Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Shane Carwin linked to steriods case

13

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 8,594 ✭✭✭Fozzy


    And Texas didn't have any drug testing at all in 2006. Their policy was that it was up to the promoters to do it, which they usually didn't. UFC didn't do any at 69 in Texas


  • Registered Users Posts: 8,594 ✭✭✭Fozzy


    Quite the opposite. Carwin, from what I've read, is linked to this because of intials matching his are on an order form belonging to a guy who was busted for distribution. Brock got caught red handed with HGH. So in both cases it is more then a scenario.

    His initials were in the court documents along with 21 other sets of initials. But his name was mentioned in court by the prosecutor along with six other names


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 23,089 ✭✭✭✭rovert


    Quite the opposite. Carwin, from what I've read, is linked to this because of intials matching his are on an order form belonging to a guy who was busted for distribution. Brock got caught red handed with HGH. So in both cases it is more then a scenario.

    Again I think you are missing out on the context of the two explained. The only reason Brock was caught "red handed" is that the police thought it was illegal steriods. Carwin has been caught buying PEDs for competition while Lesnar never has.
    Fozzy wrote: »
    And Texas didn't have any drug testing at all in 2006. Their policy was that it was up to the promoters to do it, which they usually didn't. UFC didn't do any at 69 in Texas

    Yep, it is kind of confusing there alright.

    It is optional in Hawaii as well.


  • Registered Users Posts: 19,145 ✭✭✭✭MrStuffins


    Fozzy wrote: »
    I just checked where Carwin's first five fights took place. Two in California, two in Texas and one in Hawaii. Those fights all took place before April 2007, which is when California first started testing for steroids

    So in at least two of these cases, there was no chance of him failing any test

    Therefore he's guilty?

    So every fighter who fought in California before April 2007 is therefore a drugs cheat?


  • Registered Users Posts: 10,549 ✭✭✭✭cowzerp


    Rovert let it lye as he has not been proven to have been doing anything illegal, if people where saying the same about brock you would be screaming blue murder. Even if its proven he bought them it was not proven that he done them regardless how you or i might feel.

    Rush Boxing club and Rush Martial Arts head coach.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 427 ✭✭Plastikman_eire


    rovert wrote: »
    Again I think you are missing out on the context of the two explained. The only reason Brock was caught "red handed" is that the police thought it was illegal steriods. Carwin has been caught buying PEDs for competition while Lesnar never has.



    Yep, it is kind of confusing there alright.

    It is optional in Hawaii as well.

    No im not missing the point, (lets read between the lines and call a spade a spade here, both Carwin and Lesnar have had "help" getting into the shape they are in) the point as far as I'm concerned, is that neither have ever tested positive so can't be considered to be cheaters.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 23,089 ✭✭✭✭rovert


    MrStuffins wrote: »
    Therefore he's guilty?

    Can we stop with the defensive jumping to this conclusion about other's posts?
    MrStuffins wrote: »
    So every fighter who fought in California before April 2007 is therefore a drugs cheat?

    No the reason why it was mentioned was that people were using the fact Carwin not failing a test as proof of something.
    cowzerp wrote: »
    Rovert let it lye as he has not been proven to have been doing anything illegal, if people where saying the same about brock you would be screaming blue murder. Even if its proven he bought them it was not proven that he done them regardless how you or i might feel.

    Cowerzp where did I say he was guilty? That Brock comment is completely and utterly stupid. Please dont go down that road especially after the last few days, month.
    as far as I'm concerned, is that neither have ever tested positive so can't be considered to be cheaters.

    Carwin wasnt tested during the time he bought these PEDs


  • Registered Users Posts: 10,549 ✭✭✭✭cowzerp


    Your totally trying to label him guilty, that is obvious and i can also read between the lines like you do all the time, you said he bought them for competition, that is a definite statement that he bought them for fighting, stick to the facts which right now are that he may have bought them, thats all. could have been for his mate, his dog or just for giggles, the point is you dont know if he bought them for competition..

    Rush Boxing club and Rush Martial Arts head coach.



  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 23,089 ✭✭✭✭rovert


    cowzerp wrote: »
    Your totally trying to label him guilty, that is obvious and i can also read between the lines like you do all the time, you said he bought them for competition, that is a definite statement that he bought them for fighting, stick to the facts which right now are that he may have bought them, thats all. could have been for his mate, his dog or just for giggles, the point is you dont know if he bought them for competition..

    Where did I do that? Check out the qualifications I made in this thread heck check out who titled this thread. Personally I dont go out and out accusing people of things without evidence, I leave that to others.


  • Registered Users Posts: 293 ✭✭barochoc


    cowzerp wrote: »
    Your totally trying to label him guilty, that is obvious and i can also read between the lines like you do all the time, you said he bought them for competition, that is a definite statement that he bought them for fighting, stick to the facts which right now are that he may have bought them, thats all. could have been for his mate, his dog or just for giggles, the point is you dont know if he bought them for competition..

