USADA CEO is known for being in a lead of Armstrong case. Now he's defending Jones

[ortizgnp]

Good question, honestly.
The key here - "they are comfortable with the outcome".
The whole MMA community considers it shady, bit Tygart isn't.
On the other hand, Tygart is known for Armstrong case, whixh is serious sign for him being honest.

So I'm personally torn here

Tygart's words or the MMA community's words?

Yea, that's a tough one.

 

[kflo]

Especially if they're dishing out suspensions for diuretics and IV usage and shit. But Jones gets vindicated without having to provide any evidence to back his claims.

again, everyone is saying no evidence. an arbitrator reviewed the evidence presented. he came to a conclusion. is it your position the independent arbitrator was paid off to lie?

 

[AimedWithV]

no. they stand behind their decision, and respect the decision of the arbitrator.

@Doughie99 , yep, it's like his own decision now

 

[Shaddows]

Specifically him as a CEO?
Or he's just one of the bribed?

Well, that would depend what Jon has on his team already and what was him lacking.
I don't think as CEO, but an asset is an asset.

But then again, I don't know if it would be worth it. The ruling is done, and it won't change. So hiring anyone now wouldn't matter much.
Whoever is willing to accept, does not need convincing. WHoever thinks him as a cheat, won't change their minds.
I guess it would be a matter of him proving the latter wrong by not failing again.

 

[AimedWithV]

Tygart's words or the MMA community's words?

Yea, that's a tough one.

By MMA community, I don't just mean sherdoggers.
Fighters, journalusts..

 

[AimedWithV]

Well, that would depend what Jon has on his team already and what was him lacking.
I don't think as CEO, but an asset is an asset.

But then again, I don't know if it would be worth it. The ruling is done, and it won't change. So hiring anyone now wouldn't matter much.
Whoever is willing to accept, does not need convincing. WHoever thinks him as a cheat, won't change their minds.
I guess it would be a matter of him proving the latter wrong by not failing again.

Well, if any bribe happened, it was done obviously BEFORE the ruling...

 

[JosephTessaro]

There's nothing left to assume.

USADA have officially confirmed Jones has not ever and will not ever take anything against the rules and is officially the GOAT and anyone challenging that is a tard.

Then how come he has received 2 suspensions?

 

[JosephTessaro]

Check his wiki:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Travis_Tygart

Check his statement re:Jones

USADA CEO Travis T. Tygart said in a statement: “The independent arbitrator found that Jon Jones was not intentionally cheating in this case, and while we thought 18 months was the appropriate sanction given the other circumstances of the case, we respect the arbitrator’s decision and believe that justice was served.”

What can we take from that?

How is he defending Jones here? USADA wanted an 18 month suspension, arbitrator gave Jones a 15 month suspension and Tygart believes justice was served.

What we can take from this is they gave jones a 15 month suspension instead of a potential 4 year ban.

 

[AimedWithV]

How is he defending Jones here? USADA wanted an 18 month suspension, arbitrator gave Jones a 15 month suspension and Tygart believes justice was served.

What we can take from this is they gave jones a 15 month suspension instead of a potential 4 year ban.

I think you understand very well what I mean here by "defending".
Just like everybody else does

 

[moreorless87]

This is the same USADA that allows Justin Gatlin back racing remember, you know the guy with two failed tests who's hitting his career best in his mid/late 30's.

Again I think Lance was a PR move, they saw that a new sport cold war was brewing with the Russians and they needed a scapegoat to be seen to act on PEDs. Not that I don't think he was guilty but without that political situation and the fuss around him would they have acted?

 

[Shaddows]

Well, if any bribe happened, it was done obviously BEFORE the ruling...

Agreed.
The question here is if it would be worth it... and IMHO as Jon does have the money, I don't think it is far-fetched to think it happened.
I mean, if you have the means, and IT IS your career and livelihood that is at risk... I wouldn't spare any expense. WOuld you?

 

[rambosabeast]

again, everyone is saying no evidence. an arbitrator reviewed the evidence presented. he came to a conclusion. is it your position the independent arbitrator was paid off to lie?

I just have to do a great deal of mental legwork to see how this isn't, at a minimum, an abnormally managed case which just happens to deal with one of the UFC's biggest stars and a split from the way other fighters have been dealt with. It stinks.

 

[AimedWithV]

Agreed.
The question here is if it would be worth it... and IMHO as Jon does have the money, I don't think it is far-fetched to think it happened.
I mean, if you have the means, and IT IS your career and livelihood that is at risk... I wouldn't spare any expense. WOuld you?

I'd never cheat like him, that's for sure.
Woild I bribe? I'm not sure about that, honestly....

 

[Entram]

danawadofmoney.jpg

 

[Shaddows]

I'd never cheat like him, that's for sure.
Woild I bribe? I'm not sure about that, honestly....

It's not really bribe (to hire people that could help you with the case).
That's why I think he should do it. He got the money, and it is not like he'd miss it.

 

[AimedWithV]

It's not really bribe (to hire people that could help you with the case).
That's why I think he should do it. He got the money, and it is not like he'd miss it.

If USADA's job is to judge him , the from Tygart's POV it's supposed to be bribe

 

[AimedWithV]

danawadofmoney.jpg

So Dana? Or Jones?

 

[Shaddows]

If USADA's job is to judge him , the from Tygart's POV it's supposed to be bribe

USADA do not judge. They find the issue. They check to see if the test was real and how the substance found its way into the body of Jon Jones.
They work with the fighter. They merely provide the data, but they are not the judges.

The arbitror are the judges.

And if they are corrupt, then (IMO) it is not USADA's fault.

 

[AimedWithV]

USADA do not judge. They find the issue. They check to see if the test was real and how the substance found its way into the body of Jon Jones.
They work with the fighter. They merely provide the data, but they are not the judges.

The arbitror are the judges.

And if they are corrupt, then (IMO) it is not USADA's fault.

Wait, so EVERY TIME there is an independent arbitrator?
Every time some unknown, independent person makes the career-making verdict?

Any way, USADA also collect samples. So hiring Tygart to support a fighter looks like an awful conflict of interests...

 

[Entram]

So Dana? Or Jones?