Jon Jones Least Favorite Word

Stump said:
Man that whole picogram defence was the most incriminating thing I've ever heard.

He was trying to appeal to our stupidity in explaining how little the amount was. It doesn't matter, dude. That's not how these tests work.

It was like someone contesting a pregnancy test because the hormones detected are in such small quantities.

"I'm not pregnant. The doctor said the pregnancy hormones they detected were about as much as a grain of salt in a pool!"

Jon defending himself with such a stupid argument removed all doubt he is guilty and clearly displayed he thinks the average mma viewer is as dumb as he is.

He's probably not wrong
Click to expand...
I mean yeah Jon probably cheated, but I don't agree with your analogy at all here. On the pregnancy metaphor, it's more like saying "I'm not pregnant, cause I haven't had sex, so the miniscule amount of hormone must have come from something else". False positive on the pregnancy test, which does happen. Just as it could theoretically happen in a drug test (miniscule amounts of a PED showing up from supplements, food, recreational drugs, etc).

I'm not defending Jon, it seems likely that he cheated. But there's nothing inherently wrong with his defense.
 
Stump said:
Man that whole picogram defence was the most incriminating thing I've ever heard.

He was trying to appeal to our stupidity in explaining how little the amount was. It doesn't matter, dude. That's not how these tests work.

It was like someone contesting a pregnancy test because the hormones detected are in such small quantities.

"I'm not pregnant. The doctor said the pregnancy hormones they detected were about as much as a grain of salt in a pool!"

Jon defending himself with such a stupid argument removed all doubt he is guilty and clearly displayed he thinks the average mma viewer is as dumb as he is.

He's probably not wrong
Click to expand...
It was usada’s and smrtl’s position. Not Jon’s. Jon repeated what experts said.

I know this is falling on deaf ears though.
 
DS66 said:
I mean yeah Jon probably cheated, but I don't agree with your analogy at all here. On the pregnancy metaphor, it's more like saying "I'm not pregnant, cause I haven't had sex, so the miniscule amount of hormone must have come from something else". False positive on the pregnancy test, which does happen. Just as it could theoretically happen in a drug test (miniscule amounts of a PED showing up from supplements, food, recreational drugs, etc).

I'm not defending Jon, it seems likely that he cheated. But there's nothing inherently wrong with his defense.
Click to expand...


Thats exactly how pregnancy tests work - there is a sensitivity for the test, it's not merely the presence of a hormone, its the amount of the hormone - above a certain threshold and you're almost certainly pregnant. Below the threshold it is not so likely/unlikely. Jon tried to describe the amount of the metabolite (Not the PED) which was above the threshold, as tiny and insignificant, which is a completely meaningless argument.

If Jon was actually arguing that point, he would be arguing for higher thresholds for the metabolite. That's an actual argument - "they told me its like a grain of sand in a swimming pool" is decidedly NOT that argument, it's an invalid defense that relies on a skewed representation of how these tests work, designed to fool idiots.
 
kflo said:
It was usada’s and smrtl’s position. Not Jon’s. Jon repeated what experts said.

I know this is falling on deaf ears though.
Click to expand...

USADA's position was that the metabolite amount was so small it wasn't valid? why wouldn't they adjust the testing threshold instead? why invalidate their own testing standards?
 
Stump said:
USADA's position was that the metabolite amount was so small it wasn't valid? why wouldn't they adjust the testing threshold instead? why invalidate their own testing standards?
Click to expand...
They did subsequently adjust the testing threshold.

But they also couldn’t prove reingestion, which was when the salt in swimming pool analogy was used. And that was true.

Again, I don’t except to change your mind, but it wasn’t Jon inventing a line.
 
kflo said:
They did subsequently adjust the testing threshold.

But they also couldn’t prove reingestion, which was when the salt in swimming pool analogy was used. And that was true.

Again, I don’t except to change your mind, but it wasn’t Jon inventing a line.
Click to expand...

