BoxRec

the_doctor wrote:

Enlightened-One wrote: I’m not interested in your nonsense theory about employment tribunals, because employers cannot sack employees due to accusations of criminal activity without sufficient evidence, without going through due process or without obtaining both sides of the story by discussing the matter with the accused party, otherwise they’d get sued for wrongful dismissal. Do you want to know why employers receive punishment for dismissing an employee using baseless accusations? It’s because it’s “wrong”.

They only receive punishment if the accusation is shown to be baseless. And this isn't a criminal case either.

When we are talking about a fight, if there is some evidence (and there is some evidence - not concrete evidence) that one of the fighters is on something that could unnaturally improve his performance, the fight should be cancelled. The fact that Povetkin is still allowed to fight despite potentially having something in his system is a disgrace and a massive health risk to his opponent. And I say that as someone who wanted to see Povetkin win, then smash Wilder.

I tried to use an analogy to illustrate the reason why the thread title was totally absurd! However, you’re more interested in undermining the minutiae of the analogy itself than digesting the actual point that I’m trying to make.

This is going to be the third time that I’m going to remind you of the title of this thread, which is: “Povetkin allowed to fight after he failed test – JOKE”. That’s what we’re debating here.

So I’ll make my point loud and clear, just for the sake of those that wholeheartedly believe that all human beings should receive punishment for allegations of wrongdoing based purely on the “no smoke without fire” mythical justice system!

In the last two years, Alexander Povetkin has never been judged guilty of being a drug cheat. The second sample has not been tested to verify the initial results of the positive test that has only just been announced by the media. These recent allegations have not yet been proven to be true.

Therefore, Povetkin should be allowed to fight Johann Duhaupas tonight, because his opponent is aware of the situation and Alexander has not been proven to be guilty of any wrongdoing.

Every person should be presumed innocent until guilt has been proven. Similarly, punishment should not be administered until guilt has been proven!

I noticed that you ignored the vast majority of the points I made in my previous response, which was factually correct… is this because you can’t address each one without conceding that I’m right?

Just to make myself clear, I couldn’t care less whether Povetkin is or isn’t guilty of being a drug cheat, the point I’m labouring over is that he should be considered innocent until proven guilty. And innocent people should not receive any form of punishment, such as taking away their source of income.

Killer Blow wrote:

Badhusker wrote:

the_doctor wrote: Yep. That's exactly the same

Keep in mind doctor you are trying to get a point across with arguably the dumbest mfer on the forum.

Arguably? That's unbelievably generous.

Fact remains, it's once again exactly the same story, all the tests are negative, untill the latest one just before the fight and that one is "positive" and once again tested in the same lab in Los Angeles. Once again a coincidence? It would surprise me, I expect it to be exactly the same as last time, innocent after all just like all tests in Povetkin his entire life. Stiverne on the other side has litterally been caught red handed, but somehow was allowed to fight anyway, using the excuse "I didn't know"?!

Now I admit that America is full of good actors, but you can't keep on trying to fool the rest of the world forever. Continue to try so just proves how a dumb mfer someone who does is.

YT feed for those who want to watch the fight

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hB86cpcEXyw

Enlightened-One wrote:
Just to make myself clear, I couldn’t care less whether Povetkin is or isn’t guilty of being a drug cheat, the point I’m labouring over is that he should be considered innocent until proven guilty. And innocent people should not receive any form of punishment, such as taking away their source of income.

OK well we can agree to disagree.

Personally, when we are taking about endangering the health of another human being, I think providing a sample that tests positive for a steroid-like substance a matter of days before fight night is enough reason to call a fight off. You don't, that's fine.

If it's later proven he's innocent then good for him - no ban, back in the rankings and he can sue as much as he likes.

the_doctor wrote:

Enlightened-One wrote:
Just to make myself clear, I couldn’t care less whether Povetkin is or isn’t guilty of being a drug cheat, the point I’m labouring over is that he should be considered innocent until proven guilty. And innocent people should not receive any form of punishment, such as taking away their source of income.

OK well we can agree to disagree.

Personally, when we are taking about endangering the health of another human being, I think providing a sample that tests positive for a steroid-like substance a matter of days before fight night is enough reason to call a fight off. You don't, that's fine.

If it's later proven he's innocent then good for him - no ban, back in the rankings and he can sue as much as he likes.

When boxers or any athletes test positive for banned substances, they are guilty until proven innocent, because they have already been proven guilty, by the positive test. Punishment is withheld until all the bases are covered, but the fight is definitely not happening as far as being sanctioned. Liability issues there among other things.

Badhusker wrote:

the_doctor wrote:

Enlightened-One wrote:
Just to make myself clear, I couldn’t care less whether Povetkin is or isn’t guilty of being a drug cheat, the point I’m labouring over is that he should be considered innocent until proven guilty. And innocent people should not receive any form of punishment, such as taking away their source of income.

OK well we can agree to disagree.

Personally, when we are taking about endangering the health of another human being, I think providing a sample that tests positive for a steroid-like substance a matter of days before fight night is enough reason to call a fight off. You don't, that's fine.

If it's later proven he's innocent then good for him - no ban, back in the rankings and he can sue as much as he likes.

