USADA respond to Thomas Hauser’s allegations: “Numerous Substantial Inaccuracies and Misleading Information…”; Hauser retorts

USADA rebuttal: http://www.usada.org/usada-response-to-inaccuracies-misleading-information-professional-boxing-article/

Encouraging to read that USADA tested all of the Mayweather-Pacquiao urine samples with the CIR method, ruling out the use of exogenous testosterone.

Hauser responds in kind: http://ringtv.craveonline.com/news/399559-thomas-hauser-responds-to-usada-statements-again

2 thoughts on “USADA respond to Thomas Hauser’s allegations: “Numerous Substantial Inaccuracies and Misleading Information…”; Hauser retorts

  1. Read both.

    It’s a slog through USADA’s “detailed 25 page fact correction,” but this is obfuscation by design. The agency doesn’t have much to say in its behalf or against Hauser, so it’s piled on caviling minutiae (and some ad hominem in Conte’s case). I’ve seen more impressive denials out of the mafia when hoods were caught on tape discussing cement shoes.

    Notably, there’s nothing of value on Floyd’s TUEs. By playing coy, the boutique testing agency and its richest client assert a kind of royal privilege: i.e., Floyd’s body, our rules, end of.

    But this hurts their claim that “a national solution is exactly what USADA has been advocating for.” A national franchise, anyway.

    Not excepting the matter of his sources, Hauser has lost nothing in my eyes. Your take?

    • Finally read the 25 pages.

      It’s USADA’s word against that of Hauser and his sources on the matter of if a USADA official was present before Mayweather had his IV infusion. USADA dispute Hauser’s “damage control” claims surrounding the Morales situation by saying they had already informed everybody before the story broke on Halestorm Sports, however it may be telling that the NSAC still deny that they knew prior to Oct. 18th.

      These two issues form the crux of Hauser’s article and, while obfuscation & minutiae are piled on throughout, USADA’s rebuttal does carry weight, in my view.

      Would I like greater transparency regarding the reasons behind the granting of the TUE & full test results rather than a summary being released to relevant state commissions after the completion of a testing program? Yes, but I can understand that this is not straightforward when the International Standards for Protection of Privacy and Personal Information (ISPPPI) are taken into consideration, and commissions like Nevada don’t conform to the same standards with regards to the appropriate handling of this information.

      It’s pretty absurd that the NSAC’s charter states that it conforms to WADA code but that the use of IVs is still allowed without any oversight. It is equally perturbing that “paragraph 30” of the Mayweather-Pacquiao USADA testing contract implies that any of the rules can basically be changed to suit any of the parties’ purposes as they go through the testing process, whether this clause was included at the behest of Mayweather, as Hauser implies, or Pacquiao, as USADA states.

      It is very good to read that each Mayweather and Pacquiao sample was subject to CIR testing, but this should be the standard for every single sample USADA collect when drug testing boxers (and indeed, all athletes). If VADA can test every sample with CIR, then why can’t USADA, who have a far bigger bank balance & testing fee?

      Tim Starks’ take on Hauser’s piece is worth reading & does a good job of breaking down the good and the bad of it: http://bloguin.com/queensberryrules/2015-articles/floyd-mayweather-usada-thomas-hauser-and-the-search-for-one-clean-kill.html

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s