Heavyweight Boxing

yourdeadwright

walshb wrote: »

yourdeadwright wrote: »

Also you do realise he tested positive for benzoylecgonine, ,Its not performance enhancing
I could be wrong but isn't it something that appears in your body after cocaine use ?
So its slightly different than being on the Jesus juice,

He was done for a banned/prohibited substance....

He is a drugs cheat no different than AP.

I did not read in-depth on it, but I think AP was initially down for Melondiuom, which was free to use for many years, and people still disagree on whether or not it enhances performance.

I will read a bit more, but wasn't Fury also cited for nandrolone levels that were above what is termed acceptable?

He got banned for taking Melondiuom twice,
He was caught and went back to taking it again so it was defo helping him
I believe they done loads of test after Sharpaova(tennis ) was caught taking it , they came to the below conclusion which would most certainly benefit a boxer in his mid to late 30's ,
The ability to recover quicker and train harder is huge,
"Meldonium increases an athlete's endurance and exercise tolerance and it also reduces recovery time, which is really important in high-level athletes," Dr. Robert Glatter, a physician at Lenox Hill Hospital in New York, "

squinn2912

I think AP was found to have violated ostarine which apparently increases stamina. The other time was residual levels of meldonium or whatever you call it which was only recently put on the banned list. I'm not sure what Fury was found to have taken?
The point is that there is suspicion that AP was taking enhancers all along and that ties in with the culture of Russian athletes recently. Now if he fights AJ we know he won't be on anything and there's a question over how a 38 YO will cope. For Fury we can be quite sure he never got a shot at Wlad with any enhancers in his system and he's a much younger man too. Deplorable of course for taking anything and blaming it on a pig but that's the main difference for me. He has other things to overcome.
I've called it all along that AP is the next down from the big 3 and Fury is included with a footnote.

yourdeadwright

walshb wrote: »

yourdeadwright wrote: »

AP was performance enhancing  Fury got done for coke, one is cheating the other is just ruining your own life.
Would you call Fury a cheat for using coke ?  I wouldn't it doesn't effect the fight , I'd just call him an idiot
But I will say there was at first the charge of nandrolone at Tyson and Hughie Fury but it was never taking any further and resolved which was odd ,
1

You are being selective here.

Fury was done for a banned substance, as well as the nadrolone suspicions....

Cocaine is well know as being debated for being a PED.....

Plenty people can argue that it can enhance one's performance....

There are instances where it can be used to aid and help an athlete...

Ah the old coke is ped argument,
The only way coke has ever been consider a Ped is due to people not eating while on it so a constant abuser would lose weight,
But then its been show that if you used it to that extent you could not also be a top athlete due to the other side effects .
I think its pretty obvious that AP was using peds and Fury went off the rails partying drinking and using coke,
Just in common sense if your doing enough coke to lose weight you aren't going to be functioning properly to be an athlete
There both banned so no excuses you do it you should be banned, but that's why I call AP an cheat and not Fury

squinn2912

I think that's fair enough YDR

walshb

yourdeadwright wrote: »

Ah the old coke is ped argument,
The only way coke has ever been consider a Ped is due to people not eating while on it so a constant abuser would lose weight,
But then its been show that if you used it to that extent you could not also be a top athlete due to the other side effects .
I think its pretty obvious that AP was using peds and Fury went off the rails partying drinking and using coke,
Just in common sense if your doing enough coke to lose weight you aren't going to be functioning properly to be an athlete
There both banned so no excuses you do it you should be banned, but that's why I call AP an cheat and not Fury

He also failed a test for nandrolone....that is a banned substance and it is linked to performance enhancing

Throw in his refusal to be tested in September 2016....

He is every bit a cheat as the others...

squinn2912

Aw I don;t know where to stand now. Ok all cheats then. Should all cheats be banned for life? It seems the banned substance list needs to be overhauled and changes like the weather so I have sympathy for the athletes - not necessarily Fury/AP specifically. I'm sick of trying to work out what and how much of it they had in their systems at this point.
It seems that double standards are rife though. Remember when Tony Bellew wanted all drugs cheats to be banned for life? Not much talk of that when he's eying up a Fury fight.

walshb

squinn2912 wrote: »

Aw I don;t know where to stand now. Ok all cheats then. Should all cheats be banned for life? It seems the banned substance list needs to be overhauled and changes like the weather so I have sympathy for the athletes - not necessarily Fury/AP specifically. I'm sick of trying to work out what and how much of it they had in their systems at this point.
It seems that double standards are rife though. Remember when Tony Bellew wanted all drugs cheats to be banned for life? Not much talk of that when he's eying up a Fury fight.