No I don't expect Jon was smart enough to come up with the line himself, but that doesn't change the fact what he said doesn't at all indicate his innocence.

When we are talking about microscopic amounts of tertiary metabolites, how big something is compared to a swimming pool is meaningless and is obviously intended to mislead idiots.

Its like if I claimed I didn't murder someone because the bullet the coroner recovered is smaller than a car.

I didn't know they they adjusted the threshold. Thats encouraging news.

I still find it strange they would attempt to prove reingestion. It seems like the burden of proof would go the other way - Jon should have to prove he didn't reingest but that's a whole other can of worms
 
Last edited:
Stump said:
No I don't expect Jon was smart enough to come up with the line himself, but that doesn't change the fact what he said doesn't at all indicate his innocence.

When we are talking about microscopic amounts of tertiary metabolites, how big something is compared to a swimming pool is meaningless and is obviously intended to mislead idiots.

Its like if I claimed I didn't murder someone because the bullet the coroner recovered is smaller than a car.
Click to expand...
A recent effective dose of tbol would look a lot different. A recent cycle of tbol would be that much more different. The smaller the trace of a single long term metabolite the less we know about the source. Your analogy doesn’t work.

the fact is it was in concentrates undetectable not long ago and still undetectable depending on the lab today.

there’s not a lot known about m3.

again, it was in the context of reingestion at the time of the Gus fight and it was experts at usada and smrtl that originated it.
 
kflo said:
A recent effective dose of tbol would look a lot different. A recent cycle of tbol would be that much more different. The smaller the trace of a single long term metabolite the less we know about the source. Your analogy doesn’t work.

the fact is it was in concentrates undetectable not long ago and still undetectable depending on the lab today.

there’s not a lot known about m3.

again, it was in the context of reingestion at the time of the Gus fight and it was experts at usada and smrtl that originated it.
Click to expand...

It was above the testing threshold, man. Grains of salt in swimming pools or stars in a galaxy or whatever don't mean anything. Concentration thresholds do.

If they adjusted the threshold afterwards, that only proves my point. Again, the argument " the existing threshold is too low and therefore generates violations for people who may not have actually cheated" is a totally different argument than, " they told me it was as much as a grain of sand in a pool" jon did not make that statement as evidence of an improper testing threshold, he very explicitly abd repeatedly said things along the lines of "how could so little of something be any kind of an advantage?"

Honestly dude. It was one of the most incriminating thing I can recall hearing. More incriminating even than when he admitted he beat DC "off steroids and on steroids... I mean off steroids again."
 
Stump said:
It was above the testing threshold, man. Grains of salt in swimming pools or stars in a galaxy or whatever don't mean anything. Concentration thresholds do.

If they adjusted the threshold afterwards, that only proves my point. Again, the argument " the existing threshold is too low and therefore generates violations for people who may not have actually cheated" is a totally different argument than, " they told me it was as much as a grain of sand in a pool" jon did not make that statement as evidence of an improper testing threshold, he very explicitly abd repeatedly said things along the lines of "how could so little of something be any kind of an advantage?"

Honestly dude. It was one of the most incriminating thing I can recall hearing. More incriminating even than when he admitted he beat DC "off steroids and on steroids... I mean off steroids again."
Click to expand...
He repeatedly said he didn’t know how it got there. You’re aware right? Others also said it afforded no advantage. Which certainly is relevant to say. Both statements together matter in context of the timeline and events.
 
kflo said:
He repeatedly said he didn’t know how it got there. You’re aware right? Others also said it afforded no advantage. Which certainly is relevant to say. Both statements together matter in context of the timeline and events.
Click to expand...

Hahaha. Sure he didn't.

Sure it wasn't an advantage. Jon's performance clearly didn't fall off a cliff immediately afterward

Cmon dude, don't be obtuse
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,280,626
Messages
58,306,605
Members
176,000
Latest member
Furigo94

Share this page

Back
Top