CANELO back in september ?

[Enlightened-One]

There is no proof, because Canelo didn't provide a hair sample. If he was really clean, he would have done that...

Here's a quote from Dan Rafael:

Canelo Alvarez submitted to hair follicle testing at the request of the Nevada State Athletic Commission and the test came back negative for the banned performance-enhancing drug clenbuterol, lending some credence to Alvarez's insistence that his two positive drug tests for the substance in February, which caused his rematch with unified middleweight world champion Gennady Golovkin to be canceled, were caused by eating contaminated beef.

Nevada commission rules call for a suspension when a banned substance is found in an athlete's system, regardless of how it got there, so Alvarez was suspended for six months...

[boxing_rocks]

The question is whose hair sample it was.

[SenorPipino]

The question is whose hair sample it was.

Canelo's detractors (or is it Golovkin diehards?) will always have an answer or a spin for everything and anything that favors the Mexican fighter.

The hair sample results should put all this malarkey to rest, although I realize that it won't.

I would love to see Canelo/Golden Boy file a monetary suit against the NSAC for depriving Canelo of a massive Cinco de Mayo payday, despite no valid evidence that the trace clenbuterol sample in February was intentional or even effective.

It's been a witch hunt. There should be absolutely no repercussions against Mexican athletes who test positive for the drug as long as the results are within an acceptable level.

Canelo's blood levels for the drug were practically non existent. His hair sample was negative.

The hysteria is misplaced and looking more and more like a scenario drummed up to allow Golovkin to walk away from a rematch and appear noble.

No wonder he suddenly wants contract terms to be renegotiated.

That won't happen.

[boxing_rocks]

I asked a legitimate question. We know that people were submitting somebody else's urine. Why are you sure that it was Canelo's hair sample? Do you know how it was collected?

[tiny_acres]

I find it funny that some that chastis Povetkin defend Canelo and vice versa.

[Thomastearns]

I find it funny that some that chastis Povetkin defend Canelo and vice versa.

True. Hopefully we can move on from all the ambiguities involved by laying down some clear ground rules eg

Random 24/7 drug testing with no exceptions - including mandatory enrolment in testing programs

Self-responsibility for consumption of food and drink - no more bullshit meat excuses.

2nd offence means life ban - do you feel lucky punk?

Other sports are getting there, albeit slowly. So should boxing, where the consequences can be literally life threatening.

Then let's see how many (esp30+) fighters remain competitive, or undergo sudden late body muscle transformations, or demonstrate quick injury turnarounds or display unaccounted needle marks.

Lance Armstrong is a living testament to the fact that it's almost impossible to beat drug cheats without becoming one yourself.

[tiny_acres]

I find it funny that some that chastis Povetkin defend Canelo and vice versa.

True. Hopefully we can move on from all the ambiguities involved by laying down some clear ground rules eg

Random 24/7 drug testing with no exceptions - including mandatory enrolment in testing programs

Self-responsibility for consumption of food and drink - no more bullshit meat excuses.

2nd offence means life ban - do you feel lucky punk?

Other sports are getting there, albeit slowly. So should boxing, where the consequences can be literally life threatening.

Then let's see how many (esp30+) fighters remain competitive, or undergo sudden late body muscle transformations, or demonstrate quick injury turnarounds or display unaccounted needle marks.

Lance Armstrong is a living testament to the fact that it's almost impossible to beat drug cheats without becoming one yourself.

Great post.

[Counter-puncher]

I find it funny that some that chastis Povetkin defend Canelo and vice versa.

True. Hopefully we can move on from all the ambiguities involved by laying down some clear ground rules eg

Random 24/7 drug testing with no exceptions - including mandatory enrolment in testing programs

Self-responsibility for consumption of food and drink - no more bullshit meat excuses.

2nd offence means life ban - do you feel lucky punk?

Other sports are getting there, albeit slowly. So should boxing, where the consequences can be literally life threatening.

Then let's see how many (esp30+) fighters remain competitive, or undergo sudden late body muscle transformations, or demonstrate quick injury turnarounds or display unaccounted needle marks.

Lance Armstrong is a living testament to the fact that it's almost impossible to beat drug cheats without becoming one yourself.

Great post.

[Deleted_Scenes]

There is no proof, because Canelo didn't provide a hair sample. If he was really clean, he would have done that...

