Page 11 of 11
Re: a quick response
Posted: 30 Jun 2012, 02:54
by daveferguson
mugabi wrote:taffytoon wrote:[quote="mugabi"
You are the joke on this matter Mug, by the way I have corrected the spelling mistakes and grammar on your post to such an extent that I could at least understand what you had said, I now wish I hadn't as it is utter tosh. To use words like Man, Integrity and honourable about a drug cheat is absolutely laughable.

Havent you got a meeting at the dole office this morning pet? Go and spend all the money on booze like your hero Gascoigne, so you can come on here and make an asshole of yourself.
For someone like you to even mention things like honour and integrity when they are alien concepts to an online warrior like you is the only joke here.
All of you people should step in the ring one day , and take punches for a living......than you will understand these things like integrity, honour, courage etc. If you did earn a living in the HW division you would know everyone is on drugs. So there is no cheating[/quote]
Bullshit I never used peds when I was fighting
Re: Larry O: a quick response
Posted: 30 Jun 2012, 03:43
by Final round
Out of interest Mugabi do you take or have you ever taken illegal steroids? You sound like someone who has first hand experience himself and cannot see the problem with using them?
Re: Larry O: a quick response
Posted: 30 Jun 2012, 05:46
by safeerah
This is not about the after effects of steroids, it's about getting an unfair advantage in sport, cheating. Wrestlers and body builders have died young because of steroid abuse, even though in their industies they have expert advice on how to take them, body building champ, actor and Governor Arnie has had a heart bypass opp at a young age. No one should take them because they feel other people do, not only are you cheating other sportsmen, but past sportsmen because the records they achieved are in danger of being broken by sportsman who use an unfair advantage.
Re: Larry O: a quick response
Posted: 30 Jun 2012, 06:09
by rhino222
we use steroids at work on a daily basis, even in a very well prepared and equipped operating theatre doctors do not 'willy nilly' administer steroids because of their side effects!!..and these are steroids that are designed for medicinal use.
yes there are illnesses that require high amounts of steroids, but this is done in a very controlled and progressive manner, plus there is a weaning off period post treatment.
........ out of interest kenalog is a steriod we use regularly in theatre....a quick look at its side effects reveals the following..
Severe allergic reactions (rash; hives; itching; difficulty swallowing or breathing; tightness in the chest; swelling of the mouth, face, hands, legs, eyes, throat, lips, or tongue; unusual hoarseness); depression; fainting; fast, slow, or irregular heartbeat; joint stiffness or pain; mood or mental changes; muscle pain or weakness; numbness or tingling in the hands or feet; pain, redness, or swelling at the injection site; personality changes; seizures; severe or persistent headache or dizziness; shortness of breath; signs of infection (eg, fever, chills, sore throat); slow wound healing; swelling of the ankles, hands, legs, or feet; unusual weight gain, especially in the face; vision changes.
so...imagine what a non medicinally authorised injection would do!!
Re: Larry O: a quick response
Posted: 30 Jun 2012, 06:40
by safeerah
rhino222 wrote:we use steroids at work on a daily basis, even in a very well prepared and equipped operating theatre doctors do not 'willy nilly' administer steroids because of their side effects!!..and these are steroids that are designed for medicinal use.
yes there are illnesses that require high amounts of steroids, but this is done in a very controlled and progressive manner, plus there is a weaning off period post treatment.
........ out of interest kenalog is a steriod we use regularly in theatre....a quick look at its side effects reveals the following..
Severe allergic reactions (rash; hives; itching; difficulty swallowing or breathing; tightness in the chest; swelling of the mouth, face, hands, legs, eyes, throat, lips, or tongue; unusual hoarseness); depression; fainting; fast, slow, or irregular heartbeat; joint stiffness or pain; mood or mental changes; muscle pain or weakness; numbness or tingling in the hands or feet; pain, redness, or swelling at the injection site; personality changes; seizures; severe or persistent headache or dizziness; shortness of breath; signs of infection (eg, fever, chills, sore throat); slow wound healing; swelling of the ankles, hands, legs, or feet; unusual weight gain, especially in the face; vision changes.
so...imagine what a non medicinally authorised injection would do!!
Too True !
Re: a quick response
Posted: 30 Jun 2012, 12:08
by Scrap
daveferguson wrote:mugabi wrote:taffytoon wrote:[quote="mugabi"
You are the joke on this matter Mug, by the way I have corrected the spelling mistakes and grammar on your post to such an extent that I could at least understand what you had said, I now wish I hadn't as it is utter tosh. To use words like Man, Integrity and honourable about a drug cheat is absolutely laughable.

