Chris Eubank Jr. vs. Conor Benn | PPV - 26 April 2025

[Spud]

Hearn might “not legally be allowed to pull the fight” but if he did the right thing… made it public then the BBBC would’ve had no option to pull it immediately.

No doubt he hoped it would stay forever silent or at least silent until after the fight.

He was prepared to allow a fighter who has tested positive to fight a fighter who was draining down in weight.

That’s insane.

I agree with most of that

[Controversial]

What I don’t get is if it’s true that drug stays in your system for months, and he was tested by UKAD in between and their tests were negative, then how come the VADA test came back positive?

[gregregegg]

What I don’t get is if it’s true that drug stays in your system for months, and he was tested by UKAD in between and their tests were negative, then how come the VADA test came back positive?

I guess the idea there that he could of only injected an absolutely tiny amount (like a trace contamination) some time after the ukad test but befor the vada test. Such a small amount that it’s out of his system befor the next ukad test.

This is always a possibility, but I’m not going to believe anyone suggesting it or denying it. I want all the test dates, with all the levels, so I can determine if contamination or cheating is more likely. I don’t give a fuk what any bias party says, give me (the public) the numbers and let us figure it out.

[Ruthless-RKO]

Go Beefy!
It stinks alright and Beefy isn't nut hugging Eddie, how refreshing!

Not like he’s with DAZN anyway..

[Ruthless-RKO]

[Controversial]

What I don’t get is if it’s true that drug stays in your system for months, and he was tested by UKAD in between and their tests were negative, then how come the VADA test came back positive?

I guess the idea there that he could have only injected an absolutely tiny amount (like a trace contamination) some time after the ukad test but befor the vada test. Such a small amount that it’s out of his system befor the next ukad test.

But what advantage would you get taking such tiny doses, would it be worth the risk of being caught?

[maverick23]

What I don’t get is if it’s true that drug stays in your system for months, and he was tested by UKAD in between and their tests were negative, then how come the VADA test came back positive?

Yeah. This is why I’m thinking there’s more likely been some micro-dosing going on (Dr Usman’s speciality) rather it being used following a cycle.

I’ve no idea if it can be used for micro-dosing (it’s used to increase testosterone, why not just micro-dose with testosterone rather than something stays in your system for ages and has no right being in a bloke) but it’d be interesting to see information on all the tests.

[Wee Tommy]

Wtf is going on here

[gregregegg]

Microdosing somthing that just increases testosterone doesn’t make sense to me. People have test, to micro does such a supplement in a way that may avoid testing I would think you would get a negligible increase in testosterone, less than diet and lifestyle changes. (Although I’m no expert)

As another poster mentioned, rather than microdosing clom, why not notably does testosterone.

(Craziest part of all this is the BBBoc give out TRT exceptions don’t they? Or was that just a rumour?)

[Phenomenal-Nutrition]

What I am going to write os going to be controversial but please read all of my post before you debate with me.

Weirdly I think Connor Benn could possibly be “legally innocent.”

I say “legally innocent” because there is now some contradictions concerning the use of clomiphene. Once in the body it stays there for sometime. Which is possibly why after the 1st failed test that small amounts of clomiphene were still in the body for the second test.

A contradiction comes to the fore … why was the 1st test swept under the carpet and deemed as a “faulty” test. What happened to the B Sample?

Why did Mr Hearn say nothing about the 1st test? Why did the event continue to be sold?

Then we have the 2nd test … again minimal traces were found again. The same question to Mr Hearn why wasnt the event pulled immediately on receipt of the second test. Same question to the BBBofC.

Now to what I consider to the key point to the whole saga …contamination is I believe the prime piece of the defence. Team Benn have yet to test sample b. The key point is can Team Benn prove beyond reasonable doubt how the sample was contaminated. If Team Benn cannot prove how the sample was contaminated then a token ban will be issued.

To get the waffle out of the way. Can you answer this …

Innocent … due to the minimal amounts found In both tests were not deemed to be performance enhancing

Guilty … despite the minimal amounts found … proof is not given how the offending drug got into the sample

The small amounts are irrelevant. The fact it's there shows he doped with it. It's probably a small amount because he took a large amount a long time ago and it stays in your body for a long time. It stays in your fat stores even after. So he could of taken it a year ago. Lost some bodyfat and it suddenly small amounts are release into his body fluids again because the drug was stored in his bodyfat.

