USADA says Jones tested clean the night he fought Gus

Welcome to our Community
Wanting to join the rest of our members? Feel free to Sign Up today.
Sign up

Caesar

Active Member
Feb 20, 2018
53
115
Wait I thought the picograms, grains of salt in a swimming pool could last up to 7 years? Now he's miraculously clean? Wow what incredible drug testing we have. We should all just blindly believe this like juicy jones and the corrupt NSAC/USADA/UFC want us to because clearly we as an audience are stupid enough to believe anything they tell us

 

SCADA

Posting Machine
Oct 10, 2016
3,981
4,219
All the experts in the subject have the same opinion.

- "They all must be on the take"

 

Dim

Well-Known Member
Aug 3, 2017
173
373
I think Dim has done a great job through all of this. He seems to be looking at things without bias and just giving facts and his legitimate takes on them.

FWIW he thinks a lot of this is very fishy as well.
not so much fishy, as there are two things going on here. There is "usada" and then there is "the ufc"

This whole Jones thing, from USADA's pov. They get notified of the positive test and they have to decide if they are going to move forward with an ADRV (Anti doping rule violation). To make that stick they are going to have to prove something, that is a new ingestion. They cannot do that. So they are faced with a choice, charge the athlete, go to arbitration and have Jones team ask them "could this be a remnant of the ingestion from 2017?" and the simple fact is, USADA dont know, so they lose the case. USADA need to have t's crossed and i's dotted when charging an athlete with a violation, in this case they couldnt.

So thats one part, USADA cant make a strong case, so rightfully they err on the side of the athlete. I have no problem with that, thats the right thing to do in these cases. (and dont forget the case doesnt end there, they will keep on testing and monitoring Jones)

So from that pov, USADA have done everything correctly.





Then we come to the UFC. Rather than presenting the above as the facts, they instead choose to to come out with a load of bullshit.

They tell us that only one of Jones samples was positive, they even tell Gus "all his samples were clean except this last one" and then four days later admit they werent.

They take quotes such as Larry Bowers "I dont see anything that represents a fresh ingestion SINCE AUGUST 2018" and completely misrepresent it as Bowers saying "this is conclusively from 2017"

They take quotes from Daniel Eichner "There is no evidence this is a fresh ingestion" and completely misrepresent it as Eicher saying "this is conclusively from 2017"

Misrepresenting the views of THREE people (two of them either current or former USADA employees) as ALL THE TOP EXPERTS IN THE WORLD

They take a study on Clomiphine (A total different substance) and claim that it is conclusive evidence of pulsing (Which anyone who had read the study can tell you it isnt because they classed anything lower than 50pg/ml in the study as not present / below limit of detection)

They fail to inform a licensing commission, that Jones has had multiple positives despite it being the original commission that he had the positive test under because in Jeff Novitzky's words "it didnt seem important"



So, the UFC were faced with a choice, tell us the honest truth from USADA's point of view and treat us like intelligent adults, or, try and totally bullshit us with a load of untruths, misrepresentations, and exagerations.

They chose the latter.






When Dana and Jeff originally said "All his samples except the last one were clean" he was lying.. the truth was multiple samples were positive,

the stupid thing is, the truth, actually made some sense, scientifically at least.

the lie, was scientifically unlikely given the circumstances they claimed, and bordering on the preposterous
 

Dim

Well-Known Member
Aug 3, 2017
173
373
The pulsing instances Mini Egg cited were not the same substance from what is coming out
now. Almost everything he said on Rogan's show is now in dispute

I just wish this guy would tell the truth at least once

That Mixed Moly Whoppery dude made a video about just how thin,
inconclusive and scientifically unrelated the studies he cited were and
Luke Thomas did a follow up video about it.

For lack of a better phrase it appears Novitzsky literally "Baffled Joe with Bullshit"


Time stamped 2:30 Mark

View: https://youtu.be/CQCmx32Rqog?t=147
Luke's got this really badly wrong.

He said the original study wasnt Rodchenkov' it was. And he said only 1 person was it tested on and thats not true either. Rodchenkov was using hundreds of samples from Russian athletes that he personally had doped.
 

Rambo John J

Formerly 'Inside Job'
First 100
Jan 17, 2015
43,354
48,500
not so much fishy, as there are two things going on here. There is "usada" and then there is "the ufc"

This whole Jones thing, from USADA's pov. They get notified of the positive test and they have to decide if they are going to move forward with an ADRV (Anti doping rule violation). To make that stick they are going to have to prove something, that is a new ingestion. They cannot do that. So they are faced with a choice, charge the athlete, go to arbitration and have Jones team ask them "could this be a remnant of the ingestion from 2017?" and the simple fact is, USADA dont know, so they lose the case. USADA need to have t's crossed and i's dotted when charging an athlete with a violation, in this case they couldnt.

So thats one part, USADA cant make a strong case, so rightfully they err on the side of the athlete. I have no problem with that, thats the right thing to do in these cases. (and dont forget the case doesnt end there, they will keep on testing and monitoring Jones)

So from that pov, USADA have done everything correctly.





