General UFC Chit Chat/News

Davei141

I guess we are just going to ignore the 2 tests that were done according to WADA standards and protocol pre and post fight that showed up negative and ban a guy for 5 years for the test that throwed up a crazily high off the charts reading that was collected with unregulated standards and tested in a unaccredited WADA lab. Yeah the facts...

John stop trying to infer he is doing something on par with Chael Sonnen/Nate Marquadt/Vitor Belfort etc by constantly saying PED and how dangerous it is just to make it easier to justify that a guy got his career ended by an unreliable test for weed.

Davei141

Mellor wrote: »

Cheers for that.
Without seeing the full results it's hard to know anything for sure. But I'd question them describing the first and third tests as "clean". If it was absolutely clean, the failed test is very odd. But what they probably mean is the 1st & 3rd tests were below the 150ng/ml threshold. I'd be interested to see the exact readings though.

They test the samples for how diluted they are. The this is what each test found


I'd read that as if the 1st and 3rd were more "watery". So it makes sense that concentrations of marijuana were lower in those samples. If they were like 100ng/ml or so, then "the clean tests" are fairly irrelevant tbh.

The clean tests were 49ng/ml pre fight and 61ng/ml post fight. Pretty consistent compared to the 733ng/ml.

MartyMcFly84

So you are saying Nick Diaz did not smoke pot in the run up to his fight with Anderson Silva?

Davei141

MartyMcFly84 wrote: »

So you are saying Nick Diaz did not smoke pot in the run up to his fight with Anderson Silva?

If you haven't a clue about this topic i would suggest plenty of other threads you would like to contribute to.

MartyMcFly84

If you haven't a clue about this topic i would suggest plenty of other threads you would like to contribute to.

Its a pretty straight forward question. Do you think he did not consume marijuana in the run up to his fight with Anderson Silva?

John_D80

Davei141 wrote: »

I guess we are just going to ignore the 2 tests that were done according to WADA standards and protocol pre and post fight that showed up negative and ban a guy for 5 years for the test that throwed up a crazily high off the charts reading that was collected with unregulated standards and tested in a unaccredited WADA lab. Yeah the facts...

John stop trying to infer he is doing something on par with Chael Sonnen/Nate Marquadt/Vitor Belfort etc by constantly saying PED and how dangerous it is just to make it easier to justify that a guy got his career ended by an unreliable test for weed.

You can put any spin on it that you want and try to make it sound like 'it was just a bitta weed'. He broke the rules again and got caught again. Calling Cannabis a PED might make you uncomfortable but thats exactly what it is, with good reason.

He used a PED and he's paying the price.

John_D80

MartyMcFly84 wrote: »

Its a pretty straight forward question. Do you think he did not consume marijuana in the run up to his fight with Anderson Silva?

I got a pretty similar evasive answer when I asked him that too!! :-)

Mellor

Davei141 wrote: »

I guess we are just going to ignore the 2 tests that were done according to WADA standards and protocol pre and post fight that showed up negative and ban a guy for 5 years for the test that throwed up a crazily high off the charts reading that was collected with unregulated standards and tested in a unaccredited WADA lab. Yeah the facts...

It wasn't crazy high off the charts. You just made that up.
There's also no such thing as an unacredited lab. Nor was it unregulated. The quest lab is a commonly used lab by NSAC.

Davei141

Mellor wrote: »

It wasn't crazy high off the charts. You just made that up.
There's also no such thing as an unacredited lab. Nor was it unregulated. The quest lab is a commonly used lab by NSAC.

Wasn't WADA accredited i meant. And the forms which weren't filled out correctly and had Diaz name on it wasn't regulated, as it is standard to identify people with a ID number to stop bias. Is that the same Quest lab that the commissioner admitted they were stuck with because of funding? And that in an ideal world they would use WADA accredited labs? The defence showed up their whole system as being ridiculous and the NSAC didn't like that.

You said if he was testing at 100ng/ml it was irrelevant, now that was it was well below that is it still irrelevant?

Mr. Manager

MartyMcFly84 wrote: »

So you are saying Nick Diaz did not smoke pot in the run up to his fight with Anderson Silva?

Davei141 wrote: »

If you haven't a clue about this topic i would suggest plenty of other threads you would like to contribute to.

MartyMcFly84 wrote: »

Its a pretty straight forward question. Do you think he did not consume marijuana in the run up to his fight with Anderson Silva?