[JimJim2009]

In all this, has there been confirmation that UKAD tests for clomiphene? I can't find any information to say it does or it doesn't.

If UKAD did also test for clomiphene, I imagine we'd have heard, non-stop, that Conor didn't test positive for clomiphene with UKAD but did with VADA as that would throw up quite a big question mark and would help back up the stance Conor is taking.

If UKAD doesn't test for clomiphene then it's a red herring to keep referring to Conor passing his UKAD tests.

Not sure if I've overlooked the obvious in all this, perhaps it's already been clarified but I can't seem to find anything to indicate either way.

[Controversial]

What I am going to write os going to be controversial but please read all of my post before you debate with me.

Weirdly I think Connor Benn could possibly be “legally innocent.”

I say “legally innocent” because there is now some contradictions concerning the use of clomiphene. Once in the body it stays there for sometime. Which is possibly why after the 1st failed test that small amounts of clomiphene were still in the body for the second test.

A contradiction comes to the fore … why was the 1st test swept under the carpet and deemed as a “faulty” test. What happened to the B Sample?

Why did Mr Hearn say nothing about the 1st test? Why did the event continue to be sold?

Then we have the 2nd test … again minimal traces were found again. The same question to Mr Hearn why wasnt the event pulled immediately on receipt of the second test. Same question to the BBBofC.

Now to what I consider to the key point to the whole saga …contamination is I believe the prime piece of the defence. Team Benn have yet to test sample b. The key point is can Team Benn prove beyond reasonable doubt how the sample was contaminated. If Team Benn cannot prove how the sample was contaminated then a token ban will be issued.

To get the waffle out of the way. Can you answer this …

Innocent … due to the minimal amounts found In both tests were not deemed to be performance enhancing

Guilty … despite the minimal amounts found … proof is not given how the offending drug got into the sample

The small amounts are irrelevant. The fact it's there shows he doped with it. It's probably a small amount because he took a large amount a long time ago and it stays in your body for a long time. It stays in your fat stores even after. So he could of taken it a year ago. Lost some bodyfat and it suddenly small amounts are release into his body fluids again because the drug was stored in his bodyfat.

If he took large amounts a long time ago then how come it didn’t show up in the UKAD test?

[Controversial]

In all this, has there been confirmation that UKAD tests for clomiphene? I can't find any information to say it does or it doesn't.

If UKAD did also test for clomiphene, I imagine we'd have heard, non-stop, that Conor didn't test positive for clomiphene with UKAD but did with VADA as that would throw up quite a big question mark and would help back up the stance Conor is taking.

If UKAD doesn't test for clomiphene then it's a red herring to keep referring to Conor passing his UKAD tests.

Not sure if I've overlooked the obvious in all this, perhaps it's already been clarified but I can't seem to find anything to indicate either way.

UKAD banned people before for it so they must do

[Phenomenal-Nutrition]

In all this, has there been confirmation that UKAD tests for clomiphene? I can't find any information to say it does or it doesn't.

If UKAD did also test for clomiphene, I imagine we'd have heard, non-stop, that Conor didn't test positive for clomiphene with UKAD but did with VADA as that would throw up quite a big question mark and would help back up the stance Conor is taking.

If UKAD doesn't test for clomiphene then it's a red herring to keep referring to Conor passing his UKAD tests.

Not sure if I've overlooked the obvious in all this, perhaps it's already been clarified but I can't seem to find anything to indicate either way.

No it wouldn't. You can have trace elements of a drug in your body that is metabolised at different rates and the strength of your urine can also determine if you are likely to test positive or not

Clomiphene is a drug that can bond with your bodyfat so you can test positive for a long time after using it. You could test clean for months, then if you lose some bodyfat you could test positive for it again because it's being released from your bodyfat into your fluids.

[Phenomenal-Nutrition]

What I am going to write os going to be controversial but please read all of my post before you debate with me.

Weirdly I think Connor Benn could possibly be “legally innocent.”

I say “legally innocent” because there is now some contradictions concerning the use of clomiphene. Once in the body it stays there for sometime. Which is possibly why after the 1st failed test that small amounts of clomiphene were still in the body for the second test.

A contradiction comes to the fore … why was the 1st test swept under the carpet and deemed as a “faulty” test. What happened to the B Sample?

Why did Mr Hearn say nothing about the 1st test? Why did the event continue to be sold?