Then we come to the UFC. Rather than presenting the above as the facts, they instead choose to to come out with a load of bullshit.

They tell us that only one of Jones samples was positive, they even tell Gus "all his samples were clean except this last one" and then four days later admit they werent.

They take quotes such as Larry Bowers "I dont see anything that represents a fresh ingestion SINCE AUGUST 2018" and completely misrepresent it as Bowers saying "this is conclusively from 2017"

They take quotes from Daniel Eichner "There is no evidence this is a fresh ingestion" and completely misrepresent it as Eicher saying "this is conclusively from 2017"

Misrepresenting the views of THREE people (two of them either current or former USADA employees) as ALL THE TOP EXPERTS IN THE WORLD

They take a study on Clomiphine (A total different substance) and claim that it is conclusive evidence of pulsing (Which anyone who had read the study can tell you it isnt because they classed anything lower than 50pg/ml in the study as not present / below limit of detection)

They fail to inform a licensing commission, that Jones has had multiple positives despite it being the original commission that he had the positive test under because in Jeff Novitzky's words "it didnt seem important"



So, the UFC were faced with a choice, tell us the honest truth from USADA's point of view and treat us like intelligent adults, or, try and totally bullshit us with a load of untruths, misrepresentations, and exagerations.

They chose the latter.






When Dana and Jeff originally said "All his samples except the last one were clean" he was lying.. the truth was multiple samples were positive,

the stupid thing is, the truth, actually made some sense, scientifically at least.

the lie, was scientifically unlikely given the circumstances they claimed, and bordering on the preposterous
agree
but moving an event on 6 days notice because of a single fighter "pulsing" is ridiculous and shady

Jones needs to stop Pulsing or sit the F down...and they need to show cases of other Pulsers...not lie to our faces

the misrepresentation of the three "experts" statements is insulting to our intelligence
 

Tiiimmmaaayyy

First 100 ish
Jan 19, 2015
6,129
8,115
I can’t believe anything they say from here on out. They have lost all credibility. Not sure why they even bothered to test him on the night of the fight. It wouldn’t have mattered if he pissed off the charts hot, they were gonna have to find a way to let the test go because they went through so much shit to make the fight happen.
 
Last edited:
Nov 21, 2015
6,848
9,463
I can’t believe anything they say from here on out. They have lost all credibility. Not sure why they even bothered to test him on the night of the fight. It wouldn’t have mattered if he pissed off the charts hot, they were gonna have to find a way to let the test go because they went through so much shit to make the fight happen.
THIS


I don't particularly care what USADA or Mini Egg has to say at this point.

They have proven beyond a doubt to blatant liars at best and incompetent at worst
 

conor mcgregor nut hugger

King of Florida
Oct 24, 2015
49,484
39,452
So thats one part, USADA cant make a strong case, so rightfully they err on the side of the athlete. I have no problem with that, thats the right thing to do in these cases. (and dont forget the case doesnt end there, they will keep on testing and monitoring Jones)

So from that pov, USADA have done everything correctly.
So many mouth breathers on social media and MMA forums were quick to jump the gun and scream SEE!!! USADA IS CORRUPT!!!!!!!!

Thank you for clarifying things, and please accept my apology for saying you were off on this topic.

By correctly arguing that Jones was indeed innocent here, you have restored my faith in you.
 

Rambo John J

Formerly 'Inside Job'
First 100
Jan 17, 2015
43,354
48,500
So many mouth breathers on social media and MMA forums were quick to jump the gun and scream SEE!!! USADA IS CORRUPT!!!!!!!!

Thank you for clarifying things, and please accept my apology for saying you were off on this topic.

By correctly arguing that Jones was indeed innocent here, you have restored my faith in you.
suck harder...you will get a bigger reward
 

Saloth Sar

Let's take a little trip to the countryside
Dec 1, 2015
5,728
9,811
not so much fishy, as there are two things going on here. There is "usada" and then there is "the ufc"

This whole Jones thing, from USADA's pov. They get notified of the positive test and they have to decide if they are going to move forward with an ADRV (Anti doping rule violation). To make that stick they are going to have to prove something, that is a new ingestion. They cannot do that. So they are faced with a choice, charge the athlete, go to arbitration and have Jones team ask them "could this be a remnant of the ingestion from 2017?" and the simple fact is, USADA dont know, so they lose the case. USADA need to have t's crossed and i's dotted when charging an athlete with a violation, in this case they couldnt.

So thats one part, USADA cant make a strong case, so rightfully they err on the side of the athlete. I have no problem with that, thats the right thing to do in these cases. (and dont forget the case doesnt end there, they will keep on testing and monitoring Jones)

So from that pov, USADA have done everything correctly.





Then we come to the UFC. Rather than presenting the above as the facts, they instead choose to to come out with a load of bullshit.

They tell us that only one of Jones samples was positive, they even tell Gus "all his samples were clean except this last one" and then four days later admit they werent.