When boxers or any athletes test positive for banned substances, they are guilty until proven innocent, because they have already been proven guilty, by the positive test. Punishment is withheld until all the bases are covered, but the fight is definitely not happening as far as being sanctioned. Liability issues there among other things.

As per the thread title, Povetkin was allowed to fight, because he is not yet guilty of anything. If the Russian is cleared, he'll retain his mandatory challenger status.

Could the WBC's refusal to sanction a fight where both participants are alleged drug cheats, be interpreted as a form of punishment, perhaps... but I focused on addressing the thread title.

This topic alone already proves barely anyone still believes in Wada/Vada. And from start of it was clearly visable that the more intelligent the person is or was, the less they trusted Wada/Vada.

asdfjkl wrote:This topic alone already proves barely anyone still believes in Wada/Vada. And from start of it was clearly visable that the more intelligent the person is or was, the less they trusted Wada/Vada.

Claims the Putin Bobblehead Doll

Tanzio wrote:

asdfjkl wrote:This topic alone already proves barely anyone still believes in Wada/Vada. And from start of it was clearly visable that the more intelligent the person is or was, the less they trusted Wada/Vada.

Claims the Putin Bobblehead Doll

I've no idea who you're talking about, but any intelligent individual could tell you this.

asdfjkl wrote:

Tanzio wrote:

asdfjkl wrote:This topic alone already proves barely anyone still believes in Wada/Vada. And from start of it was clearly visable that the more intelligent the person is or was, the less they trusted Wada/Vada.

Claims the Putin Bobblehead Doll

I've no idea who you're talking about, but any intelligent individual could tell you this.

Badhusker wrote:

the_doctor wrote:

Enlightened-One wrote:
Just to make myself clear, I couldn’t care less whether Povetkin is or isn’t guilty of being a drug cheat, the point I’m labouring over is that he should be considered innocent until proven guilty. And innocent people should not receive any form of punishment, such as taking away their source of income.

OK well we can agree to disagree.

Personally, when we are taking about endangering the health of another human being, I think providing a sample that tests positive for a steroid-like substance a matter of days before fight night is enough reason to call a fight off. You don't, that's fine.

If it's later proven he's innocent then good for him - no ban, back in the rankings and he can sue as much as he likes.

When boxers or any athletes test positive for banned substances, they are guilty until proven innocent, because they have already been proven guilty, by the positive test. Punishment is withheld until all the bases are covered, but the fight is definitely not happening as far as being sanctioned. Liability issues there among other things.

These are the rules - thank you

computerrank wrote:

Badhusker wrote:

the_doctor wrote: OK well we can agree to disagree.

Personally, when we are taking about endangering the health of another human being, I think providing a sample that tests positive for a steroid-like substance a matter of days before fight night is enough reason to call a fight off. You don't, that's fine.

If it's later proven he's innocent then good for him - no ban, back in the rankings and he can sue as much as he likes.

When boxers or any athletes test positive for banned substances, they are guilty until proven innocent, because they have already been proven guilty, by the positive test. Punishment is withheld until all the bases are covered, but the fight is definitely not happening as far as being sanctioned. Liability issues there among other things.

These are the rules - thank you

Povetkin even has proved it and people still act like he has been guilty before, while in fact Wada/Vada were wrong.

computerrank wrote:

Badhusker wrote:

Enlightened-One wrote:... if we learned one thing from the Wilder-Povetkin situation... is that there has to be an assumption of innocence until guilt has been proven according to the due processes and bylaws of the sport.

I couldn’t really care less whether Povetkin is or isn’t guilty of taking PED’s, but I do believe in the presumption of innocence until guilt has been categorically proven via due process, whereby the accused party was given an opportunity to defend themselves against accusations.

When boxers or any athletes test positive for banned substances, they are guilty until proven innocent, because they have already been proven guilty, by the positive test...

These are the rules - thank you

Thomas Hauser: "Fighters are entitled to an initial presumption of innocence when questions arise regarding the use of performance enhancing drugs."

International Olympic Committee (IOC) President Thomas Bach: "But at this time we have nothing more than allegations and we have to respect the presumption of innocence for the athletes..."

Larry Scott, the chief executive of the Women's Tennis Association Tour: "It is important to remember that in the area of anti-doping, all players are presumed innocent until proven otherwise..."

In regards to the thread title:
• Povetkin was not taking part in a WBC event
• Povetkin is only suspected of having used doping
• The results of the VADA-administered “B” sample tests were unknown when the Povetkin-Duhaupas fight took place

He should be ban for live, period. I hate cheaters.

Ryabinsky talks about the situation in this Russian-language article:
http://m.sovsport.ru/gazeta/article-item/947411

A few moments:
- Duhaupas was contacted ahead of time, because Ryabinsky has complex relations with King (won a court case against him) and didn't fully believe that the fight was happening
- Duhaupas arrived a couple days before the fight, but his luggage got lost which explains his tennis shoes (they couldn't find boxing shoes of his huge size in Ecaterinburg)
- Sulaiman didn't object if Stiverne fight would happen without the belt on the line
- Team Stiverne first demanded additional $500K for participation, but then stopped negotiations and left.

Another article: https://www.championat.com/boxing/artic ... tkina.html

- The positive result was for Dec 6th test; Dec 15th test results are unknown
- B sample for Dec 6th test is still to be open.