Here's a quote from Dan Rafael:

Canelo Alvarez submitted to hair follicle testing at the request of the Nevada State Athletic Commission and the test came back negative for the banned performance-enhancing drug clenbuterol, lending some credence to Alvarez's insistence that his two positive drug tests for the substance in February, which caused his rematch with unified middleweight world champion Gennady Golovkin to be canceled, were caused by eating contaminated beef.

Nevada commission rules call for a suspension when a banned substance is found in an athlete's system, regardless of how it got there, so Alvarez was suspended for six months...

Purely playing devil's advocate here, we had a debate last week, where you maintained hair testing couldn't and shouldn't be used as a method of testing for clenbuterol, since the results were unreliable.

More seriously, what I do actually have a problem with from this latest report, is the claim that Canelo's hair sample tested 'negative'.

Based on the sample being taken well within 90 days, unless it was sample of short cut, close to the root, faster growing head hair that had been submitted, that hair SHOULD have contained some clenbuterol - we know it was in his system, allegedly from the meat.

I'd like more information, although understandably we probably won't get it.

Based on what's been presented, if the result genuinely was NEGATIVE, there are two possibilities:

• You were correct in stating hair testing is unsuitable for clenbuterol, in which case these findings are meaningless.

• The sample that Canelo submitted was too close to the root (too new hair) to show up the clenbuterol we categorically know WAS there at the time of his two positive urine tests, and therefore only confirms Canelo has ingested no clenbuterol more recently than that - also making the findings meaningless.

There should have been clenbuterol in that hair, if it was a good enough quality to cover the time period in question, and if the testing method was reliable.

The question was never positive or negative, it was how much. A tiny amount (indicating meat contamination), or a much larger amount (indicating doping).

A 'negative' result was never a possible outcome, for a reliable test.

[boxing_rocks]

Based on what's been presented, if the result genuinely was NEGATIVE, there are two possibilities:

• You were correct in stating hair testing is unsuitable for clenbuterol, in which case these findings are meaningless.

• The sample that Canelo submitted was too close to the root (too new hair) to show up the clenbuterol we categorically know WAS there at the time of his two positive urine tests, and therefore only confirms Canelo has ingested no clenbuterol more recently than that - also making the findings meaningless.

There should have been clenbuterol in that hair, if it was a good enough quality to cover the time period in question, and if the testing method was reliable.

The question was never positive or negative, it was how much. A tiny amount (indicating meat contamination), or a much larger amount (indicating doping).

A 'negative' result was never a possible outcome, for a reliable test.

There is a third quite possible option - somebody else's hair was tested. Why would a cheater pass an opportunity to cheat with hair sample if it was possible?

[lazboy]

Deleted scenes and thomastearns quality posts thank you.

[Deleted_Scenes]

Based on what's been presented, if the result genuinely was NEGATIVE, there are two possibilities:

• You were correct in stating hair testing is unsuitable for clenbuterol, in which case these findings are meaningless.

• The sample that Canelo submitted was too close to the root (too new hair) to show up the clenbuterol we categorically know WAS there at the time of his two positive urine tests, and therefore only confirms Canelo has ingested no clenbuterol more recently than that - also making the findings meaningless.

There should have been clenbuterol in that hair, if it was a good enough quality to cover the time period in question, and if the testing method was reliable.

The question was never positive or negative, it was how much. A tiny amount (indicating meat contamination), or a much larger amount (indicating doping).

A 'negative' result was never a possible outcome, for a reliable test.

There is a third quite possible option - somebody else's hair was tested. Why would a cheater pass an opportunity to cheat with hair sample if it was possible?

True, although I was assuming the test and results were genuine. I'm not even 100% in the 'Canelo is a dirty cheat' camp. It might have been meat. We just haven't seen any proof of that yet.

What I do believe though, is a pro boxer is responsible for what enters their body, and I agree with the NSAC rules that contamination shouldn't be an acceptable defence.

Indeed, Dillian Whyte was banned for 2 YEARS for ingesting an illegal substance present in an over the counter sports supplement. It wasn't declared on the list of ingredients either, but UKAD and the BBBoC didn't accept that as a defence and suspended him anyway. Canelo has got off very light, even if he's being honest with us.

[Deleted_Scenes]

Deleted scenes and thomastearns quality posts thank you.

Thankyou, sir. Nice to be appreciated.

I may not even be right though. That's just how the information comes across. As I said, I'd like more details.

[Enlightened-One]

There is no proof, because Canelo didn't provide a hair sample. If he was really clean, he would have done that...

