- Joined
- Dec 13, 2014
- Messages
- 186
- Reaction score
- 0
Overeem pissed hot and was found to have been "juiced to the gills" in the fight against Lesnar.
Do people not care because they assume that Brock was juiced also? ..even though Brock followed the testing protocol and did not have any positive tests.
Brock's true record should be 5-2.
http://www.bloodyelbow.com/2012/4/5...rock-lesnar-overturned-drug-test-testosterone
"This was the first time following the UFC 141 bout that Overeem received a "random test" and he failed it and failed it hard. To find out that there is no retroactive punishment renders the entire idea of a conditional license moot. He's not going to lose the win, he isn't going to be fined, he's just going to have trouble (assuming no change when/if the B-sample is tested) getting a new license.
How is that any different from what would have happened had he tested positive for greater than a 10:1 ratio anyway? Had Roy Nelson or Antonio Silva or Frank Mir tested that high, they probably wouldn't be licensed for UFC 146 either. So, the punishment for failing your first random test on a conditional license that said you had to pass two random tests is...the same as the punishment for fighters who were NOT on the same sort of conditional license?
The conditions applied to his license for the Brock Lesnar fight. By failing those conditions, he violated the terms of that license and thus the license would not be valid and the fight should be turned into a no contest. If not, it's time to stop with the charade of granting these conditional licenses simply to pretend that the commission is showing real strength in these situations."
Do people not care because they assume that Brock was juiced also? ..even though Brock followed the testing protocol and did not have any positive tests.
Brock's true record should be 5-2.
http://www.bloodyelbow.com/2012/4/5...rock-lesnar-overturned-drug-test-testosterone
"This was the first time following the UFC 141 bout that Overeem received a "random test" and he failed it and failed it hard. To find out that there is no retroactive punishment renders the entire idea of a conditional license moot. He's not going to lose the win, he isn't going to be fined, he's just going to have trouble (assuming no change when/if the B-sample is tested) getting a new license.
How is that any different from what would have happened had he tested positive for greater than a 10:1 ratio anyway? Had Roy Nelson or Antonio Silva or Frank Mir tested that high, they probably wouldn't be licensed for UFC 146 either. So, the punishment for failing your first random test on a conditional license that said you had to pass two random tests is...the same as the punishment for fighters who were NOT on the same sort of conditional license?
The conditions applied to his license for the Brock Lesnar fight. By failing those conditions, he violated the terms of that license and thus the license would not be valid and the fight should be turned into a no contest. If not, it's time to stop with the charade of granting these conditional licenses simply to pretend that the commission is showing real strength in these situations."
Last edited:
