BoxRec

Nondescript wrote: ↑02 May 2019, 07:21 Pretty sure Belfort didn't have therapeutic levels of testosterone in his system either. He had some ridiculously high levels that were probably very damaging to his own health, let alone the damage to opponents.

Yep, Belfort went overkill with it. Aged about 30 years in a few months when he was taken off it. Still not entirely sure how he was getting away with it other than the fact he had an exemption.

Counter-puncher wrote: ↑02 May 2019, 03:50 I suspect you're at least a little bit naive, there.

You are too subtle/polite.

Ezzard wrote: ↑02 May 2019, 05:59 I think every single British Olympian has asthma of some kind...officially of course...

Yes, it must be all that damp weather we get.

"Cheating?"

Who said that? Medicinal usage is totally within the law.


"Legal cheating?"

No such thing!

Thomastearns wrote: ↑02 May 2019, 09:20 Yes, it must be all that damp weather we get.

"Cheating?"

Who said that? Medicinal usage is totally within the law.


"Legal cheating?"

No such thing!

..it's not necessarily about cheating...it's about the right to know who might have an advantage ...

greg wrote: ↑02 May 2019, 09:24 ..it's not necessarily about cheating...it's about the right to know who might have an advantage ...

So you think the TUE process is taken advantage of.

oogiebe wrote: ↑02 May 2019, 09:32 So you think the TUE process is taken advantage of.

..I have no personal knowledge of it, I believe there are cases though when the whole teams (was it biathlon, Sweden? not sure) have been taken an advantage of it...why would anyone keep it a low profile and is not prepared to disclose this information?...

oogiebe wrote: ↑02 May 2019, 09:32 So you think the TUE process is taken advantage of.

I have no doubt

Money is at stake= people break rules and cut corners

It's as close to a sure fire rule as you can get

greg wrote: ↑02 May 2019, 09:38 ..I have no personal knowledge of it, I believe there are cases though when the whole teams (was it biathlon, Sweden? not sure) have been taken an advantage of it...why would anyone keep it a low profile and is not prepared to disclose this information?...

There are reasons not to disclose as the general rule says the information is protected by privacy rights. I'm in no way doubting that athletes find ways.

oogiebe wrote: ↑02 May 2019, 09:40 There are reasons not to disclose as the general rule says the information is protected by privacy rights. I'm in no way doubting that athletes find ways.

..athletes find ways, their managers find ways, their doctors ...the whole food chain can profit from it..

TUEs are just another method of gaining that +1% edge (which clearly is more than just 1% if you are legally taking some of the substances mentioned in this thread)

I don't particularly care if athletes have TUEs for cycling, basketball, cricket etc (insert any sport which is non contact) however with combat sports it needs to be revealed - thoughts?

kbackup408 wrote: ↑02 May 2019, 09:51 TUEs are just another method of gaining that +1% edge (which clearly is more than just 1% if you are legally taking some of the substances mentioned in this thread)

I don't particularly care if athletes have TUEs for cycling, basketball, cricket etc (insert any sport which is non contact) however with combat sports it needs to be revealed - thoughts?

I agree. If I were in a contact sport, I have a right to know what I'm up against.

oogiebe wrote: ↑02 May 2019, 09:32 So you think the TUE process is taken advantage of.

Definitely, although it's not just one set of people or one nation doing it. I think they're pretty much all at it in different ways. A lot of the Russian athletes were found to be using Meldonium (same thing Povetkin popped for), then a lot of the Brits are on some kind of Asthma medication, and then you Mo Farah, with who it might be a case of wtf was he not likely on. He was never caught but that Oregon training camp he was with, all kinds of shit was coming out.

oogiebe wrote: ↑02 May 2019, 09:32 So you think the TUE process is taken advantage of.

I believe the acceptable ratio is 3 or 4 times normal. The real kicker is if they actually have low t as a world class athlete 999 out of 1000 it's from abusing peds to begin with!

