Deontay Wilder v Tyson Fury - December 1st

walshb wrote: »

Over and out, pal.

Like I said, this discussion is about Fury. Nothing to do with my awareness.

It's clear you are a huge fan, and anything perceived negative about the man sees you getting your knickers in a twist, hence the meandering to Vitali from the 90s, and now to Parker and his AJ suspicions....it makes you sound a wee bit ridiculous, as w ell as very childish.

it's well

walshb wrote: »

Over and out, pal.

Like I said, this discussion is about Fury. Nothing to do with my awareness.

It's clear you are a huge fan, and anything perceived negative about the man sees you getting your knickers in a twist, hence the meandering to Vitali from the 90s, and now to Parker and his AJ suspicions....it makes you sound a wee bit ridiculous, as w ell as very childish.

i'm a fan of fury, but not a huge one, i just think he has the number of any hw out there at the moment if he stays in shape, you disagree but your predictions on the wilder fight were way off.

all i am pointing out is that its very unlikely AJ or Wlad were clean, i have no proof except what i can see with my own two eyes, and most others can see aswell. Do you believe they are both clean?

walshb wrote: »

Well, at least here you are actually making points instead of being a smart ass with the one liners....

AJ is and always has been a fantastic physical specimen.....there you go....never ever failed any PEDs tests to my knowledge...

Wlad was always a fantastic physical specimen. There you go. From "Russia," so of course more speculation...

Now, can you answer me about using physical appearance being a little bit suspect as regards making unfounded claims about people?

you havent answered my question, do you believe both are clean?

AJs stomach area exhibits a lot of markers for HGH, maybe its just coincidence.

Wlad was in what i would consider unbelievable shape for a man in his 40's, when i say unbelievable i mean i dont believe its possible clean.

Cyrus wrote: »

you havent answered my question, do you believe both are clean?

AJs stomach area exhibits a lot of markers for HGH, maybe its just coincidence.

Wlad was in what i would consider unbelievable shape for a man in his 40's, when i say unbelievable i mean i dont believe its possible clean.

This is what happens when you have no facts or evidence and are using your eyes alone..

Believe they are clean? Yes...know for a fact? No..

That not knowing for a fact can apply to any top athlete...

Back in topic: Fury is a convicted cheat, despite his protestations...

Canelo the same...why? Well, those little details caused facts and findings and results..

yourdeadwright wrote: »

Speculation is worth nothing
Unless someone fails a test then you have to presume there clean unless proven otherwise,
Is there boxer who haven't been caught of course there are but you can't label someone without evidence that's just stupid,

you have to presume they are clean unless proven otherwise, so up until lance armstrong was caught you assumed he was clean ?

Cyrus wrote: »

you havent answered my question, do you believe both are clean?

AJs stomach area exhibits a lot of markers for HGH, maybe its just coincidence.

Wlad was in what i would consider unbelievable shape for a man in his 40's, when i say unbelievable i mean i dont believe its possible clean.

Wlad was in crazy shape but its 100% possible if clean ,

I have a close friend who is 36, 6'3 plays rugby and looks wise is in better shape than Wlad and he isn't even a professional ,
This guy is just a genetic freak , not only is he built like tank and ripped he is also very athletic ,

I couldn't count the number of times people have asked him how long has he done steroids and the answer is never , some people are just freaks,

Now I believe its quite possible Wlad is also one of these freaks of nature and its the reason why he was a long reigning heavy weight champion

Is it possible Wlad is on roids YES, is it possible he is not YES,

With no failed test's id give him the benefit of the doubt

Cyrus wrote: »

you have to presume they are clean unless proven otherwise, so up until lance armstrong was caught you assumed he was clean ?

In the case of Mr Armstrong there where so many stories and first hand accounts ,that it seemed unlikely he was clean ,

There are not the same with AJ or Wlad ,

And again Armstrong was caught so its easy to look back and say "we all knew anyway "

walshb wrote: »

Desperation to back up your claims/belief about a man who is already a natural amazing specimen, and one who has never failed a PEDs test...

You looking at his midsection to try and justify something..

That same midsection that was pretty much always ripped...

your last sentence shows that you don't understand the point i was making, read up a little.

If you believe he is an amazing natural specimen allow me to direct you to the tooth fairy, santa claus and other fairy tales

walshb wrote: »

Again. Lost me...

You disputing that humans cannot be naturally amazing physical specimens without PEDs?

as i said read up, you are trying to refute a point you didn't understand,

as to your second question, in top level sport i believe most amazing physical specimens are pharmaceutically enhanced.

Cyrus wrote: »

as to your second question, in top level sport i believe most amazing physical specimens are pharmaceutically enhanced.

Most?

Would you agree that AJ and Wlad we two athletes with naturally very impressive physiques?

See...to be both are very natural. Always looked muscular, ripped and impressive...

I am not saying this means both are definitely clean, but going by your visual argument, it kind of makes a mockery of it to think of those two as regards “most.”

walshb wrote: »

Most?

Would you agree that AJ and Wlad we two athletes with naturally very impressive physiques?

See...to be both are very natural. Always looked muscular, ripped and impressive...

