Once a cheat, always a cheat

Yeah, as far as I know, it has always been rumoured as peppermint shnaaps?

 

or you could argue the first fight ruined arguello. like I'm sure some will do if margarito whupped cotto in a rematch.

 

just like Chavez/Taylor II.

 

I don't care what science says, if he had something ELSE mixed, it wasn't because they thought it was going to be detrimental to him. It was done to perk up his charge. Even if its sugar water, thats illegal.

 

Terry Norris, Crisanto Espana and four years had a lot more to do with it

 

well there's the rub

Illegal yes... a HUGE advantage detrimental to the other fighter such as hardened hand wraps or plaster of paris or steroids? HELL NO

Believe whatever you want but KNOW this: it wasnt cocaine

 

DOn't start making distinctions between levels of cheating. There are none. If you take a short cut, I don't care if you just jump the niegbours fence to the next road over, or drive through the fence. Cheaters share the same crime; cheating.

It was cocaine? :: I never said it was, nor would I care if it was or wasn't. What I KNOW is that they did something odd and appeared to be circumventing the legalities of proper corner work.

Cocaine ::

 

No there are levels of cheating

If you and I have a fight and you drink sugar water while I have lead prosthetic knuckles in my gloves... I think I am endangering you a lot more than you are endangering me

Making your hands as hard as rocks can seriosuly maim someone... drinking sugar water is a placebo... it doesnt make you eat Alexis Arguello's right hands with a grin on your face and throw 6 punch combinations as if it were the easiest thing in the world to do (liquor in your water won't make either of those things happen either, though it could make you THINK you could do both of those things if you drank enough of it)

So what do you put in a water bottle to make a guy be able to do those things? Oh, thats right there ISN'T anything:bangh:

That is why people SMOKE things, SNORT THINGS and INJECT THINGS -- becasue you cant just pour a little of your drug of choice into water and beceom superman

 

Nope, sorry. Don't agree and am never going to change my mind on that.

 

Abject Coward

 

Chinny deflector.

 

Gladys

 

You Blasphemous Heathen!!

 

Time has strongly healed the wound, yet an injustice is still an injustice.

I'm pretty sure he did it before then, maybe long before then. You should have heard how long Forrest was fighting with this injury, it was for a ridiculously long time and he's lucky he didn't incur some irreparable damage for how long he let it fester.

 

I'm sure De La Hoya may be thinking the same way, as he thinks about the loss to Mosley (II) while the latter was on gear

 

dsimon writes:

Steve Dave despite the English slang to "bottle it" you cannot put something magical in a bottle that makes somoene a hulk... AS Cdogg has done he has stated quite correctly that cocaine put in a ingestible form in a bottle would have to be toxic in the amount ingested. Cocoa leaves? Nicotine? other stimulants would have a negligable effect if at all. maybe a bit of alcohol, maybe. But these are negligable all of them not magic potations.

You have to understand chemistry and pharmacology to understand how ridiculous you guys sound when trying to come up with a magic potion in a bottle.:: I love you guys so as someone with some knowledge og chemistry take it for what it is worth.

Look at it this way guys... If one fucked with LSD and made it so that you had to drink it like water to get an effect and you drank that much of it you would probably die of toxocology and toxic shock to the liver. Thge guy who invented fake Herione took the smallest amount and died of an overdose because it is too potent. Some things cannot be put in a bottle.

 

dsimon writes:

Don't waste your time. I think most sane people agree but lately there has been a rash of Double L itis on the board. Tam honestly wants to argue this point in its own merits... So be it his thread his point of view. Tam is smart enough to know better but chooses not to

 

His M.O. is to argue and be a downer no matter what.

 

I think there are different levels of cheating, in terms of the output, but not the input.

If someone knows the rules and then knowingly and intentionally violates them, they're all in the same boat.

I don't, however, think that means that everyone's cheating has the same effect.

 

You seriously think drinking sugar water is as bad as having plaster of paris wraps?

Loaded gloves could brain damage/kill a fighter, sugar water - not so much.

 

I agree. I simply don't like the idea of cheating full stop, that's why GSP's beating of Penn left a bad taste in my mouth.

But is having Vaseline smeared on your back anywhere near as bad as loaded gloves? No. There are varying degrees of cheating.

 

lets pretend the known crackhead wasn't drinking cocaine, which you absolutely can do, and assume it was a diarrhetic or alcohol of some kind, or some other thing forbidden by the rules.

It is still "cheating" and even if you take this fairy tale outlook that its a harmless thing, its still a behavior forbidden by the rules. You must believe drug addicts when they tell you to your face they aren't using anymore, even though they are in the same circles, if you believe Panama Lewis was clean then and Pryor was just mixed up in "the wrong crowd"

REED's point is ridiculous and ill point to a contemporary example Morales/Pacquiao, of how what happens in a re-match after a brutal fight and long career should just be taken as a mucholder past it guy facing a fresher better younger guy.

 

There are different levels of cheating

and the punishment should fit the cheating level.

 

Don't be stupid.

 

Maybe it was "Michael's Secret Stuff" from Space Jam. It worked wonders for the Looney Tunes team.

 

Come on dude. You're never happy.

 

And yet you somehow think thats linked to a plan about how I post? Just to argue? Right.

 

While I do agree that there are degrees of severity when it comes to cheating, Tam's point is a pertinent one. No cheating should be considered acceptable or even 'less harmful'.

A cheat is a cheat is a cheat. Alot of guys here seem extremely happy that Marg has been proven a cheat and they're entitled to their opinion but that doesn't mean a guy like Mosley or Toney gets a pass on roiding up because it's not as damaging.

Either cheating is acceptable or it isn't. It makes no sense to crucify one if you're not going to do it to all.

 

Usually, you limit it to TAA, but it's starting to carry over to the boxing forum. That's why I brought it up.

 

Another problem I have with people trying to divide cheating, is that they have it wrong in the first place. Mosley cheated. Margarito tried to cheat. Mosley got caught after he fought and got whatever benefits he got out of it. Margarito got busted before that.