Onetimeonly wrote: ↑02 May 2019, 10:49 I believe the acceptable ratio is 3 or 4 times normal. The real kicker is if they actually have low t as a world class athlete 999 out of 1000 it's from abusing peds to begin with!

Exactly

oogiebe wrote: ↑02 May 2019, 09:54 I agree. If I were in a contact sport, I have a right to know what I'm up against.

Agreed - all TUEs should be declared before any contracts are signed. Privacy rights be damned! This is a blood sport.

That said, any worthwhile coach / trainer will do everything in their power to give their boxer the best chance of winning. If they stay within the rules, all is good. Currently TUEs are legal, but if they're open to misuse then perhaps they shouldn't be.

The sheer list of past high profile users of TUEs is surprising in itself. From tennis to football, even golf! Athletics and cycling hardly need mentioning. This information only became public via accident or data hacking.

So far Floyd Mayweather remains the most famous user of a TUE in boxing - in his case a backdated one!

Some might say it doesn't matter who is using what. However with unimaginably vast sums of money at stake, it does matter.

And then there's posterity...

Maybe we should be redefining which drugs are worth testing for and which aren't.

The likes of epo and hgh are one thing, other stuff that's available to the general public without a prescription is something else.

Once this is done they could then outlaw Tues altogether for the stuff that remains on the list.

Or is that too simplistic a viewpoint?

ewenhay wrote: ↑02 May 2019, 13:43 Maybe we should be redefining which drugs are worth testing for and which aren't.

The likes of epo and hgh are one thing, other stuff that's available to the general public without a prescription is something else.

Once this is done they could then outlaw Tues altogether for the stuff that remains on the list.

Or is that too simplistic a viewpoint?

It gets complicated as there are legitimate medicines necessary for one's health that contain banned substances. Steroids are a good example. I don't know for certain but I would think those substances contained are in trace amounts but still can come up on VADA/WADA testing thus the waiver.

ewenhay wrote: ↑02 May 2019, 13:43 Maybe we should be redefining which drugs are worth testing for and which aren't.

The likes of epo and hgh are one thing, other stuff that's available to the general public without a prescription is something else.

Once this is done they could then outlaw Tues altogether for the stuff that remains on the list.

Or is that too simplistic a viewpoint?

no, you make a great point - I also think if you can't outlaw TUEs altogether they should be made available to public or atleast the opponent

oogiebe wrote: ↑02 May 2019, 13:51 It gets complicated as there are legitimate medicines necessary for one's health that contain banned substances. Steroids are a good example. I don't know for certain but I would think those substances contained are in trace amounts but still can come up on VADA/WADA testing thus the waiver.

yes that is another good point, the TUE discussion is always interesting because I know if you suffer from any skin itchiness or problem the creams doctors prescribe can have steroids

kbackup408 wrote: ↑02 May 2019, 13:58 yes that is another good point, the TUE discussion is always interesting because I know if you suffer from any skin itchiness or problem the creams doctors prescribe can have steroids

There just aren't any white knights who want to protect the integrity of the sweet science. It's a business and when there's money to be made, there is greed; where there is greed; there is no integrity. It's a hot mess with no real answers.

Would biological passports work in boxing?

greg wrote: ↑02 May 2019, 09:24 ..it's not necessarily about cheating...it's about the right to know who might have an advantage ...

X2

ewenhay wrote: ↑02 May 2019, 14:56 Would biological passports work in boxing?

I reckon it would be more difficult in boxing just on the sheer volume of boxers in every country - in an MMA organisation such as the UFC (via usada) it is easier, even the olympics it happens every 4 years and athletes aren't in the multiple of 1000's

keirw wrote: ↑02 May 2019, 05:28 Pretty sure I read the other day that he was getting a six month ban.

Who is in a position to ban him?
The only thing I have seen reported is that the WBA will not be ranking him for 6 months.

leejonesjnr wrote: ↑02 May 2019, 16:37 Who is in a position to ban him?
The only thing I have seen reported is that the WBA will not be ranking him for 6 months.

A sanctioning body has the right, so all but the WBC.