62 fighters have missed weight since early weigh in introduced.

[dim_]

Would be nice to see it go back a bit further - it may be more convincing then

it deliberately covers 8 months prior to the iv ban, because the gap between iv ban and early weigh-ins is 8 months.

so its like for like periods, anything else would be misleading


the point is more that USADA and the IV restrictions did not cause a sudden rise in weight-misses. its fairly obvious when the weight misses went through the roof

 

[Lemonsqueezer]

it deliberately covers 8 months prior to the iv ban, because the gap between iv ban and early weigh-ins is 8 months.

so its like for like periods, anything else would be misleading


the point is more that USADA and the IV restrictions did not cause a sudden rise in weight-misses. its fairly obvious when the weight misses went through the roof

Sorry, I just don't agree.

One can simply have a bar graph which extents further back, and include the data fields for the eight-month periods. It would simply offer a larger snapshot. What if the misses were higher before the eight-month period before the iv ban?

 

[Newave]

Yea if you could curb the spread of fatal diseases, why would anyone do that?

If you don’t understand why enabling an illegal activity with tax payer dollars is at the very least controversial, then there’s no point in even debating the weight cutting issue.

 

[dim_]

Sorry, I just don't agree.

One can simply have a bar graph which extents further back, and include the data fields for the eight-month periods. It would simply offer a larger snapshot. What if the misses were higher before the eight-month period before the iv ban?

well feel free to dig out the data for further back

 

[Lemonsqueezer]

well feel free to dig out the data for further back

Honestly, I really can't be bothered to finish someone else's work. It's clear you have been selective with the periods - that's your agenda and personal bias, not mine.

 

[dim_]

oh, ive added in opponent and method of victory

 

[dim_]

Honestly, I really can't be bothered to finish someone else's work. It's clear you have been selective with the periods - that's your agenda and personal bias, not mine.

its got fuck all to do with personal agenda and bias

i wasnt aiming to track weigh in misses since the dawn of fucking time. the focus was specifically monitoring since the early weigh ins..

as it is, i went a full 18 months prior to the early weigh ins so there was a good amount of data.

and it was interesting to highlight within that data the start of the usada testing and the start of the iv restrictions.




why the fuck did i need to go back further than 18 months prior to the period i was interested in?

why would i compare two periods of differing length?

you can take your bias agenda bollocks and shove it up your arse.

If you want to put together data from a period of time that wasnt even fucking relevant to what i was monitoring then feel free to do so, but dont give me shit because i didnt.

fucking idiot

 

[Lemonsqueezer]

its got fuck all to do with personal agenda and bias

i wasnt aiming to track weigh in misses since the dawn of fucking time. the focus was specifically monitoring since the early weigh ins..

as it is, i went a full 18 months prior to the early weigh ins so there was a good amount of data.

and it was interesting to highlight within that data the start of the usada testing and the start of the iv restrictions.




why the fuck did i need to go back further than 18 months prior to the period i was interested in?

why would i compare two periods of differing length?

you can take your bias agenda bollocks and shove it up your arse.

If you want to put together data from a period of time that wasnt even fucking relevant to what i was monitoring then feel free to do so, but dont give me shit because i didnt.

fucking idiot

Triggered, much?

Perhaps you should take a break from the internet for a while.

 

[Kryptt]

Pretty interesting data and further proof of a weight cutting crisis.

People will always seek to tip the scales to their favor, especially when the penalties aren't a deterrent.

 

[Lemonsqueezer]

its got fuck all to do with personal agenda and bias

i wasnt aiming to track weigh in misses since the dawn of fucking time. the focus was specifically monitoring since the early weigh ins..

as it is, i went a full 18 months prior to the early weigh ins so there was a good amount of data.

and it was interesting to highlight within that data the start of the usada testing and the start of the iv restrictions.




why the fuck did i need to go back further than 18 months prior to the period i was interested in?

why would i compare two periods of differing length?

you can take your bias agenda bollocks and shove it up your arse.

If you want to put together data from a period of time that wasnt even fucking relevant to what i was monitoring then feel free to do so, but dont give me shit because i didnt.

fucking idiot

You should count the number of months before and after the introduction of the early weigh-ins on your chart. They are not equal.

 

[dim_]

You should count the number of months before and after the introduction of the early weigh-ins on your chart. They are not equal.

thats because time passes....

jesus fuck...

so are you suggesting that with every month that passes i also go back one month in history....

no, 18 months was plenty of prior data..

 

[Lemonsqueezer]

thats because time passes....

jesus fuck...

so are you suggesting that with every month that passes i also go back one month in history....

no, 18 months was plenty of prior data..

The first question that the data raises is whether the 18 months prior is a suitable snapshot for comparison. You think it is? Why?

 

[dim_]

The first question that the data raises is whether the 18 months prior is a suitable snapshot for comparison. You think it is? Why?

i think its clearly obvious when you look at 18 months pre early weigh ins and 18 most post early weigh ins (and the new ufc weight cutting policies) that there was a dramatic shift

i dont think adding another 6 months, or 12 months will change that.

but like i say, if you want to go out and collect more data feel free. ive got enough to do



the other thing was to demonstrate that the IV ban didnt have an impact. There is only 8 months of time between iv ban and early weigh ins, so there can only ever be 8 months to evaluate the iv ban impact. its impossible to have more than 8 months to evaluate the iv ban impact. therefore, there was only a need to compare like to like with the preceding 8 months.

if not you are just going back 8 months at a time looking for data to fit a narrative which is not what i was trying to do

 

[Lemonsqueezer]

i think its clearly obvious when you look at 18 months pre early weigh ins and 18 most post early weigh ins (and the new ufc weight cutting policies) that there was a dramatic shift

i dont think adding another 6 months, or 12 months will change that.

but like i say, if you want to go out and collect more data feel free.

ive got enough to do

Judging from your post count, that's not entirely true.

#numbersdontlie

 

[Vegesus44]

If you don’t understand why enabling an illegal activity with tax payer dollars is at the very least controversial, then there’s no point in even debating the weight cutting issue.

So, because YOU dont understand something means it doesn't work...
ok BOZO.

 

[007]

they don't no what they are doing

 

[ultimateriley-o]

its got fuck all to do with personal agenda and bias

i wasnt aiming to track weigh in misses since the dawn of fucking time. the focus was specifically monitoring since the early weigh ins..

as it is, i went a full 18 months prior to the early weigh ins so there was a good amount of data.

and it was interesting to highlight within that data the start of the usada testing and the start of the iv restrictions.




why the fuck did i need to go back further than 18 months prior to the period i was interested in?

why would i compare two periods of differing length?

you can take your bias agenda bollocks and shove it up your arse.

If you want to put together data from a period of time that wasnt even fucking relevant to what i was monitoring then feel free to do so, but dont give me shit because i didnt.

fucking idiot

I don’t know if this moron is trolling you or genuinely doesn’t get it, but you can ignore him now because he’s incredibly stupid and a waste of time.

Thanks for compiling the data you did.