John_D80 wrote: »

I got a pretty similar evasive answer when I asked him that too!! :-)

So are we going to get an answer about this..?

Mellor

Davei141 wrote: »

The clean tests were 49ng/ml pre fight and 61ng/ml post fight. Pretty consistent compared to the 733ng/ml.

It's a urine test, not a blood test. So the levels are hugely depend on the water in the sample. The specific gravity suggest the 1st and 3rd were diluted a lot.
The second sample was consistent with typical urine. I guessed 100ng above, but 49 and 61ng are hardly miles off.

The fact is marijuana was present in all 3 samples. Presiously, the 61ng would have been a fail.

Awesomeness

Ah lads diaz lawyer ripped them apart. If this was any other fighter than Diaz we wouldnt even have a debate. I am no nick diaz fan but I have yet to see one person in the mma community come out and say the commission was right.

Their all ego and anyone that thinks this does anything other than show their obvious flaws is deluded. One of the commissioners owns a medical marijuana company and another one was openly laughing at Diaz's lawyer ffs

Davei141

MartyMcFly84 wrote: »

Its a pretty straight forward question. Do you think he did not consume marijuana in the run up to his fight with Anderson Silva?

John_D80 wrote: »

You can put any spin on it that you want and try to make it sound like 'it was just a bitta weed'. He broke the rules again and got caught again. Calling Cannabis a PED might make you uncomfortable but thats exactly what it is, with good reason.

He used a PED and he's paying the price.

John_D80 wrote: »

I got a pretty similar evasive answer when I asked him that too!! :-)

Cereal Rapper wrote: »

So are we going to get an answer about this..?

What do you think? He had it in his system. That isn't against the rules, the fact you's keep asking as if it is a yes/no issue shows what yous know. There was loads of doubt cast and a great defence put up and Diaz was punished for having the audacity to defend himself. In what universe is that acceptable? Apart from the boards "hurr dems the rules/i don't like Diaz ban him" line of reasoning.

And Mellor yes they were more diluted but they had expert testimony that hydrating to that level to produce those results would have been very dangerous. Lets just ignore all the questions the defence raise and stick with what the NSAC have decided beforehand. What is the point of hearings if you can't defend yourself.

Davei141

Awesomeness wrote: »

Ah lads diaz lawyer ripped them apart. If this was any other fighter than Diaz we wouldnt even have a debate. I am no nick diaz fan but I have yet to see one person in the mma community come out and say the commission was right.

Their all ego and anyone that thinks this does anything other than show their obvious flaws is deluded. One of the commissioners owns a medical marijuana company and another one was openly laughing at Diaz's lawyer ffs

I think we are wasting our time tbh. Like the commission most of these posters made up their mind beforehand, most of them posting without even watching or reading further than "5 year ban headline". That is pretty much what you are dealing with.

Remember Chael Sonnen folks?

Sonnen was flagged for a total of five PEDs prior to a scheduled fight with Vitor Belfort at the July 5 pay-per-view event: anastrozole, clomifene, human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG), human growth hormone (HGH) and recombinant human erythropoietin. The first failed test prompted the UFC to pull him from the fight, after which he publicly retired from the sport on June 11. The second positive test, which revealed the presence of noted PEDs HGH and EPO, triggered the termination of his relationship with the UFC and FOX, where he served as a host of FOX Sports 1’s “UFC Tonight.”

2 Year ban and zero monetary fine for 3 failed tests for PEDs (proper PEDs) because the commission like him. I think i'm going to leave this as reading some of the black & white crap above from posters just makes me angry. Not an ounce of critical thought.

John_D80

Davei141 wrote: »

What do you think? He had it in his system. That isn't against the rules, the fact you's keep asking as if it is a yes/no issue shows what yous know. There was loads of doubt cast and a great defence put up and Diaz was punished for having the audacity to defend himself. In what universe is that acceptable? Apart from the boards "hurr dems the rules/i don't like Diaz ban him" line of reasoning.

And Mellor yes they were more diluted but they had expert testimony that hydrating to that level to produce those results would have been very dangerous. Lets just ignore all the questions the defence raise and stick with what the NSAC have decided beforehand. What is the point of hearings if you can't defend yourself.

