Evidence of Jones' Guilt

Again, you are lying. I never said it was 60%. It’s much less. And why would they lose the ufc contract? And who would that affect? How? Again, you have no idea what you’re talking about. It doesn’t stop you.

Again, tell me all the tests he passed between July 2018 and aug 2019…..Lol at the most unlikely and improbable…. Again, you just make shit up over and over again.
I think you are really not comprehending the situation.

  • Jon Jones tests positive for Tbol once.
  • A year goes by and he tests negative every time
  • All of a sudden, a year later, he starts "pulsing" with a string of failed tests.

Do you have an explanation for why the M3 took a year off before he began pulsing in earnest? No personal insults please, just an explanation.
 
No. Trace elements of a substance that has been broken down to a by product, and then that by product has been broken down to another, and then that one has been broken down to yet another by product is not offering any PED benefit. The metabolites are indications of a PED substance, they are not, themselves, the PED substance.

So, what remains is that he has already been punished for the vague, unspecified "you clearly used it SOMETIME" offense. While you may feel it's fine to punish someone for life for a single offense, that's not how the rules and parameters are set up. You get sanctioned, and then you've paid the price. So, if you have a long-term metabolite that simply doesn't break down, and can stay in the system for indeterminate periods of time, the fact that we can now detect those substances and much finer levels than ever before (aka "picograms/ml") doesn't mean, ITSELF, that he's used again.

That's what needs to be proven. If they find out that, no, the current understanding is wrong, and ALL of the M3 metabolite is gone from the body after 15 months, then we can reassess. If he pops for other metabolites, then the deniability, plausible or implausible, that it was from the original incident that he was already punished for, goes out the window. But, as it is, having trace amounts of the M3 show up, absent any other kind of indicator, is not a "failed test" or indication of new use, and can't and should not be sanctioned, without first changing the rules of this particular game.
I believe there won't be a definitive answer for a while. He shouldn't have cheated to begin with.
 
Is that what happened? When he first tested positive for Turinabol it was under exactly the same circumstances, with exactly the same results as the subsequent failure. The first test failure was as much a "pulse" as the subsequent one. The main difference between the two is that for the first one, Jones hand never previously been punished for ever having used Turinabol.

Why would it only show up under those circumstances? What are those circumstances?

No detection of the actual substance. During regular preceding testing, no detection of primary or secondary metabolites that do eventually clear the system, but that would indicate ongoing PED use during that timeframe. Post fight testing did not indicate anything abnormal. Levels of the tertiary metabolite were only detected at levels much, much lower than ever even possible before.

It shows up because there's enough of a concentration of the substance to be detected. What is a common factor of post-weigh-in pre-fight urine tests vs other tests, before and after?

The fighter is dehydrated. How is concentration of the substance measured? weight of the substance per unit of volume. By definition, the concentration of ANYTHING, except for water, itself, is going to be higher in a urine sample of a dehydrated person.

It's not all that complicated. A substance exists in levels that aren't concentrated enough to be detectable. After dehydrating, it shows up in barely detectable levels, due to the substance not being diluted in as much water as with the other samples.

These are ordinary and very understandable, uncomplicated concepts, that do not require any kind of conspiracy theory. Also, this wasn't invented for Jon Jones. They had seen it happen in enough other cases and in other sports between suspension and subsequent result that they no longer dismissed it out of hand, and the growing body of evidence led them to conclude that they couldn't definitely say it was due to subsequent PED use. That's also how science works. You have your working theory based on the best explanation for the data available. When better and more data comes in, you update it because the previous explanation is not longer the best based on currently available data.
So it is not AT ALL POSSIBLE that masking agents are letting the M3 get through? You BELIEVE jon jones isn't still cheating even though he can't definitively prove he's not when he keeps failing tests?
 
I think you are really not comprehending the situation.

  • Jon Jones tests positive for Tbol once.
  • A year goes by and he tests negative every time
  • All of a sudden, a year later, he starts "pulsing" with a string of failed tests.

Do you have an explanation for why the M3 took a year off before he began pulsing in earnest? No personal insults please, just an explanation.
Why lie when it’s verifiable? Post his actual test results and comment instead of just lying about them.
 
So it is not AT ALL POSSIBLE that masking agents are letting the M3 get through? You BELIEVE jon jones isn't still cheating even though he can't definitively prove he's not when he keeps failing tests?
What masking agents mask the metabolites?
 
Why lie when it’s verifiable? Post his actual test results and comment instead of just lying about them.
Lol you just said he tested negative for the rest of 2017. You provided those test results. I am relying on your own information.

Why would he test negative, repeatedly, for a year before the M3 decided to start pulsing? That makes no sense and does not fit in with what people are calling pulsing.

I had actually assumed that he went on to fail his 2017 tests and then started failing again in 2018 but according to you, he had one lone failure on July 28, 2017 and then tested negative for a year until he started pulsing in August of 2018.

It's amazing to me that under that scenario USADA decided it was more likely that he was doing this new phenomenon called "pulsing" which is not backed by any science, rather than deciding that after a positive test, followed by a year of no failures, he simply had a new infraction, a new ingestion. Which is what they have decided for every athlete in that circumstance up until Jon Jones. They made up new rules just for him, just for the UFC.

The only way they could have concluded that is if they threw out everything they knew about drug cheats and tried mightily to come up with a plausible alternative--which is laughably implausible. The only reason this ridiculous case has not set the sports world on fire is because nobody considers MMA a real sport.

Didn't I read a recent post by @UsernameLOL where he pointed out that there is a double standard now between USADA testing for the UFC and USADA/WADA testing for everyone else? It all points to one thing: UFC is telling USADA what to do and they are complying with UFC's directives.