I'm the same. I think for the most part it's a fooking nonsense, with the biggest of all PEDs not near any banned list, money....

I guess my points here are about fairness....treating them at least "somewhat" similarly. In this case, Fury and his transgressions are every bit as "cheaty" as AP and Ortiz....

YDR mentioned several times about (AP) being a drugs cheat, and it was in a disparaging way. But conveniently never mentioned Fury.

squinn2912

Yep good point. It's gone to the stage now where largely having money behind you makes all the difference. The time was hunger and poverty seemingly gave an edge but that's gone now.
He is yes. But if you look at it wasn't Whyte banned for 2 years some time ago? AJ was pushing drugs himself and got away with it. Wilder was caught with something in his car last year. It goes on and on and it's nearly harder to name anyone without a drugs link of some kind.
Well I can see into that because the thread of discussion was more aimed at whether or not AP was a worthy opponent for AJ compared to Wilder. But you do have a point and I'll concede to not mentioning Fury either as often. I do like AP though. I've said enough to suggest that I'm less than impressed by Fury though. For AP I think the drugs issue could be more relevant since his fight with Wilder was called off (there was another one as well wasn't there?) and if he's getting an AJ fight then he'll have to be clean. If Fury gets himself into contention and it transpires that he was taking anything then I'll be happy to throw him to the wolves.

yourdeadwright

walshb wrote: »

yourdeadwright wrote: »

Ah the old coke is ped argument,
The only way coke has ever been consider a Ped is due to people not eating while on it so a constant abuser would lose weight,
But then its been show that if you used it to that extent you could not also be a top athlete due to the other side effects .
I think its pretty obvious that AP was using peds and Fury went off the rails partying drinking and using coke,
Just in common sense if your doing enough coke to lose weight you aren't going to be functioning properly to be an athlete
There both banned so no excuses you do it you should be banned, but that's why I call AP an cheat and not Fury

He also failed a test for nandrolone....that is a banned substance and it is linked to performance enhancing

Throw in his refusal to be tested in September 2016....

He is every bit a cheat as the others...

He was never done for his reported failed Nandrolone test either was Hugey , which is very strange if it was true ,
 If he was done for it then yes he is a cheat to but I won't accuses  someone until the system finds them guilty they know more than me,

yourdeadwright

walshb wrote: »

squinn2912 wrote: »

Aw I don;t know where to stand now. Ok all cheats then. Should all cheats be banned for life? It seems the banned substance list needs to be overhauled and changes like the weather so I have sympathy for the athletes - not necessarily Fury/AP specifically. I'm sick of trying to work out what and how much of it they had in their systems at this point.
It seems that double standards are rife though. Remember when Tony Bellew wanted all drugs cheats to be banned for life? Not much talk of that when he's eying up a Fury fight.

I'm the same. I think for the most part it's a fooking nonsense, with the biggest of all PEDs not near any banned list, money....

I guess my points here are about fairness....treating them at least "somewhat" similarly. In this case, Fury and his transgressions are every bit as "cheaty" as AP and Ortiz....

YDR mentioned several times about (AP) being a  drugs cheat, and it was in a disparaging way. But conveniently never mentioned Fury.

Not convenient at all ,
AP was found guilty of using a PED , Fury was not It's quite simply ,
If anyone is found guilty of PEDs I would say the same, If no attachment to these fighters I'm just calling it straight,
Iv always said I never support a boxer like say I would a football team so I'm not leaning towards one over another here,
I just watch and talk about what i see it , In this case one was found guilty of using a know PED and the other wasn't ,

walshb

Pull the other one

He failed a test and he was found with elevated nandrolone levels....

The test was clear. The conviction, not so....

They are all guilty of failing PED/Drugs tests....that is the key...

The conviction is separate.

Many many stars are cleared because of this, that and the other. The actual tests are valid...

He has two PED blemishes on his career and a test refusal......3 blemishes on his name.