Mate you are suffering from serious butthurt over this in fairness. You cant seriously really say that he got railroaded for defending himself when he answered most questions asked of him with 'fifth amendment'. He had every opportunity to defend himself.

Pleading the fifth in such a case was spurious at best. The NSAC rightly questioned whether or not the fifth amendment even applied to him yesterday as he was not on trial for any crime or is there any pending cases against him.

His defence was nothing short of obstructive to the procedure. Even when he was asked basic simple questions, like whether he fought in UFC 184, he was pleading the fifth......... and there was about 10 minutes of sh1t like that. Seriously?

By his own actions in and out of the hearing room he sealed his own fate.

John_D80

Davei141 wrote: »

I think we are wasting our time tbh. Like the commission most of these posters made up their mind beforehand, most of them posting without even watching or reading further than "5 year ban headline". That is pretty much what you are dealing with.

Remember Chael Sonnen folks?



2 Year ban and zero monetary fine for 3 failed tests for PEDs (proper PEDs) because the commission like him. I think i'm going to leave this as reading some of the black & white crap above from posters just makes me angry. Not an ounce of critical thought.

Chael Sonnen pretty much admitted everything and took responsibility for his actions. Also as I recall he offered to become an advocate for the NSAC in advising young athletes of the dangers of taking PED's in order to get a reduced ban.

Big difference between that and the Diaz situation.

Lukker-

John_D80 wrote: »

Mate you are suffering from serious butthurt over this in fairness. You cant seriously really say that he got railroaded for defending himself when he answered most questions asked of him with 'fifth amendment'. He had every opportunity to defend himself.

Pleading the fifth in such a case was spurious at best. The NSAC rightly questioned whether or not the fifth amendment even applied to him yesterday as he was not on trial for any crime or is there any pending cases against him.

His defence was nothing short of obstructive to the procedure. Even when he was asked basic simple questions, like whether he fought in UFC 184, he was pleading the fifth......... and there was about 10 minutes of sh1t like that. Seriously?

By his own actions in and out of the hearing room he sealed his own fate.

He plead the fifth because he didn't believe he'd get a fair and impartial trial, which was proved to be the case.

Lukker-

John_D80 wrote: »

Chael Sonnen pretty much admitted everything and took responsibility for his actions. Also as I recall he offered to become an advocate for the NSAC in advising young athletes of the dangers of taking PED's in order to get a reduced ban.

Big difference between that and the Diaz situation.

Yeah the difference is that Sonnen actually took PED's, multiple times.

John_D80

Lukker- wrote: »

He plead the fifth because he didn't believe he'd get a fair and impartial trial, which was proved to be the case.

I dont think you really undestand what the fifth amendment is. Fifth amendment really only applies in a criminal case or when there is a criminal case pending in a court that 'outranks' the one that your currently giving evidence in.

1. He was not being tried for a crime.

2. The hearing he was testifying in is not a court.

So unless there is a directly related criminal case forthcoming, then his defence team gave him some very bad advice in telling him to plead the fifth.

John_D80

Lukker- wrote: »

Yeah the difference is that Sonnen actually took PED's, multiple times.

Like it or not mate but as far as the athletic commissions & governing bodies of nearly every sport in the world is concerned, Cannabis is also a PED.

Mellor

Davei141 wrote: »

You said if he was testing at 100ng/ml it was irrelevant, now that was it was well below that is it still irrelevant?

What I was saying was that the idea that the other tests were "clean" is irrelevant if these actually test showed any significant levels of marijuana. And they did. I imagine that lower levels are expected in a more watery sample.
If they had of been completely clean, as in 0ng's, then it would be very weird. But the fact is all 3 tests confirm he had marijuana in his system. I really can't see what grounds he has to complain here.

I don't actually agree with weed being treated a PED like other drugs. But it is, and everyone knows that it he, especially Nick.

Lukker-

Mellor wrote: »

What I was saying was that the idea that the other tests were "clean" is irrelevant if these actually test showed any significant levels of marijuana. And they did. I imagine that lower levels are expected in a more watery sample.
If they had of been completely clean, as in 0ng's, then it would be very weird. But the fact is all 3 tests confirm he had marijuana in his system. I really can't see what grounds he has to complain here.

I don't actually agree with weed being treated a PED like other drugs. But it is, and everyone knows that it he, especially Nick.