I am not saying this means both are definitely clean, but going by your visual argument, it kind of makes a mockery of it to think of those two as regards “most.”

yes most, and i include AJ and Wlad in most, clear enough?

AJ isn't natural for god's sake

Cyrus wrote: »

yes most, and i include AJ and Wlad in most, clear enough?

AJ isn't natural for god's sake

You’re on a wind up now if you don’t believe AJ to be a naturally very impressive specimen...

Did you ever hear of or see the man before his pro career?

6 feet 6 SHW amateur boxer aged 20/21 or so...

You come across very limited here..

walshb wrote: »

You’re on a wind up now if you don’t believe AJ to be a naturally very impressive specimen...

Did you ever hear of it see the man before his pro career?

6 feet 6 SHW amateur boxer aged 20/21 or so...

You come across very limited here..

i have followed Joshua's career from the olympics. Yes he is an impressive speciman, i'm saying he isn't natural.

you are coming across as limited to be honest if you can't comprehend that.

Cyrus wrote: »

yes most, and i include AJ and Wlad in most, clear enough?

AJ isn't natural for god's sake

From looks alone I would agree that AJ does not look natural and he looks like has the GHG belly going on ,

Wlad for me looks like a man who is just in amazing natural shape , he doesn't look as obvious as AJ,

But again if Aj hasn't tested positive its hard to claim otherwise

walshb wrote: »

Hold on...you implied me ignorant, yet me making a claim that people labeling athletes cheats with no evidence to back it up is ignorant/arrogant/nasty is uncalled for...

surely even you understand the difference between ignorance as it relates to a piece of knowledge and labelling someone ignorant or are you just on a wind up?

Cyrus wrote: »

surely even you understand the difference between ignorance as it relates to a piece of knowledge and labelling someone ignorant or are you just on a wind up?

Gimme a shout when you unearth this piece of knowledge that bolsters your claims so much.

Morrison J wrote: »

There's double standards everywhere when it comes to drug cheats. Everyone has an excuse.

The likes of Roy Jones, Holyfield, Mosley, Morales, Toney all get free passes despite being drug cheats.

.

its almost as if some of the greatest boxers of all time were on PEDs, but everyone else probably isn't :pac:

pac_man wrote: »

I'm always uncomfortable with the term 'drugs cheat'. To me, a cheat is someone that is knowingly gaining an advantage by dishonest means.

I'm sure there has been times in which people have failed drug tests and have been completely oblivious as to how they failed them. It's a bit too simplistic just to label anyone that fails a drugs test as a drugs cheat.

I agree with this...

I am sure there many examples of genuine errors and mistakes and no intention to cheat/deceive.

The ones we choose to believe and disbelieve is down to us.

Alf Veedersane wrote: »

Most people don't fail drugs tests being oblivious to the fact that they had ingested drugs.

And if they have, there is no excuse for them or their team being so sloppy and taking 'tainted supplements' or eating meat from cows that were on a serious cycle of Clen.

He never said in all cases.....

We all know many are deliberate intentions to cheat....

But to suggest all cases are intentional cheating seems ridiculous to me.

walshb wrote: »

I agree with this...

I am sure there many examples of genuine errors and mistakes and no intention to cheat/deceive.

exactly like two cousins eating contaminated boar

Alf Veedersane wrote: »

I didn't say 'all' cases. I said 'most'.

Ok,

But pac-mans post is still true IMO.

pac_man wrote: »

How do you differentiate between who are cheats and who isn't cheating?

Intentionally taking banned substances is a start.

Alf Veedersane wrote: »

Ah heyor.

Well, there was, and maybe still is a debate about Melondium even being a PED......was fine for years to use....

Overall the whole PEDs in sports is a crock of sh1t.......too many arguments and debates and excuses etc.....

Wanna know the biggest PED in sport? Fooking money, and the more of it, usually the greater the performance....

And the tribunal who investigated her did say that there was no intention to cheat.

Alf Veedersane wrote: »

But if you believe it was a genuine mistake and she had a legitimate medical reason for taking it and there was no intention to improve performance by taking it, outside of this medical condition, then we'll just agree to disagree.

Especially since its only taking the thread further off topic.

Well, even "if" she was taking it to improve performance, she was doing it legally for years. Isn't that what all athletes should be doing, doing things to improve performance? Within the rules that is. That is all athletes are thinking about; doing things and taking things to make them better.....that's human nature.

Now, she continued taking it under medical supervision after it went to the banned list, and that was (according to her team and her) down to ignorance.

This is where we choose to believe or disbelieve in her.

I think she made a genuine mistake here. Her team let her down. Yes, she is responsible, but it was for me a genuine mistake.

But yes, we are going off topic big time. Interesting debate all the same.

Morrison J wrote: »

Think its fair to say Freddie Roach won't be in Fury's corner again. Awful form from Freddie talking about this in the open. I couldn't disagree with him more either. Davison had Fury boxing to the perfect plan that night.

Kind of bad form alright, but he has a point about Fury being more offensive.....this allowing him to possibly make sure of the win, and maybe even get the stoppage; of course, that comes with risk.....but it's HW boxing...

I scored 7-5 Fury....but some rds could be argued either way.