Then we have the 2nd test … again minimal traces were found again. The same question to Mr Hearn why wasnt the event pulled immediately on receipt of the second test. Same question to the BBBofC.

Now to what I consider to the key point to the whole saga …contamination is I believe the prime piece of the defence. Team Benn have yet to test sample b. The key point is can Team Benn prove beyond reasonable doubt how the sample was contaminated. If Team Benn cannot prove how the sample was contaminated then a token ban will be issued.

To get the waffle out of the way. Can you answer this …

Innocent … due to the minimal amounts found In both tests were not deemed to be performance enhancing

Guilty … despite the minimal amounts found … proof is not given how the offending drug got into the sample

The small amounts are irrelevant. The fact it's there shows he doped with it. It's probably a small amount because he took a large amount a long time ago and it stays in your body for a long time. It stays in your fat stores even after. So he could of taken it a year ago. Lost some bodyfat and it suddenly small amounts are release into his body fluids again because the drug was stored in his bodyfat.

If he took large amounts a long time ago then how come it didn’t show up in the UKAD test?

Because it would of been during a period he wasn't being tested

[Controversial]

The small amounts are irrelevant. The fact it's there shows he doped with it. It's probably a small amount because he took a large amount a long time ago and it stays in your body for a long time. It stays in your fat stores even after. So he could of taken it a year ago. Lost some bodyfat and it suddenly small amounts are release into his body fluids again because the drug was stored in his bodyfat.

If he took large amounts a long time ago then how come it didn’t show up in the UKAD test?

Because it would of been during a period he wasn't being tested

Yes but presumably he’s been tested by UKAD in between taking it and testing negative?

[joshj909]

The small amounts are irrelevant. The fact it's there shows he doped with it. It's probably a small amount because he took a large amount a long time ago and it stays in your body for a long time. It stays in your fat stores even after. So he could of taken it a year ago. Lost some bodyfat and it suddenly small amounts are release into his body fluids again because the drug was stored in his bodyfat.

If he took large amounts a long time ago then how come it didn’t show up in the UKAD test?

Because it would of been during a period he wasn't being tested

Could he also use masking agents/diuretics to get it out of his system quicker?

[maverick23]

In all this, has there been confirmation that UKAD tests for clomiphene? I can't find any information to say it does or it doesn't.

If UKAD did also test for clomiphene, I imagine we'd have heard, non-stop, that Conor didn't test positive for clomiphene with UKAD but did with VADA as that would throw up quite a big question mark and would help back up the stance Conor is taking.

If UKAD doesn't test for clomiphene then it's a red herring to keep referring to Conor passing his UKAD tests.

Not sure if I've overlooked the obvious in all this, perhaps it's already been clarified but I can't seem to find anything to indicate either way.

No it wouldn't. You can have trace elements of a drug in your body that is metabolised at different rates and the strength of your urine can also determine if you are likely to test positive or not

Clomiphene is a drug that can bond with your bodyfat so you can test positive for a long time after using it. You could test clean for months, then if you lose some bodyfat you could test positive for it again because it's being released from your bodyfat into your fluids.

Interesting - thanks.

Do you think he likely used it post cycle then?

I haven’t seen anything from him saying he’s an independent hair follicle test that’s shown no steroid usage.

[Dioufy]

What I don’t get is if it’s true that drug stays in your system for months, and he was tested by UKAD in between and their tests were negative, then how come the VADA test came back positive?

Exactly. If it’s life span is “10 months” and Benn was tested by UKAD then how the hell is he not failing UKAD?

[Spud]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/sport ... tests.html

[JimJim2009]

Thanks, I just wondered if UKAD actually test for clomiphene.

The latest revelation is that, apparently, the first failed test result was not communicated to team Eubank. Will be interesting to see if that question is put to Eddie and how he responds. The only acceptable answer is that it was, at the time.

[golden_labrador]

deep into reading all this serious and depressing legal and scientific brain-bending stuff and this pops up in between it all just about sums up this forum

[Loynesy]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/sport ... tests.html

It's just a surreal article - between 30 and 34 eggs: neither number is divisible by 7, so he can't say he had X per day, they are not both divisible by 5 or 6 so he can't say he had a day or two off them.

If he gets licensed again he simply has to be Conor "the omelette" Ben.

[tony1234]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/sport ... tests.html

Benn's been scrambled

[Spud]

Excellent clip … personality’s from the boxing world finally saying how it is …