    Now that's calling a spade a spade. :D


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 10,549 ✭✭✭✭cowzerp


    rovert wrote: »
    Where did I do that? Check out the qualifications I made in this thread heck check out who titled this thread. Personally I dont go out and out accusing people of things without evidence, I leave that to others.

    Yeah!
    rovert wrote: »
    Again I think you are missing out on the context of the two explained. The only reason Brock was caught "red handed" is that the police thought it was illegal steriods. Carwin has been caught buying PEDs for competition while Lesnar never has.

    That is an accusation of him buying for competition.

    Rush Boxing club and Rush Martial Arts head coach.



  • Registered Users Posts: 293 ✭✭barochoc


    MrStuffins wrote: »
    Sorry, but unless you stand watching cyclists in the street, can you call yourself a real fan? :pac:

    I do & will continue to watch cycling at any possible location.

    It's not a necessity to prove your worth as a fan either.

    The fact I competed for about 10 years as an amateur here in Ireland would also stand to me.

    It's a phenomenal sport & I have difficulty choosing between MMA & Cycling for the toughest sport on the planet.

    Anyway, back to the main subject :)


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 23,089 ✭✭✭✭rovert


    barochoc wrote: »
    Now that's calling a spade a spade. :D

    How?

    Again where did say he was guilty? Every time that would come up Id would refute it out right and ask where did I say it and I wouldnt get an answer. Again check out my qualifications referring to the title as well as what I chose for the topic title.

    No one can deny that:
    He has a lot of questions to answer
    The balance of evidence doesnt seem to be in his favour
    His approach P.R. wise has been notable as well given his typical approach

    Yes there is currently a strong case against him IMO but I never said he was guilty.

    So please stop with that nonsense.
    cowzerp wrote: »
    Yeah!

    Please dont go down that road.
    cowzerp wrote: »
    That is an accusation of him buying for competition.

    I made that statement in contrast to Lesnar doing HGH in WWE. Nice try.


  • Registered Users Posts: 293 ✭✭barochoc


    rovert wrote: »
    How?

    Again where did say he was guilty? Every time that would come up Id would refute it out right and ask where did I say it and I wouldnt get an answer. Again check out my qualifications referring to the title as well as what I chose for the topic title.

    No one can deny that:
    He has a lot of questions to answer
    The balance of evidence doesnt seem to be in his favour
    His approach P.R. wise has been notable as well given his typical approach

    Yes there is currently a strong case against him IMO but I never said he was guilty.

    So please stop with that nonsense.



    Please dont go down that road.



    I made that statement in contrast to Lesnar doing HGH in WWE. Nice try.

    Just keep denying it. Eventually we'll all believe you :D


  • Registered Users Posts: 10,549 ✭✭✭✭cowzerp


    rovert wrote: »

    I made that statement in contrast to Lesnar doing HGH in WWE. Nice try.

    Exactly, you accused him of buying peds for competition in contrast to lesnar doing hgh in the wwe, the accusation is serious and against the forum charter-if you said he is been linked with buying peds, but there is no proof that he used or intended to use them then you would be playing within the rules but you did not.

    Rush Boxing club and Rush Martial Arts head coach.



  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 23,089 ✭✭✭✭rovert


    barochoc wrote: »
    Just keep denying it. Eventually we'll all believe you :D

    One poster to another please stop, if you want to discuss my points go ahead otherwise I dont know what this stuff adds to the topic.
    cowzerp wrote: »
    Exactly, you accused him of buying peds for competition in contrast to lesnar doing hgh in the wwe, the accusation is serious and against the forum charter-if you said he is been linked with buying peds, but there is no proof that he used or intended to use them then you would be playing within the rules but you did not.

    I was talking about the rationale. Brock could have been using them for both comestic and rehab reasons. Anyway this rest of my posts make it clear that I dont think he is absolutely guilty. The other poster was saying that Brock using PED in Wrestling is the same as Carwin using PED in MMA. One is a comestic sport and the other is a competitive one.


  • Registered Users Posts: 293 ✭✭barochoc


    rovert wrote: »
    One poster to another please stop, if you want to discuss my points go ahead otherwise I dont know what this stuff adds to the topic.

    Are you for real or are you just here to wind people up?

    You'll never wind me up because I get endless entertainment from your posts.

    You blatantly say one thing & then spend the rest of your time denying having said it, yet it's there for all to see!!! :confused:

    You try to twist it & worm your way out.

    You'll no doubt ask for an example of this yet anyone reading this forum won't need it. Except you!

    So what are you adding to the topic other than crapping all over Carwin & hugging Lesnars nuts???????? :confused:


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 24,878 ✭✭✭✭ Luna Defeated Fence


    rovert wrote: »
    Carwin has been caught buying PEDs for competition

    WTF, thats a very serious alligation to make :eek:

    Are you totally ignorant of the forum's charter & in particular this rule;
    8) No unfounded allegations against fighters, particularly in regard to steroid use. If you want to accuse them make sure you have a bulletproof source or you will be banned.

