Quote Originally Posted by InTheNeutralCorner View Post
Quote Originally Posted by JJson View Post
Just out of curiosity, this is my question to those who do not find Manny's
accomplishment as impressive nor do they find his resume to be better than Floyd's. Is it then justifiable for Floyd Mayweather to demand that Manny go through a rigid blood test for PEDs considering that Manny is just average (even below average as some thinks) & is even the underdog in that fight?
I'm afraid your context is skewed. Logically, demanding the condition of more rigorous drug testing has nothing to do with whether your opponent is washed up or great. It has to do with making sure that he is clean

How does the term "justifiable" find its way into a conversation about drug testing? A fighter is justifiable in seeking any conditions that brings a greater level of fairness to the competition. But we can turn that question around. Given the fact that the fans of Manny claim that Floyd only fights push overs, how justifiable is Manny in refusing to take part in random drug testing, considering that he is thought to be way above the class of everyone PBF has fought previously?

Floyd did not refuse to fight. Manny did. Floyd said that "Let us submit ourselves to random drug testing leading up to our battle". Manny responded "no way Jose". So who refused to fight. Floyd did not refuse to abide by any condition to make the fight, Manny did. Floyd did not demand any special dispositions for himself, Manny did. It was Manny who had convenient hangups about his blood being drawn.

No amount of dumbing down of the conversation on the sweet science will vitiate the logical indictment of Manny's position. Floyd Mayweather Junior threw down a gauntlet at Manny's feet in the challenging fashion of Knights of old. Manny refused to pick it up, thus by extension refusing to accept the challenge to do battle.
I may have used the wrong word. It may be justifiable to request for a blood test to clean up the sport but why now when the fighter that Floyd is facing is deemed inferior to him by a number of posters in this forum. Manny is the underdog. I feel that it's like Lebron James demanding blood test from Vince Carter before they play ball. It may be valid to request for the blood test if there is suspicion that the opponent is using but if the opponent is not seen as someone exceptional, then where did the suspicion come from? And do you think it was to bring a greater level of fairness to the competition? But there was no level of fairness when he fought Marquez, was there?

I am not condoning Manny's response to the demand. He could have responded better. I am just posting a question with regards to the demand that started the disagreement. The motive for Floyd's demand is suspicious. The refusal to accede to the demand also placed Manny under suspicion.
I say you pose a great question. Many of the people on this forum thinks that Pacquiao is an average fighter that got lucky beating shot or over the hill fighters. So if he's deem so inferior in boxing and got fighters that were shot, why do they want him to take a blood test anyway if he's not that good or great? Especially against an undefeated boxer like Floyd that many here claims is the Michael Jordan, Wayne Gretzky, Pele, Johnny Unitas, of this sport?