BoxRec

If the visiting boxer can somehow avoid it, the hometown boxer's team loses nothing

If the visiting boxer got caught, then the hometown boxer will have his loss nullified

So, why not always doing it? Browne got punished when it's obvious he's innocent, and Chagaev's team didn't lose anything

Chagaev's team lost a title actually

asdfjkl wrote:Chagaev's team lost a title actually

They would've lost it whether Browne is drugged or not. But with Browne being drugged (intentionally or not), there's a chance they could escape with a no contest and possibly get their title back

s21 wrote:

asdfjkl wrote:Chagaev's team lost a title actually

They would've lost it whether Browne is drugged or not. But with Browne being drugged (intentionally or not), there's a chance they could escape with a no contest and possibly get their title back

Well it wasn't like Browne was that dominating at all anyway. Chagaev was standing while the fight was flagged all over, Chagaev won the first 6 rounds or so and Browne has been down. It was a fair win from Browne in my second opinion, but just a few minits before the end I expected Chagaev to win easely.

asdfjkl wrote:

s21 wrote:

asdfjkl wrote:Chagaev's team lost a title actually

They would've lost it whether Browne is drugged or not. But with Browne being drugged (intentionally or not), there's a chance they could escape with a no contest and possibly get their title back

Well it wasn't like Browne was that dominating at all anyway. Chagaev was standing while the fight was flagged all over, Chagaev won the first 6 rounds or so and Browne has been down. It was a fair win from Browne in my second opinion, but just a few minits before the end I expected Chagaev to win easely.

But that's not really the point though. Whatever happens in the fight, the promoter won't lose anything in attempting to drug the visiting boxer.

I find this thread puerile. Who in their right mind would condone the taking or administering of banned substances especially without the affected persons knowledge!?

Stuarty30 wrote:I find this thread puerile. Who in their right mind would condone the taking or administering of banned substances especially without the affected persons knowledge!?

Eastern bloc promotors, apparently.

dberry wrote:

Stuarty30 wrote:I find this thread puerile. Who in their right mind would condone the taking or administering of banned substances especially without the affected persons knowledge!?

Eastern bloc promotors, apparently.

I am sure this is just troll bait

dberry wrote:

Stuarty30 wrote:I find this thread puerile. Who in their right mind would condone the taking or administering of banned substances especially without the affected persons knowledge!?

Eastern bloc promotors, apparently.

Evidently

Drug testing should be mandatory before and after any major fight. Stamp the drug users out.

s21 wrote:

asdfjkl wrote:

s21 wrote:
They would've lost it whether Browne is drugged or not. But with Browne being drugged (intentionally or not), there's a chance they could escape with a no contest and possibly get their title back

Well it wasn't like Browne was that dominating at all anyway. Chagaev was standing while the fight was flagged all over, Chagaev won the first 6 rounds or so and Browne has been down. It was a fair win from Browne in my second opinion, but just a few minits before the end I expected Chagaev to win easely.

But that's not really the point though. Whatever happens in the fight, the promoter won't lose anything in attempting to drug the visiting boxer.

I have no clue what happens if you get caught on something like that actually, but it would be very very, very very sad indeed if someone tries to drug the visiting boxer.

Stuarty30 wrote:I find this thread puerile. Who in their right mind would condone the taking or administering of banned substances especially without the affected persons knowledge!?

But it (probably) already happened, and Chagaev's team loses nothing from doing it, so why not always do it if you can?

Of course this shouldn't actually be condoned, but the "rules" still let Browne be punished even though he's obviously innocent

asdfjkl wrote:I have no clue what happens if you get caught on something like that actually, but it would be very very, very very sad indeed if someone tries to drug the visiting boxer.

Well, it already happened with Browne.

It doesn't only happen in Chechnya. Wlad definitely appeared to have been drugged in Brewster 1. Golota showing up late at the arena on his own in a police car glassy eyed and drugged for the Lewis fight has never been satisfactorily explained. Plenty of other strange cases right here in the US. Boxing is a very corrupt sport.

Browne could have been drugged, but it doesn't mean that he was clean. He certainly looked way too durable and energetic for a clean fighter.

ikorolev wrote:Browne could have been drugged, but it doesn't mean that he was clean. He certainly looked way too durable and energetic for a clean fighter.

Even if he isn't clean, it's certainly not by taking Clenbuterol right before the fight, cause that won't do any good at all for him.

s21 wrote:

Stuarty30 wrote:I find this thread puerile. Who in their right mind would condone the taking or administering of banned substances especially without the affected persons knowledge!?

But it (probably) already happened, and Chagaev's team loses nothing from doing it, so why not always do it if you can?

