the fight, that team pac didn't want to be pulled a fast one on.

i still stand by my hair sampling compromise. it's less intrusive and more indicative if pac has ever used roids.

Hair testing does not detect EPO. EPO needs to be tested in the blood, if it comes back positive then a urine test is used to confirm it.

[erik_corrales]

Hair testing does not detect EPO. EPO needs to be tested in the blood, if it comes back positive then a urine test is used to confirm it.

then why not test it in urine and THEN blood to confirm?

[fan johnny]

From the link you have provided the blood is only an added measure for testing and in other article a screening of athlete to determine who they deem necessary for a urine test. But the urine is sufficient for detecting EPO.

which brings me to this video that i remember seeing earlier this month.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jGd8r...layer_embedded
based on this video, dated dec 11,team pac originally agreed with the olympic style testing. it's only when the mayweather's demanded excessive random blood sampling, which could possibly be done right before the fight, that team pac didn't want to be pulled a fast one on.

i still stand by my hair sampling compromise. it's less intrusive and more indicative if pac has ever used roids.

With regards to testing for synthetic EPO in the blood verses Urine, according to the experts. They look for the effects of EPO in the blood by measuring how much oxygen it can carry which is why taking blood is required (but it needs only be taken immediately after the fight.) They take urine samples to look for the actual synthetic molecule. But what cheaters do is wash their urine using an undetectable masking agent which is why they want the blood to confirm the effects. The thing is if they use the masking, it takes out all of the EPO both natural and synthetic so then can be concluded the urine sample was tampered with. If I'm an expert and know this, I won't make statement that don't make sense. The link I provided lists the type of testing they do for the groups of banned substances Drug Tests Used in Sports - Sports and Drugs - ProCon.org

I have also read the USADA cannot do the testing because it's rules don't allow it to participate but I can't find the link to the article and it was from a diffident guy than the one GBP uses as a reference.

I don't think Pacquiao needs to be defended about blood testing by his fans. He has stated his reasons you can accept them or not. If this is really a physiological battle, he is letting Mayweather get the upper hand by playing into it.

The longer this negotiation fiasco goes on in the media, the more I think this is all hoax.