    Rovert, I always suspect you of purposely threading a very thin line - but this time you've crossed it big time.. Post is reported.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 23,089 ✭✭✭✭rovert


    WTF, thats a very serious alligation to make :eek:

    Are you totally ignorant of the forum's charter & in particular this rule;



    Rovert, I always suspect you of purposely threading a very thin line - but this time you've crossed it big time.. Post is reported.

    Plastikman_eire and I were speculating the post was framed in that context. Again look at the OP and the rest of posts.


  • Registered Users Posts: 890 ✭✭✭dartstothesea


    rovert wrote: »
    was talking about the rationale. Brock could have been using them for both comestic and rehab reasons. Anyway this rest of my posts make it clear that I dont think he is absolutely guilty. The other poster was saying that Brock using PED in Wrestling is the same as Carwin using PED in MMA. One is a comestic sport and the other is a competitive one.
    Not quite on topic here, but depending on the dosage and length of use, the body conditioning potential held by rhgh goes far beyond what I personally would call "cosmetic" or "rehab". Using GH can effect much more permanent changes in an athlete's body than anabolic steroids.
    Whether you use PEDs to get a foot in the door or just to get a rung or two higher on the ladder that leads to the door, it's still help along the way from a PED. It just depends on how big a picture you're willing to look at.


  • Advertisement
  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 23,089 ✭✭✭✭rovert


    Not quite on topic here, but depending on the dosage and length of use, the body conditioning potential held by rhgh goes far beyond what I personally would call "cosmetic" or "rehab". Using GH can effect much more permanent changes in an athlete's body than anabolic steroids.
    Whether you use PEDs to get a foot in the door or just to get a rung or two higher on the ladder that leads to the door, it's still help along the way from a PED. It just depends on how big a picture you're willing to look at.

    I take your point

    In fairness to Brock (not to hug his nuts :rolleyes:) he was receiving legal doses of the stuff under medical supervision rather than going through what the judge in this case called "drug dealers in lab coats."


  • Registered Users Posts: 10,549 ✭✭✭✭cowzerp


    Im going to close this thread till further notice, it needs to be checked by another mod or admin in relation to allegations etc, if deemed appropiate it will be re-opened.. Thanks

    Rush Boxing club and Rush Martial Arts head coach.



  • Registered Users Posts: 10,549 ✭✭✭✭cowzerp


    Thread has been reopened but under no circumstances are people to say that carwin or anyone else uses steroids or anything illegal that is unproven, thanks.

    Rush Boxing club and Rush Martial Arts head coach.



  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,284 ✭✭✭Gerard.C


    Do ye think it will do much damage to the sport if it come out that Carwin was infact taking steroids?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 13,477 ✭✭✭✭Raze_them_all


    No, Josh Barnett got caught twice and the sports still going good. Unless the sports big stars start failing piss tests in mass numbers it won't effect the sport. It's be like saying would soccer suffer if a player was caught on drugs


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,045 ✭✭✭Vince135792003


    No, Josh Barnett got caught twice and the sports still going good. Unless the sports big stars start failing piss tests in mass numbers it won't effect the sport. It's be like saying would soccer suffer if a player was caught on drugs

    I think comparing Carwin to Barnett is not comparing like with like. Carwin is much more well know today than Barnett was when he was found guilty.


    In saying that I agree I don't think the sport or any sport would suffer hugely when 1 star is found to be taking drugs. However it does shine a spotlight on the sport and if more were to come out and found to be guilty that had a similar status to Carwin, there's no doubt the sport would suffer financially.


  • Registered Users Posts: 19,145 ✭✭✭✭MrStuffins


    I think comparing Carwin to Barnett is not comparing like with like. Carwin is much more well know today than Barnett was when he was found guilty.

    This just isn't true!


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 13,477 ✭✭✭✭Raze_them_all


    I think comparing Carwin to Barnett is not comparing like with like. Carwin is much more well know today than Barnett was when he was found guilty.


    In saying that I agree I don't think the sport or any sport would suffer hugely when 1 star is found to be taking drugs. However it does shine a spotlight on the sport and if more were to come out and found to be guilty that had a similar status to Carwin, there's no doubt the sport would suffer financially.
    The second time round Barnett was considered #2 in the world going to fight Fedor.

    I don't think the sport would suffer financially tbh alot of people imho think most fighters are on ped's of one kind of another.


  • Registered Users Posts: 427 ✭✭Plastikman_eire


    MrStuffins wrote: »
    This just isn't true!

    Yeah it is. Barnett has never had a 100ft tall picture of himself in Time sq i'll bet.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 5,045 ✭✭✭Vince135792003


    The second time round Barnett was considered #2 in the world going to fight Fedor.

    I don't think the sport would suffer financially tbh alot of people imho think most fighters are on ped's of one kind of another.

    Sponsors run from sports with a publically known drug stigma.

    I'm not doubting Barnetts credentials and certainly it's a fair comparison to make to Carwin in those terms. I'm talking in terms of fame and notoriety.

    My point is at the peak of Barnetts fame, MMA was a growing but still small audience. Carwin on the other hand was in the main event of the second most bought MMA show in North America of all time


Advertisement