You have chosen to several times disparage AP on this and cannot simply admit that Fury is no different.....double standards...

yourdeadwright

walshb wrote: »

Pull the other one

He failed a test and he was found with elevated nandrolone levels....

The test was clear. The conviction, not so....

They are all guilty of failing PED/Drugs tests....that is the key...

The conviction is separate.

Many many stars are cleared because of this, that and the other. The actual tests are valid...

He has two PED blemishes on his career and a test refusal......3 blemishes on his name.

You have chosen to several times disparage AP on this and cannot simply admit that Fury is no different.....double standards...

As I said if found guilty of anything else then yes he is cheat to but to date he hasn't
Why where neither him or Hugey found guilty ?
A AP found guilty of PEDs twice , Fury yet to be found guilty of PEDs, that why I called AP a cheat its straight forward,

walshb

yourdeadwright wrote: »

As I said if found guilty of anything else then yes he is cheat to but to date he hasn't
Why where neither him or Hugey found guilty ?
A AP found guilty of PEDs twice , Fury yet to be found guilty of PEDs, that why I called AP a cheat its straight forward,

That's just semantics nonsense, and you know it

Did he fail a test(s) for PEDs? Yes or no?

He was banned/convicted for this, the nandrolone failed test. Have you a links saying that he was not? If so, please it.

“The anti-doping rule violations based on the reported presence of elevated levels of nandrolone metabolites are upheld, the refusal charge is withdrawn, Hughie and Tyson Fury each receive a two-year period of ineligibility, and their results from their respective fights in February 2015 are disqualified."

https://www.irishtimes.com/sport/other-sports/tyson-fury-cleared-to-box-after-doping-ban-backdated-1.3324791

You have a hard on for Fury....that much is obvious!

yourdeadwright

walshb wrote: »

yourdeadwright wrote: »

As I said if found guilty of anything else then yes he is cheat to but to date he hasn't
Why where neither him or Hugey found guilty ?
A AP found guilty of PEDs twice , Fury yet to be found guilty of PEDs, that why I called AP a cheat its straight forward,

That's just semantics nonsense, and you know it

Did he fail a test(s) for PEDs? Yes or no?

He was banned/convicted for this, the nandrolone failed test. Have you a links saying that he was not? If so, please it.

“The anti-doping rule violations based on the reported presence of elevated levels of nandrolone metabolites are upheld, the refusal charge is withdrawn, Hughie and Tyson Fury each receive a two-year period of ineligibility, and their results from their respective fights in February 2015 are disqualified."

https://www.irishtimes.com/sport/other-sports/tyson-fury-cleared-to-box-after-doping-ban-backdated-1.3324791

You have a hard on for Fury....that much is obvious!

Not at all but if he was charged then fair enough, but I didn't think he was charged,
I don't the above is correct , Hughie fought four times in 2015 twice in 2016 and once in 2017 so when did he serve this two year ban ,  He also has zero no contests on his record, ?
Also the only fights Tyson had in 2015 was Wlad and Hammer neither of which are recorded as no contests ? which they would be if "their results from their respective fights in February 2015 are disqualified " was true ,
For whatever reason this was never upheld
Tyson was banned for coke not nandrolone, that case was dropped against both fighters for whatever reason .,

walshb

yourdeadwright wrote: »

Not at all but if he was charged then fair enough, but I didn't think he was charged,
I don't the above is correct , Hughie fought four times in 2015 twice in 2016 and once in 2017 so when did he serve this two year ban ,  He also has zero no contests on his record, ?
Also the only fights Tyson had in 2015 was Wlad and Hammer neither of which are recorded as no contests ? which they would be if "their results from their respective fights in February 2015 are disqualified " was true ,
For whatever reason this was never upheld
Tyson was banned for coke not nandrolone, that case was dropped against both fighters for whatever reason .,

Please provide a link to say that he was not convicted/banned for the nadrolone incident?

He served a doping ban for cocaine and nandrolone....

He is a drugs cheat, no different than AP.