And you did say recently that a large percentage of USADA's business comes from the UFC.
 
Is that what happened? When he first tested positive for Turinabol it was under exactly the same circumstances, with exactly the same results as the subsequent failure. The first test failure was as much a "pulse" as the subsequent one. The main difference between the two is that for the first one, Jones hand never previously been punished for ever having used Turinabol.
According to @kflo, Jon Jones tested negative for a year before alternately testing positive and negative for a string of drug tests starting in August 2018. The lone failure on July 28, 2017 was not in any way what they later described as "pulsing" it was just a single failed test followed by negative tests. The test in August 2018 was positive followed by a string of positive/negative tests. If the M3 metabolite was in his system from the origin of the first failed test, why would it not show up for a year and THEN start pulsing a year later? That's ridiculous, he re-ingested and as @TrueFightFan is pointing out, the bizarre and random results from his tests over that period of time ask the question could he have been attempting to mask the Tbol with varying degrees of success?
 
According to @kflo, Jon Jones tested negative for a year before alternately testing positive and negative for a string of drug tests starting in August 2018. The lone failure on July 28, 2017 was not in any way what they later described as "pulsing" it was just a single failed test followed by negative tests. The test in August 2018 was positive followed by a string of positive/negative tests. If the M3 metabolite was in his system from the origin of the first failed test, why would it not show up for a year and THEN start pulsing a year later? That's ridiculous, he re-ingested and as @TrueFightFan is pointing out, the bizarre and random results from his tests over that period of time ask the question could he have been attempting to mask the Tbol with varying degrees of success?
This is what I said you lying retard.
“He tested positive on July 28. He tested negative on oct 11. He tested positive in aug and sept 2018, negative in 4 tests between sept and nov and positive on dec 9th and his in competition test on the 28th. He had negatives and positives in feb 2019 for smith. “
Your ability to comprehend is pathetic. Tell me where I said he tested negative for a year?

and lol at your ignorant ass talking about masking agents.
 
This is what I said you lying retard.
“He tested positive on July 28. He tested negative on oct 11. He tested positive in aug and sept 2018, negative in 4 tests between sept and nov and positive on dec 9th and his in competition test on the 28th. He had negatives and positives in feb 2019 for smith. “
Your ability to comprehend is pathetic. Tell me where I said he tested negative for a year?

and lol at your ignorant ass talking about masking agents.
You said he passed all his tests in 2017 besides the one failure on July 28. Is that not true?
 
You said he passed all his tests in 2017 besides the one failure on July 28. Is that not true?
I said he failed on the 28th, then passed one test on October 11. So where did I say he tested negative for a year? …..I didn’t……so stop making shit up. It’s tiring.
 
@kflo

Recall that one paper

https://www.scirp.org/journal/paperinformation.aspx?paperid=73210#f1

Where WADA's implementation of the turinabol tests were questioned on the basis of lacking reference materials (or something like that which has since been rectified/confirmed/accepted).

Here's an excerpt

sbiAgR2.jpg


After retesting a huge swath of the athletic population from an era where DHCMT use was rampant it turns out m3 was the culprit in the majority of cases.

I know what you're going to say "testing positive for m3 doesn't preclude one from testing positive for m1 and m4". That is true.

But the wording says "The majority of new results of re-analysis of 2008 and 2012 samples were based on adverse analytical findings of metabolite M3 or its epi-mere".
 
Last edited:
I said he failed on the 28th, then passed one test on October 11. So where did I say he tested negative for a year? …..I didn’t……so stop making shit up. It’s tiring.
He had 5 tests in Q3 and Q4 2017. You said he passed all of them except the one on July 28. He next tested positive in August of 2018 OVER A YEAR LATER. Are you begging stupidity to get out of this conversation?
 
Nah he probably just doesn't want to endlessly argue with the MMA equivalent of a flat earther.
Nice drive by. You don’t even know what the discussion is about.

The funny part is I’m the one who actually sides with the scientists….
 
Last edited:
Again, youre losing your mind. He passed all his tests in 2017 except the one right before DC on the 28th of august. Again, if you were educated on the topic you’d know this. But you don’t. Yet you continually throw shit on the wall.
Here you go, ring a bell?
 
Here you go, ring a bell?
Lol. Are you playing dumb?

You have continually repeated that jones “tested negative for a year after his positive”.

I’ll ask you again, slowly so you can follow…….how many times did he test negative in a row after his July 28th 2017 positive? C’mon genius…..you can do it……..
 
@kflo

Recall that one paper

https://www.scirp.org/journal/paperinformation.aspx?paperid=73210#f1

Where WADA's implementation of the turinabol tests were questioned on the basis of lacking reference materials (or something like that which has since been rectified/confirmed/accepted).

Here's an excerpt

sbiAgR2.jpg


After retesting a huge swath of the athletic population from an era where DHCMT use was rampant it turns out m3 was the culprit in the majority of cases.

I know what you're going to say "testing positive for m3 doesn't preclude one from testing positive for m1 and m4". That is true.

But the wording says "The majority of new results of re-analysis of 2008 and 2012 samples were based on adverse analytical findings of metabolite M3 or its epi-mere".
upload_2021-8-3_8-53-56.jpeg
Based on 250 vs 18 wouldn’t you expect the majority to be based on the 250? Wouldn’t you expect the 250 to be present in just about every positive case? And if so, wouldn’t you say the majority was from findings of it? But 18 isn’t an immaterial detection time, so I’m not sure why you are positioning it as virtually undetectable…….which is what you seem to be implying.
 
Back
Top