Of course this shouldn't actually be condoned, but the "rules" still let Browne be punished even though he's obviously innocent

asdfjkl wrote:I have no clue what happens if you get caught on something like that actually, but it would be very very, very very sad indeed if someone tries to drug the visiting boxer.

Well, it already happened with Browne.

Really? Who got caught for it? I haven't heard of that actually, just some random anonymous people or stakeholders suggesting it.

Promoters SHOULD CHEAT???? ... The repercussion for framing somebody and pulling your scam off without a hitch is ETERNAL DAMNATION!!!! ... When you think about the alternative to that, which is ETERNAL HAPPINESS, you may not want to spike somebody's water, food, or Vaseline, with a banned PED just to insure YOUR boxer retains the title even if you believe you're clever enough to pull off such a reprehensible act. A lot of very clever people are spending eternity suffering in excruciatingly torturous burning fire and everlasting stench. It's too late for them but not for you.

tigermoth87 wrote:Drug testing should be mandatory before and after any major fight. Stamp the drug users out.

Who will be left to compete though?

Kalan wrote:Promoters SHOULD CHEAT???? ... The repercussion for framing somebody and pulling your scam off without a hitch is ETERNAL DAMNATION!!!! ... When you think about the alternative to that, which is ETERNAL HAPPINESS, you may not want to spike somebody's water, food, or Vaseline, with a banned PED just to insure YOUR boxer retains the title even if you believe you're clever enough to pull off such a reprehensible act. A lot of very clever people are spending eternity suffering in excruciatingly torturous burning fire and everlasting stench. It's too late for them but not for you.

Aww crikey, a friggen God botherer weighing in to the debate yeah, that'll stop them promotors from protecting their cash cows, the threat of eternal damnation!

asdfjkl wrote: Really? Who got caught for it? I haven't heard of that actually, just some random anonymous people or stakeholders suggesting it.

Oh sorry, misinterpreted you, thought you was talking about 'Browne got caught drugging'

But well, that's the thing, how would you gonna get caught if you do it in the first place, it's too easy to do this without getting caught

s21 wrote:

asdfjkl wrote: Really? Who got caught for it? I haven't heard of that actually, just some random anonymous people or stakeholders suggesting it.

Oh sorry, misinterpreted you, thought you was talking about 'Browne got caught drugging'

But well, that's the thing, how would you gonna get caught if you do it in the first place, it's too easy to do this without getting caught

I don't think it's that easy, it has to go through food or drink, the guy shouldn't taste it, otherwise he notices it, and then still, it's a kind of odd if someone who isn't in your team suddenly offers you some drink right?

[quote="dberry] Yeah, that'll stop them promotors from protecting their cash cows, the threat of eternal damnation![/quote]

You don't get it. The fear of God actually stops a lot of bad things from happening. And not having a conscience doesn't mean there's NO repercussions as s21 suggests. I just thought I'd throw that in. I'm amazed at the number of Christians who go to church on Sunday and act as if there's no God on Monday. People suggest you do a business deal in a certain way and say "Who's gonna know?"

Kalan wrote:[quote="dberry] Yeah, that'll stop them promotors from protecting their cash cows, the threat of eternal damnation!

You don't get it. The fear of God actually stops a lot of bad things from happening. And not having a conscience doesn't mean there's NO repercussions as s21 suggests. I just thought I'd throw that in. I'm amazed at the number of Christians who go to church on Sunday and act as if there's no God on Monday. People suggest you do a business deal in a certain way and say "Who's gonna know?"[/quote][/quote][/quote]

People have to believe in God to fear him. There's no indication that not believing in God makes people any less moral.

[quote="s21] how would you gonna get caught if you do it in the first place, it's too easy to do this without getting caught[/quote]

How dumb some people are. Every athlete who ever got caught doing PEDs were assured over and over again that they would get away with it... Victor Conte is about the slickest, cleverest criminal you'll ever run into. He got caught a number of times and was sent to prison for peddling PEDs. Many of the athletes he's worked with were stripped of medals, disgraced, and suspended for years after being assured by Conte that everything they took would pass ANY urine or blood test as easy as pie.

gilgamesh wrote:People have to believe in God to fear him. There's no indication that not believing in God makes people any less moral.

I agree with that. To the extent people who don't believe in God are actually being honest with themselves they are probably just as moral, or maybe even have a deeper sense of morality than people who profess a belief in God for appearances but have no knowledge of God whatsoever. Many people profess a belief who don't really believe. It's like a guy professing to love his wife more than anything, and then doing things that prove he loves himself a whole lot more. It depends on who's watching him. Saying isn't doing ... and saying isn't being what you say.

It's like a teenager pointing out that his father is a hypocrite. So his dad says "Do as I say, not as I do" ... and the kid is thinking "yeah but not when you're not watching" because that's the real message he's getting.