Your refusal to admit and accept that shows your silly bias....

yourdeadwright

walshb wrote: »

yourdeadwright wrote: »

Not at all but if he was charged then fair enough, but I didn't think he was charged,
I don't the above is correct , Hughie fought four times in 2015 twice in 2016 and once in 2017 so when did he serve this two year ban ,  He also has zero no contests on his record, ?
Also the only fights Tyson had in 2015 was Wlad and Hammer neither of which are recorded as no contests ? which they would be if "their results from their respective fights in February 2015 are disqualified " was true ,
For whatever reason this was never upheld
Tyson was banned for coke not nandrolone, that case was dropped against both fighters for whatever reason .,

Please provide a link to say that he was no convicted/banned for the nadrolone incident?

He served a doping ban for cocaine and nandrolone....

He is a drugs cheat, no different than AP.

Your refusal to admit and accept that shows your silly bias....

Form the start I did mention the nandrlone thing was odd but I can 100%  say neither fighter served a suspension for it,
I will have a look for a article , 
Can you give a reason if what you said was true why Hugey fought every year since and why neither of them have a no contest on there records like the article said ,
"results from their respective fights in February 2015 are disqualified."

yourdeadwright

walshb wrote: »

yourdeadwright wrote: »

Not at all but if he was charged then fair enough, but I didn't think he was charged,
I don't the above is correct , Hughie fought four times in 2015 twice in 2016 and once in 2017 so when did he serve this two year ban ,  He also has zero no contests on his record, ?
Also the only fights Tyson had in 2015 was Wlad and Hammer neither of which are recorded as no contests ? which they would be if "their results from their respective fights in February 2015 are disqualified " was true ,
For whatever reason this was never upheld
Tyson was banned for coke not nandrolone, that case was dropped against both fighters for whatever reason .,

Please provide a link to say that he was not convicted/banned for the nadrolone incident?

He served a doping ban for cocaine and nandrolone....

He is a drugs cheat, no different than AP.

Your refusal to admit and accept that shows your silly bias....

It is understood these initial positives were not considered strong enough for anti-doping rule violations, particularly as follow-up tests did not corroborate them, and Tyson was allowed to fight Klitschko in November 2015, while Hughie has had five subsequent fights.
Tyson Fury's position is complicated by something Warren has only recently revealed - the boxer refused to give a sample to a doping control officer last year.
"His big problem was, when they went for his test, Tyson told them to f*** off," the promoter told Press Association Sport.
"He filmed it; I've seen it. He said: 'What you've done to me is persecute me'. This is when he wasn't feeling too good.
"Then (his uncle and trainer) Peter Fury found out and called them, an hour later. He said: 'Can you come back?' And they wouldn't come back."
Under World Anti-Doping Agency rules, refusing a test is considered the same as a failed test and the starting point for punishing a first-time, intentional offence is a four-year ban.
Clearly, Fury's mental state is a mitigating factor, as is his uncle's attempt to bring the tester back and the uncertainty around those 2015 tests.
All of this was meant to be presented by Fury's legal team - led by top Canadian lawyer James Bunting - at this month's hearing in London, but the case was halted when UKAD's own legal star Jonathan Taylor objected to a member of the three-person panel's undeclared conflict of interest
That's from an article in the Mirror ,
As I said it very strange but neither fight served a ban for it, Its seems something must have gone on because everyone was very quite about Fury's camp and also UKAD

But those suspicious samples made it inevitable they would be targeted for extra tests in the future, which is what ultimately triggered UKAD's decision to charge the pair.

yourdeadwright

walshb wrote: »

yourdeadwright wrote: »

Not at all but if he was charged then fair enough, but I didn't think he was charged,
I don't the above is correct , Hughie fought four times in 2015 twice in 2016 and once in 2017 so when did he serve this two year ban ,  He also has zero no contests on his record, ?
Also the only fights Tyson had in 2015 was Wlad and Hammer neither of which are recorded as no contests ? which they would be if "their results from their respective fights in February 2015 are disqualified " was true ,
For whatever reason this was never upheld
Tyson was banned for coke not nandrolone, that case was dropped against both fighters for whatever reason .,

Please provide a link to say that he was not convicted/banned for the nadrolone incident?

He served a doping ban for cocaine and nandrolone....

He is a drugs cheat, no different than AP.

Your refusal to admit and accept that shows your silly bias....