The lower levels are could be have been in his system from when he was out of competition. Cannabis takes more then 30 days to leave your system as it attaches itself to your fat cells. The majority of other drugs leave your system in 3 days, cocaine, heroin, even oral testosterone, will leave no trace in urine after 2-3 days.

Mr. Manager

I don't know why you're comparing this to Chael Sonnen. He failed those tests pre rule change. It's not like they can go back and give him a fine now...

Diaz was unfortunate (if you can call it that) to get caught post rule change.

John_D80

Lukker- wrote: »

The lower levels are could be have been in his system from when he was out of competition. Cannabis takes more then 30 days to leave your system as it attaches itself to your fat cells. The majority of other drugs leave your system in 3 days, cocaine, heroin, even oral testosterone, will leave no trace in urine after 2-3 days.

Such a broad and misleading statement. Its all dependent of frequency of use. For a light to moderate user there sould be far less than 50ng/ml in your urine, 10 days after last using cannabis.

For there to still be traces in excess of this, 30 days after last use, would indicate a VERY VERY heavy user.

MartyMcFly84

I think i'm going to leave this as reading some of the black & white crap above from posters just makes me angry. Not an ounce of critical thought.

Its because it is very simple. If he wanted to be sure he was not going to get caught for a third time he should not have consumed the substance in the run up to the fight.

I feel bad for the dude, but he put himself in this position and blaming the commission when he himself smoked up a few bowls is just irresponsible. Had he not smoked he would not have been caught.

Mellor

Lukker- wrote: »

The lower levels are could be have been in his system from when he was out of competition. Cannabis takes more then 30 days to leave your system as it attaches itself to your fat cells. The majority of other drugs leave your system in 3 days, cocaine, heroin, even oral testosterone, will leave no trace in urine after 2-3 days.

I don't anyone is suggesting that he smoked a joint right before he got into the octagon. I'd assume that the failed test is absolutely from previous use. Diaz commented in the past thatcher stops 8 days out from a fight.

Lukker-

John_D80 wrote: »

Such a broad and misleading statement. Its all dependent of frequency of use. For a light to moderate user there sould be far less than 50ng/ml in your urine, 10 days after last using cannabis.

For there to still be traces in excess of this, 30 days after last use, would indicate a VERY VERY heavy user.

So? If he's out of competition and has a medical cert to use it legally in the State of California.

For super heavy users it can take over 2 months to vacate the system.

Kenny Bania

Cereal Rapper wrote: »

I don't know why you're comparing this to Chael Sonnen. He failed those tests pre rule change. It's not like they can go back and give him a fine now...

Diaz was unfortunate (if you can call it that) to get caught post rule change.

Diaz was not caught post rule change. It was January. New rules came into effect from 1st July. His punishment was based off repeated offenses.

John_D80 wrote: »

Like it or not mate but as far as the athletic commissions & governing bodies of nearly every sport in the world is concerned, Cannabis is also a PED.

Cannibas is not a PED. It's a banned recreational drug.

Lukker- wrote: »

So? If he's out of competition and has a medical cert to use it legally in the State of California.

He doesn't have a medical usage card - he just said he did - but he never produced the card - his commission hearing from the Condit failure was even delayed while they gave him 45 days to produce it, after his lawyer claimed he had one:
http://www.mmamania.com/2012/5/1/2990500/ufc-mma-nevada-state-athletic-commission-nick-diaz-lawsuit
And subsequently, everyone now thinks he does have one - just because he said he did. That's fanboys for you though.

Mellor

Davei141 wrote: »

What do you think? He had it in his system. That isn't against the rules,

Actually it is against the rules. It's illegal to have marijuaba or its metabolites in you system during competition.
Why do you say it's not.

And Mellor yes they were more diluted but they had expert testimony that hydrating to that level to produce those results would have been very dangerous..

The SG indicates it was a diluted sample, but it's not outside whats normal expected. I'm not sure how testimony could disprove that.

Post fight he'd be dehydrated.
If he drank a few glasses of water after the test his marijuana levels would drop.

John_D80

Kenny Bania wrote: »

Cannibas is not a PED. It's a banned recreational drug.

Its falls under both categories actually. Most of the doping agencies/commisions just use prohibited/banned substances as an umbrella term.

Unless there has been a recent change, USADA and WADA had banned cannabis (in compettition) for meeting all three criteria for classification as a prohibited substance, including being performance enhancing.

Has this changed recently?