Here's a quote from Dan Rafael:

Canelo Alvarez submitted to hair follicle testing at the request of the Nevada State Athletic Commission and the test came back negative for the banned performance-enhancing drug clenbuterol, lending some credence to Alvarez's insistence that his two positive drug tests for the substance in February, which caused his rematch with unified middleweight world champion Gennady Golovkin to be canceled, were caused by eating contaminated beef.

Nevada commission rules call for a suspension when a banned substance is found in an athlete's system, regardless of how it got there, so Alvarez was suspended for six months...

Purely playing devil's advocate here, we had a debate last week, where you maintained hair testing couldn't and shouldn't be used as a method of testing for clenbuterol, since the results were unreliable.

More seriously, what I do actually have a problem with from this latest report, is the claim that Canelo's hair sample tested 'negative'.

Based on the sample being taken well within 90 days, unless it was sample of short cut, close to the root, faster growing head hair that had been submitted, that hair SHOULD have contained some clenbuterol - we know it was in his system, allegedly from the meat.

I'd like more information, although understandably we probably won't get it.

Based on what's been presented, if the result genuinely was NEGATIVE, there are two possibilities:

• You were correct in stating hair testing is unsuitable for clenbuterol, in which case these findings are meaningless.

• The sample that Canelo submitted was too close to the root (too new hair) to show up the clenbuterol we categorically know WAS there at the time of his two positive urine tests, and therefore only confirms Canelo has ingested no clenbuterol more recently than that - also making the findings meaningless.

There should have been clenbuterol in that hair, if it was a good enough quality to cover the time period in question, and if the testing method was reliable.

The question was never positive or negative, it was how much. A tiny amount (indicating meat contamination), or a much larger amount (indicating doping).

A 'negative' result was never a possible outcome, for a reliable test.

My stance on the validity of hair testing, as per numerous scientific studies and the official WADA code, has nothing whatsoever to do with those that previously maintained that Canelo cannot be possibly be considered innocent unless he provided hair samples.

The Mexican has submitted to all forms of PED testing that was requested of him by the NSAC and it appears that the outcome of those tests fail to prove that he ingested Clenbuterol for the sole purpose of cheating.

[Enlightened-One]

The question is whose hair sample it was.

If it was proven that an NSAC official attended this test to prove it was Canelo's hair or that DNA testing proved that this was the case, you'd either remain silent or question the validity of those tests by citing corruption or fraud.

Face it kid, you made accusations that you cannot substantiate and Canelo has allowed a battery of tests that you demanded of him.

Either show some integrity and comment on the real-world facts or stop making all sorts of bûllshît claims.

[Deleted_Scenes]

Here's a quote from Dan Rafael:

Canelo Alvarez submitted to hair follicle testing at the request of the Nevada State Athletic Commission and the test came back negative for the banned performance-enhancing drug clenbuterol, lending some credence to Alvarez's insistence that his two positive drug tests for the substance in February, which caused his rematch with unified middleweight world champion Gennady Golovkin to be canceled, were caused by eating contaminated beef.

Nevada commission rules call for a suspension when a banned substance is found in an athlete's system, regardless of how it got there, so Alvarez was suspended for six months...

Purely playing devil's advocate here, we had a debate last week, where you maintained hair testing couldn't and shouldn't be used as a method of testing for clenbuterol, since the results were unreliable.

More seriously, what I do actually have a problem with from this latest report, is the claim that Canelo's hair sample tested 'negative'.

Based on the sample being taken well within 90 days, unless it was sample of short cut, close to the root, faster growing head hair that had been submitted, that hair SHOULD have contained some clenbuterol - we know it was in his system, allegedly from the meat.

I'd like more information, although understandably we probably won't get it.

Based on what's been presented, if the result genuinely was NEGATIVE, there are two possibilities:

• You were correct in stating hair testing is unsuitable for clenbuterol, in which case these findings are meaningless.

• The sample that Canelo submitted was too close to the root (too new hair) to show up the clenbuterol we categorically know WAS there at the time of his two positive urine tests, and therefore only confirms Canelo has ingested no clenbuterol more recently than that - also making the findings meaningless.

There should have been clenbuterol in that hair, if it was a good enough quality to cover the time period in question, and if the testing method was reliable.

The question was never positive or negative, it was how much. A tiny amount (indicating meat contamination), or a much larger amount (indicating doping).

A 'negative' result was never a possible outcome, for a reliable test.