Havent you got a meeting at the dole office this morning pet? Go and spend all the money on booze like your hero Gascoigne, so you can come on here and make an asshole of yourself.
For someone like you to even mention things like honour and integrity when they are alien concepts to an online warrior like you is the only joke here.
All of you people should step in the ring one day , and take punches for a living......than you will understand these things like integrity, honour, courage etc. If you did earn a living in the HW division you would know everyone is on drugs. So there is no cheating
Bullshit I never used peds when I was fighting[/quote]
This sums it up very well
Re: a quick response
Posted: 30 Jun 2012, 17:24
by Bricks
daveferguson wrote:mugabi wrote:taffytoon wrote:[quote="mugabi"
You are the joke on this matter Mug, by the way I have corrected the spelling mistakes and grammar on your post to such an extent that I could at least understand what you had said, I now wish I hadn't as it is utter tosh. To use words like Man, Integrity and honourable about a drug cheat is absolutely laughable.

Havent you got a meeting at the dole office this morning pet? Go and spend all the money on booze like your hero Gascoigne, so you can come on here and make an asshole of yourself.
For someone like you to even mention things like honour and integrity when they are alien concepts to an online warrior like you is the only joke here.
All of you people should step in the ring one day , and take punches for a living......than you will understand these things like integrity, honour, courage etc. If you did earn a living in the HW division you would know everyone is on drugs. So there is no cheating
Bullshit I never used peds when I was fighting[/quote]
Im talking about the heavyweight scene today.
Not a while ago. I respect your career and opinion though its an informed one.
Re: Larry O: a quick response
Posted: 30 Jun 2012, 17:45
by palooka
mugabi - you were so keen on how honourable heavyweight boxers are and what a noble way it is to earn a living and how steroid use is rife; and when a non steroid using heavyweight boxer has a point of view different from yours you insult them.
I have seen your posts on other subjects and thought you had a point of view.
You've made a bit of a dick of yourself on this.
Re: Larry O: a quick response
Posted: 30 Jun 2012, 17:50
by Bricks
palooka wrote:mugabi - you were so keen on how honourable heavyweight boxers are and what a noble way it is to earn a living and how steroid use is rife; and when a non steroid using heavyweight boxer has a point of view different from yours you insult them.
I have seen your posts on other subjects and thought you had a point of view.
You've made a bit of a dick of yourself on this.
Its an emotive subject palooka and i strongly feel an injustice has been done to Larry O.
Perhaps on another thread you and I would be friends and share a viewpoint but u very much got the wrong end of the stick with what i was saying. I bear u no ill will and look forward to reading your posts in another thread less controversial than this one

Re: Larry O: a quick response
Posted: 30 Jun 2012, 18:00
by palooka
mugabi wrote:palooka wrote:mugabi - you were so keen on how honourable heavyweight boxers are and what a noble way it is to earn a living and how steroid use is rife; and when a non steroid using heavyweight boxer has a point of view different from yours you insult them.
I have seen your posts on other subjects and thought you had a point of view.
You've made a bit of a dick of yourself on this.
Its an emotive subject palooka and i strongly feel an injustice has been done to Larry O.
Perhaps on another thread you and I would be friends and share a viewpoint but u very much got the wrong end of the stick with what i was saying. I bear u no ill will and look forward to reading your posts in another thread less controversial than this one

I've no massive issue with Larry to be honest; he has his talent as a boxer and has his physical attributes; he has obviously worked hard to gain his strength and his physique; he has though used a series of drugs, over a long period of time that; in a contact combat sport has given him an unfair and undeclared advantage over many of his opponents. Maybe Larry would ave won in any case and maybe not - that is why 'it' affects the sport as a whole and not just the boxer.
I weren't trying to be 'Dr Kildaire' earlier on the thread; I'm not an expert on anything in the world and know that drug use has its advantges and it's consequences. Adults make their own choices but it'd be a horrible thing to encourage someone to do something 'dodgy'.
In any case; peace and have a good weekend and don't do anything I wouldn't do haha