They take quotes such as Larry Bowers "I dont see anything that represents a fresh ingestion SINCE AUGUST 2018" and completely misrepresent it as Bowers saying "this is conclusively from 2017"

They take quotes from Daniel Eichner "There is no evidence this is a fresh ingestion" and completely misrepresent it as Eicher saying "this is conclusively from 2017"

Misrepresenting the views of THREE people (two of them either current or former USADA employees) as ALL THE TOP EXPERTS IN THE WORLD

They take a study on Clomiphine (A total different substance) and claim that it is conclusive evidence of pulsing (Which anyone who had read the study can tell you it isnt because they classed anything lower than 50pg/ml in the study as not present / below limit of detection)

They fail to inform a licensing commission, that Jones has had multiple positives despite it being the original commission that he had the positive test under because in Jeff Novitzky's words "it didnt seem important"



So, the UFC were faced with a choice, tell us the honest truth from USADA's point of view and treat us like intelligent adults, or, try and totally bullshit us with a load of untruths, misrepresentations, and exagerations.

They chose the latter.






When Dana and Jeff originally said "All his samples except the last one were clean" he was lying.. the truth was multiple samples were positive,

the stupid thing is, the truth, actually made some sense, scientifically at least.

the lie, was scientifically unlikely given the circumstances they claimed, and bordering on the preposterous
You are being far too generous to USADA here. The statement they released also contained blatant misrepresentations.

Also, just to pull you up on some of the language you used, you accurately point out that USADA faced problems with a potential Jones' defence regarding 'pulsing' but to say 'they are going to have to prove it's a new ingestion' is a terrible way of stating it, as that's not at all how strict liability works, which I'm sure you know.
 

Saloth Sar

Let's take a little trip to the countryside
Dec 1, 2015
5,728
9,811
Luke's got this really badly wrong.

He said the original study wasnt Rodchenkov' it was. And he said only 1 person was it tested on and thats not true either. Rodchenkov was using hundreds of samples from Russian athletes that he personally had doped.
Is this just a (obviously very plausible) theory or has this been stated categorically before?

And if Rodchenkov had performed an extensive study that properly identified the detection window, is this not a counter-argument to 17-month pulsing rather than a supporting argument?
 

Dim

Well-Known Member
Aug 3, 2017
173
373
You are being far too generous to USADA here. The statement they released also contained blatant misrepresentations.

Also, just to pull you up on some of the language you used, you accurately point out that USADA faced problems with a potential Jones' defence regarding 'pulsing' but to say 'they are going to have to prove it's a new ingestion' is a terrible way of stating it, as that's not at all how strict liability works, which I'm sure you know.
but, had it gone to hearing, the first thing Jones team would have asked are

1) What excretion studies have been performed on turinabol long term metabolites

answer: none

2) can you conclusively rule out that this is a remnant from his 2017 positive

answer: no

At that point the arbitration panel find in favor of the athlete.



Strict Liability isnt actually as rigid as guys like Luke Thomas point out. Yes, you are responsible for everything you put in your body, but, there are degrees of fault, how much responsibility you bear, and that can result in anything from a warning, to a full punishment, Strict liability isnt nearly such a thing as those opposed to anti doping will have you believe.
 

Dim

Well-Known Member
Aug 3, 2017
173
373
Is this just a (obviously very plausible) theory or has this been stated categorically before?

And if Rodchenkov had performed an extensive study that properly identified the detection window, is this not a counter-argument to 17-month pulsing rather than a supporting argument?
Rodchenkov was doping athletes for 5 years with turinabol. Hes by far the best person to be commenting on anything.

The trouble is, Rodchenkov only looked at window of detection from samples he analysed. So for instance, he knew when the athlete took the turinabol (because he gave it to them) so he could get a good gauge, but did he test (or even have access to) samples where the tbol was administered 1 year previously? probably not, because they athletes who samples he used were using tbol regularly

After he published his paper, the test was further ratified by other wada labs, mainly Marcel Saugy's lab in Lausanne, but, they were analysing on samples where they dont know when the turinabol was administered, so they had no real way of determing the long term excretion parameters
 

RaginCajun

Sharing My Heart And My Part
Oct 25, 2015
18,482
44,776
So many mouth breathers on social media and MMA forums were quick to jump the gun and scream SEE!!! USADA IS CORRUPT!!!!!!!!

Thank you for clarifying things, and please accept my apology for saying you were off on this topic.

By correctly arguing that Jones was indeed innocent here, you have restored my faith in you.
 

Saloth Sar

Let's take a little trip to the countryside
Dec 1, 2015
5,728
9,811
Rodchenkov was doping athletes for 5 years with turinabol. Hes by far the best person to be commenting on anything.

The trouble is, Rodchenkov only looked at window of detection from samples he analysed. So for instance, he knew when the athlete took the turinabol (because he gave it to them) so he could get a good gauge, but did he test (or even have access to) samples where the tbol was administered 1 year previously? probably not, because they athletes who samples he used were using tbol regularly

After he published his paper, the test was further ratified by other wada labs, mainly Marcel Saugy's lab in Lausanne, but, they were analysing on samples where they dont know when the turinabol was administered, so they had no real way of determing the long term excretion parameters
So a theory. And you didn't answer my question.