My stance on the validity of hair testing, as per numerous scientific studies and the official WADA code, has nothing whatsoever to do with those that previously maintained that Canelo cannot be possibly be considered innocent unless he provided hair samples.

The Mexican has submitted to all forms of PED testing that was requested of him by the NSAC and it appears that the outcome of those tests fail to prove that he ingested Clenbuterol for the sole purpose of cheating.

I take your first point. The fact of the matter is though, a totally negative result poses more questions than it answers - we know from two urine tests that clenbuterol WAS present, and therefore SHOULD have been detected. What could have cleared his name (in their eyes) is a positive result on a hair sample, for a trace amount of clenbuterol.

Credit to Canelo for his cooperation, and being totally honest, I am more inclined to believe his defence now than I was at the time the story first broke. However, I will only be fully convinced (and believe this should be compulsory for any ranked boxed who tests positive) if he voluntarily enrolls in 365 random testing - which I believe Golden Boy have suggested he may do, if required.

However, I am still firmly in the camp that a professional boxer should be 100% responsible for whatever enters his/her body, and agree with NSAC rules that state accidental ingestion will not be accepted as a defence. A more lenient response for full cooperation on a first offence is fine by me, but a positive is a positive.

Canelo has been extremely lucky with the terms of his suspension (as are most boxers who fail PED tests in US jurisdictions) - Dillian Whyte ingested a banned substance via an over the counter sports supplement, which the manufacturers failed to list among the ingredients. Unless he had a mass spectrometry kit (or similar) in his gym, he had no possible way of knowing. UKAD and the BBBoC handed him a 2 year suspension, regardless. That's a bit harsh for me, but it highlights the inconsistencies in how various commissions handle these cases.

[boxing_rocks]

The fact of the matter is though, a totally negative result poses more questions than it answers - we know from two urine tests that clenbuterol WAS present, and therefore SHOULD have been detected. What could have cleared his name (in their eyes) is a positive result on a hair sample, for a trace amount of clenbuterol.

Credit to Canelo for his cooperation, and being totally honest, I am more inclined to believe his defence now than I was at the time the story first broke. However, I will only be fully convinced (and believe this should be compulsory for any ranked boxed who tests positive) if he voluntarily enrolls in 365 random testing - which I believe Golden Boy have suggested he may do, if required.

However, I am still firmly in the camp that a professional boxer should be 100% responsible for whatever enters his/her body, and agree with NSAC rules that state accidental ingestion will not be accepted as a defence. A more lenient response for full cooperation on a first offence is fine by me, but a positive is a positive.

Canelo has been extremely lucky with the terms of his suspension (as are most boxers who fail PED tests in US jurisdictions) - Dillian Whyte ingested a banned substance via an over the counter sports supplement, which the manufacturers failed to list among the ingredients. Unless he had a mass spectrometry kit (or similar) in his gym, he had no possible way of knowing. UKAD and the BBBoC handed him a 2 year suspension, regardless. That's a bit harsh for me, but it highlights the inconsistencies in how various commissions handle these cases.

The fact that the hair test came negative when we know for sure that clenbuterol was present in his urine leaves only two options:
- the hair test was VERY inaccurate
- it wasn't Canelo's hair

So, whatever it is, the hair test did nothing to exonerate Canelo.

[Syntax Error]

Lets hope he doesn't eat anymore Clenbuterol burgers between now & September!

[boxing_rocks]

Lets hope he doesn't eat anymore Clenbuterol burgers between now & September!

Let's hope they randomly test him starting now and not July.

[David.skold]

"He tested positive for being an 55 years old trainer" - Joe Rogan

[SenorPipino]

Lets hope he doesn't eat anymore Clenbuterol burgers between now & September!

Let's hope they randomly test him starting now and not July.

I'm not concerned.

Canelo will reportedly be spending most of the summer in the San Diego/ El Lay vicinity, so it's unlikely he'll encounter any Mexican meat.

Unless he makes a quick border hop into Tijuana.

[boxing_rocks]

Lets hope he doesn't eat anymore Clenbuterol burgers between now & September!

Let's hope they randomly test him starting now and not July.

I'm not concerned.

Canelo will reportedly be spending most of the summer in the San Diego/ El Lay vicinity, so it's unlikely he'll encounter any Mexican meat.

Unless he makes a quick border hop into Tijuana.

Random testing will make deliberate juicing hard and risky. If they only start testing after the official announcement, he would have a couple months to juice.