Re: Larry O: a quick response
Posted: 30 Jun 2012, 18:05
by Bricks

Good lad and apologies I was a little OTT in this thread
Re: a quick response
Posted: 30 Jun 2012, 18:06
by lefty
Bullshit I never used peds when I was fighting[/quote]
Im talking about the heavyweight scene today.
Not back in the middle ages.[/quote]
just a tad disrespectful
Re: a quick response
Posted: 30 Jun 2012, 18:18
by Bricks
leftysreturn wrote:Bullshit I never used peds when I was fighting
Im talking about the heavyweight scene today.
Not back in the middle ages.[/quote]
just a tad disrespectful[/quote]
Youre right.Ive amended it. I respect any man who ever stepped in the ring
Re: a quick response
Posted: 30 Jun 2012, 18:23
by Khaosai-Galaxy
oliverfennell wrote:mugabi wrote:Anyone who can't see this 4 year ban is sickeningly extreme and disproportionate is primitive in their thinking.
Sickeningly extreme and disproportionate?? Only if judged by the sickeningly
lenient punishments of the past.
Surely what we all do agree on is that there would be no PED use at all in boxing in a perfect world. "Extreme" bans are therefore much more likely to achieve such an environment than lenient ones, are they not?
i think 4 years is excessive, in my eyes. Larry is just a combination of unlucky, stupid and too honest.
He wasnt doing anything Manny Pacquiao isnt doing.
The testing is a joke, if fighters are halfway smart they know when to cycle off PEDs to beat the test.
Until consistent, legit dope testing is introduced these bans are somewhat arbitrary.
Re: a quick response
Posted: 01 Jul 2012, 00:58
by Khaosai-Galaxy
MachoMan09 wrote:sharmac wrote:Larry mate hopefully you can appeal and get this banned cut in half which would be a much fairer punishment, what you did was wrong but the blame lies with professional boxing.
Do you think the blame lies with the child who gets bummed by the paedophile, too? No? Thought not.
I wouldnt use that argument with rape victims in Pakistan.
"KILL EVERYONE" said a Karachi mullah, when asked yesterday.
Re: Larry O: a quick response
Posted: 07 Jul 2012, 11:13
by oliverfennell
palooka wrote:You have a fair point there Mugabi; the problem is that steroids taken for medical reasons are generally taken orally (tablet, capsule or liquid).
Also note that
cortisone/systemic steroids, which are often in pill form, have the opposite effect of PEDs, as they increase fat retention, reduce musculature and increase appetite.
Re: Larry O: a quick response
Posted: 07 Jul 2012, 11:28
by kevo
oliverfennell wrote:palooka wrote:You have a fair point there Mugabi; the problem is that steroids taken for medical reasons are generally taken orally (tablet, capsule or liquid).
Also note that
cortisone/systemic steroids, which are often in pill form, have the opposite effect of PEDs, as they increase fat retention, reduce musculature and increase appetite.
I assume that's what James Toney was taking then?
Re: Larry O: a quick response
Posted: 07 Jul 2012, 11:40
by oliverfennell
kevo wrote:oliverfennell wrote:palooka wrote:You have a fair point there Mugabi; the problem is that steroids taken for medical reasons are generally taken orally (tablet, capsule or liquid).
Also note that
cortisone/systemic steroids, which are often in pill form, have the opposite effect of PEDs, as they increase fat retention, reduce musculature and increase appetite.
I assume that's what James Toney was taking then?
No, because he wouldn't get a performance boost on cortisone. I think he just wanted to cut corners in training - it's a fallacy that all anabolic steroid users are buff. The musculature doesn't come by magic; it requires work even with steroid use, just the gains are greater. Toney hasn't been too fond of the inside of a gym in recent years but there will be things he could take to boost his performance and yet he'd still have a gut.
Re: Larry O: a quick response
Posted: 07 Jul 2012, 11:40
by oliverfennell
rhino222 wrote:yes there are illnesses that require high amounts of steroids, but this is done in a very controlled and progressive manner, plus there is a weaning off period post treatment.
I had an illness that requires steroid treatment and I was taking predsomed in various doses for over 3 years. I didn't have terrible side-effects but I did have some from time to time - acne, moonface, mood swings, warts, cramps, and probably some others that slip the mind right now. All in all, I didn't have a terrible time with them but the associated effects were obvious, and even as someone who tolerated them quite well my doctor monitored me carefully and regularly and wanted to get me off them as soon as I was able, and would often talk about the dangers of long-term steroid use.
There is, also, a careful weaning off period. If you use steroids regularly and then stop abruptly, the side effects can be severe. Also, even with a tapering schedule that was slightly too quick, I had my own setbacks. When I finally came off them it was on a very gradual taper.
So even in for medicinal reasons and being administered in precise amounts by a doctor for a specific purpise, it was not without consequence and the doctor himself proceeded with caution at all times. So, without wishing to reignite the Palooka v Mugabi spat, and without their respective insights, I can say as someone who took medicinal steroids for 3+ years, they are not without risk.
In fact, it would be folly to say taking
any medicine is completely risk-free. There will be some users of most medicines who will report no ill-effects, but that does not mean they are safe for all.
Re: Larry O: a quick response
Posted: 13 Jul 2012, 05:24
by Khaosai-Galaxy
Boxrec readers should know that after 8 pints Oliver gets even more angry about steroids. He had to be talked down off the roof the other night.
I am disgusted to find out he has taken them.