Taking into account that no adverse analytical findings or adverse passport findings were reported in respect of any of the urine and/or blood samples collected from either boxer after February 2015 their competition results after February 2015 are not disqualified.
“Taking into account the delays in results management that meant charges were not brought in respect of the nandrolone findings until June 2016, and the provisional suspensions that Tyson and Hughie Fury have already effectively served, the two-year period of ineligibility is backdated to December 13th 2015, and therefore expires at midnight on December 12th 2017.
“The British Boxing Board of Control has also agreed to the resolution of these proceedings on this basis.”
Another article form the Indo ,
I must admit it is quite confusing ,They mention  ban being back dated but Hughie he fought three times in the period they are saying the ban is back dated to ?
Its a bit of a mess really ,

walshb

Yes, a mess.

As is usually the case with PEDs and tests........

Excuses and arguments and all that gets played out...

Anyway, for me Fury is the same as AP as regards failed tests......

Both have clear blemishes on their records....

normanoffside

Chisora vs Takam on the Whyte-Parker undercard.

Might be a decent scrap.

yourdeadwright

normanoffside wrote: »

Chisora vs Takam on the Whyte-Parker undercard.

Might be a decent scrap.

At this stage i'd imagine Takam beats him ,
Decent card if it wasn't pay per view.

ACAguy

Great addition to the card. Chisora will need to be very fit to last this fight

squinn2912

That's great news! That should be a good fight. I'm more looking forward to seeing Takam than Chisora. I think he wins by a late KO and it could retire Chisora. Good match up.
Isn't Brook on that card as well? Shaping up to be a good night.

walshb

Takam-Chisora will be a razor close slugging match....

Neither man is in anyway superior....

ACAguy

Winner fights Whyte/Parker I would imagine

yourdeadwright

walshb wrote: »

Takam-Chisora will be a razor close slugging match....

Neither man is in anyway superior....

squinn2912 wrote: »

That's great news! That should be a good fight. I'm more looking forward to seeing Takam than Chisora. I think he wins by a late KO and it could retire Chisora. Good match up.
Isn't Brook on that card as well? Shaping up to be a good night.

I think Takam takes this to but leaning towards on the cards ,
I guess it all depends how in shape Chisora is if he is out of shape he will be stopped,
 Chisora seems to have one foot out the door which is never good ,

yourdeadwright

ACAguy wrote: »

Winner fights Whyte/Parker I would imagine

Can't see that , winner of Whyte / Parker will be looking for a title shot or a number one contender fight,

squinn2912

I think Takam will win this convincingly, by the end up. I agree that Chisora is all but retired. I'm interested to see if Takam over-performed against AJ or not. I think AJ would have obliterated Chisora within 2 rounds. If it got to a second. I know you don't really go by who beat whom but it's in my mind.
No change they'll be near P or W. They might get a go at someone like Price, Hammer or one of the up and coming fighters like Joyce or Dubois.

walshb

squinn2912 wrote: »

I think Takam will win this convincingly, by the end up. I agree that Chisora is all but retired. I'm interested to see if Takam over-performed against AJ or not. I think AJ would have obliterated Chisora within 2 rounds. If it got to a second. I know you don't really go by who beat whom but it's in my mind.
No change they'll be near P or W. They might get a go at someone like Price, Hammer or one of the up and coming fighters like Joyce or Dubois.

Takam's physical traits and fighting style I think lend to this fight being very close. He has nothing on Chisora. Both are not really that good.

He did well vs. AJ, but still got beaten clearly in almost all rds...

yourdeadwright

walshb wrote: »

squinn2912 wrote: »

I think Takam will win this convincingly, by the end up. I agree that Chisora is all but retired. I'm interested to see if Takam over-performed against AJ or not. I think AJ would have obliterated Chisora within 2 rounds. If it got to a second. I know you don't really go by who beat whom but it's in my mind.
No change they'll be near P or W. They might get a go at someone like Price, Hammer or one of the up and coming fighters like Joyce or Dubois.

Takam's physical traits and fighting style I think lend to this fight being very close. He has nothing on Chisora. Both are not really that good.

He did well vs. AJ, but still got beaten clearly in almost all rds...

Neither are world beaters, and if both turn up the fight should be close,
But the reason i'd go for Takam is that his performances are always pretty much the same as in he always puts in a decent performance .  Chisora either decent or awful and you never know what you'll get with him .