How many here would be perfectly happy allowing both fighters to juice?

How many people here would be perfectly happy to allow both Mayweather and Pacquiao to juice throughout training camp?

 

IMHO it depends on the standard of the testing.

If the testing is good, reliable and an effective deterrent, then it is of course preferable that the fighters are clean I reckon.

If not, and (as a fair few people here have already stated as fact, apparently) most of these guys are already on PED's, then it seems reasonable to allow the others to do likewise.

IMHO it's about having a level playing field, whichever side of the field that is I can only guess...

MTF :dunno:

 

a juiced Floyd would be fucking amazing to see. Just imagine Floyd with power artie:

 

This is a huge topic Double, and probably beyond the REEDtards of FightBeat in general.

That being said, I have always believed that the future of the human species would be in the development of recombinant DNA technology. When I was an undergraduate at Berkeley, I wrote a program that simulated bacterial and viral transformation based on heuristics that we were given for the assignment. It was pretty shocking. In the past 200 years of recorded data, the human race is taking longer to find cures and combat the viruses of the current day compared to the past. This seems correlated to population growth, the amount of viruses and strains has skyrocketed with population. Not including cases of exceptional melioration, we are not growing resistant or developing cures at the pace that bacteria/viruses are defeating our immunities and cures.

Genetic engineering is in our future, and it's close. Recombinant DNA technology is a higher level of manipulation than PEDs, but I would safely say much more effective. Would it be cheating if Bernard Hopkins underwent a stem cell procedure and his body was that of a 20 year old again and continued fighting effectively into his 60s?

Morality, survival, questions.

 

Steroids wouldn't give him power, though....

 

As huge as that topic may be.....it really has nothing to do with what we're talking about here.

 

::

MTF

 

It does. I'm kind of disappointed you don't realize that.

 

Look I can see the tangents root....and it might be a great topic for another thread in TAA. But it's vined all over the neighbours wall by the time you get to the 3rd sentence.

 

In 30-40 years, PEDs will be looked at like we look at people who eat whey protein today.

If you live long enough, you will see people running sub-9 second 100m dashes, and 60 year olds without any gray on their full heads of hair.

There will be a day, soon, where Gene therapy will be considered medicinal. I don't think you understand that.

 

::::

 

I don't disagree. In fact according to some the very next Olympics will be the start of athletes being genetically altered to improve performance....and there are whispers that there may have been isolated cases in Beijing, though I have no idea what that actually means. But we're talking about today, and how this all relates to Floyd-Pac. And boxing is nowhere near there yet and judging by how it absorbs trends in wider sports training will be WAY WAY behind in those developments even in the decades to come.

 

huh? how do you know PBF isn't already juicing? what, you're giving him the benefit of the doubt because he's never failed a test? or had people whimsically declare that he's on the stuff?

 

I'm not debating that what I'm talking about is decades away, but in the scope of things, that's very close and pertinent to our discussion. The question Double is asking, and perhaps unwittingly, is a question of morals and rules. "Are you okay with athletes doping?"

If one were to say "No", we come to our split path.

"No", because I am morally opposed to an athlete doping because of X reason (political, religious, mother nature, etc).

"No", because it is against the rules of the commission.

You see, those are two very different answers.

 

yes they would

 

Or 'No', because your opponents probably aren't so it's intent is to gain an unethical advantage over him. As I said, we aren't at the point yet in boxing where doping is anywhere near ubiquitous.....and we're also at a cross roads where if proper testing is introduced it doesn't need to become so for the foreseeable future.

 

That falls into the first answer, and I'm guessing might be your viewpoint.

How many people here do you think would vote "No" simply because the commissions say it's not allowed? How many would be okay with it if the commissions didn't regulate it?

Think about it, two elite fighters, going at it, throwing 200 punches a round, wild exchanges of action, all because of "enhancement".

 

I think for most people the problem is the unfair advantage of it. But the problem becomes, should you open up the rules to PEDs so that it's a level playing field, is what risks are you encouraging fighters to take to find the next advantage? And by extension what risks are you forcing on them as a barrier to entry to top level competition. It can certainly be argued that pro bodybuilding is a level playing field and there is 'fair play' because the 'cheating' is ubiquitous and well understood by everyone. But at the same time at what risk to the competitors?

Also, Pro bodybuilding has declined in popularity hugely because its become a freak show, so far beyond what normal people think is obtainable due to the drugs. Who knows if a similar thing will happen with other sports - that the deeds of the top guys will start seeming so superhuman that they'll basically be dehumanized in peoples mind. There's poetry in the will power Ali showed in getting up from Fraziers hook in 71. Is that still there when we think it's the YE-57 strain B kicking in?

Lastly, related to the first point, we'll never know whether the latest great contender is really that great, or the old champs resurgence is really a mark of greatness or whether they've just stumbled across the next generation doping technique.

There's a RAFT of problems, that'd do well to keep in the genies lantern.

 

See Hut*Hut, I always knew you were an upstanding young man, you actually care about the fighters.

I wonder though what your average UFC fan would say though, the market that is responsible for bringing MMA to the forefront of Saturday Night male social activities.

Do you think this sizable constituent wouldn't mind burying any moral quandaries you or I might have in favor of seeing "across the ring flying kicks", super human takedowns, and other entertainment worth paying money for?

 

what do you base this upon, dipshit?

 

Not sure. Without stereotyping I doubt most of them are wont to think about the consequences of those kind of things too much......and maybe the idea of superhuman fighters is more appealing to that demographic. But in the long run I think the same things would apply to the health of MMA too.:dunno:

 

No they wouldn't. Steroids do not equal strength.

 

and if they do it's because they create muscle, not improve the neural element of strength, much less POWER (which is something related but different again). If Floyd became a harder puncher through steroids it'd be because he was a lean 160 instead of a lean 147 and any advantage would be negated.

 

No they wouldn't.

 

There appears to be a fundamental lack of understanding about what steroids actually do. You don't inject them and get transformed into a super powered freak ala Captain America.

EDIT - Just realised this isn't a public poll. I voted Neither can juice.

 

So it's going to be like most of the fights that take place anyway?

 

You can´t, because it just sets a bad example for children. If LeBron can do it legally, why shouldn´t I? They get his jersey, his sneakers and his PEDs for Christmas.

Until they go after athletes with huge fines and jail, they´ll laugh off these doping bans. If I had the choice between making 100k clean or 10 million before they catch me cheating and all I get then is a two year ban, I´ll happily spend the two years on the Maldives. ::

 

exactly....and even if you did, that would only be helpful in boxing if your strength to weight ratio went up by a massive amount. Extra muscle is of no inherent advantage to a boxer, and the other benefits such as increased recovery ability are only big advantages if serious progressive resistance training is part of your training. Which it isn't for most boxers. Makes sense why both fighters caught roiding lost their fights, eh.....

epo and blood doping would be much more useful to a boxer.

 

I wish they let all the athletes juice in every sport.

It's all entertainment to me. :hammert: