PDA

View Full Version : thoughts on sherks and ufc.. anyone agree?



FFFRpickup
10-08-2007, 03:05 AM
What is sherk trying to prove with this appeal? that he didn't know that he had an illegal substance in his system? that's unfortunate..live with it. I understand a person is innocent until proven guilty BUT it's an undenialable FACT that he had an Illegal substance in his body...strip the belt from his roids infested waist! what's the UFC waiting for? Are they waiting for this appeal to end and then have a bloody press conference only to make sherk look like a victim? The ufc has just released Anthony Torres from his contract for roids. why the delay with sherk? The APPEAL can't save sherk. It can only make his look like a victim. So what.you didn't know. hopefully this doesn't set president or the ufc is fucked. everybody will just say..what it's off the shelf stuff..not my fault. Please. this is an absolute crock of horse manuer. The BEST thing the Dana White can to is hold a press conference and once he pulls sherks balls out of his mouth, utter the words..The LW title is up for grabs again!

This is how I feel. I'm sorry if i offended anybody but feel free to agree or disagree. I just feel That the UFC needs credevbility and they have to stand up and do what's right even if it involves their holy grail..sean sherk.

kingrobert
10-08-2007, 03:34 AM
I was really hoping that Shrek would be fighting Bj in December. There is no denying that Shrek did test positive and I dont think he is going to win his appeal. I know i may get killed for saying this but I dont think Shrek knowingly used steroids. It doesnt matter though if you know your taking steroids or not the bottom line is its in your system and your going to get susspended for probably a year.

Shrek is a great fighter and the fact people will always be talking or wondering about him is something he is going to have to live with.

FFFRpickup
10-08-2007, 03:44 AM
Well aparently he passed a polygraph.



IF that means anything.


didn't OJ simpson pass a lie detector test also?

You're right..IF that means anything.

Noob
10-08-2007, 03:53 AM
What is sherk trying to prove with this appeal? that he didn't know that he had an illegal substance in his system? that's unfortunate..live with it. I understand a person is innocent until proven guilty BUT it's an undenialable FACT that he had an Illegal substance in his body...

Your treatment of this is laughable. You have obviously invested no time in researching anything that has gone on in this case.


I'm not even saying that he's innocent. But to use your phasing, "it's an undeniable FACT" that all human beings produce the same chemical that he was tested for. He just happened to have more than was considered normal. And "it's an undeniable FACT" that there have been several studies that suggest the current testing system, and guidelines for acceptable testing limits are out of alignment with the biology and chemistry of that particular compound. Not to mention at least two studies have recommended that the upper limit be more than 10 times what it is now.



If he took something, then strip him. But I'm tired of these black-and-white treatments of these issues as though everyone is suddenly a pharmacological expert with specialties in performance-enhancing supplements. You don't know what you're talking about.





strip the belt from his roids infested waist! what's the UFC waiting for? Are they waiting for this appeal to end and then have a bloody press conference only to make sherk look like a victim? The ufc has just released Anthony Torres from his contract for roids. why the delay with sherk?

The UFC is waiting for due process. The Athletic Comission gave Sherk an extension, and they are waiting on the hearing.


Anthony Torres tested positive for a 'banned substance.' But no one has come out to say what the substance was, what his levels were, or even if it was a performance enhancing substance. Could have been too many poppy seeds on his BigMac for all we know. The comparison isn't even close to being valid.



But since we're making comparisons, how about Toney? He tested positive, and for higher levels if I remember correctly. And he has tested positive in the past, at least once. And all he did was stand up in front of the committee and say "I didn't do it." That's it, they let him go.




this is an absolute crock of horse manuer.

If we're talking about your post then I agree.




I just feel That the UFC needs credevbility and they have to stand up and do what's right even if it involves their holy grail..sean sherk.

Sean Sherk is by no means their Holy Grail. The list of fighters that are more important to the UFC in terms of marketing and credibilit is longer than Robert Downey Jr.'s rap sheet. Couture, Crocop, AA, Big Nog, Wandy, Shogun, Liddell, GSP, Hughes, Franklin, almost all of the TUFers, the list could go on.


If anything, Sherk is getting the benefit of the situation because aside from being champ no one pays him much mind. Do you honestly think that if this were Liddell, or Couture, or Franklin, or any number of the other posterboys of the UFC ranks that this thing would be receiving as little attention as it is?


You only have to look at what they pay Sean Sherk to realize that he's not their Holy Grail. He's not even close. He is by far the most underpaid champion on the UFC roster.




Your threads have tended on the ranting side for a while, but they've normally just been kind of head-scratching op-ed pieces. This one is just bad, even by Noob Jack standards.




what's the date on the appeal?

I know he got an extension, but I think I've seen a date set in stone. Anyone know what it is? I think it is this month sometime, if not defiantly sometime in November.


I believe it is the end of this month. The 30th or 31st, if memory serves.





I was really hoping that Shrek would be fighting Bj in December. There is no denying that Shrek did test positive and I dont think he is going to win his appeal. I know i may get killed for saying this but I dont think Shrek knowingly used steroids. It doesnt matter though if you know your taking steroids or not the bottom line is its in your system and your going to get susspended for probably a year.

Shrek is a great fighter and the fact people will always be talking or wondering about him is something he is going to have to live with.



Shrek =


http://www.movie-poster.ws/movies/wallpaper/cartoon/shrek/shrek_donkey_th.jpg





Sherk =


http://content.answers.com/main/content/wp/en/thumb/3/32/200px-IMG_2093.jpg

dickrocketjones
10-08-2007, 04:39 AM
:deadhorse: Can anyone tell me exactly it was that he tested positive for? and what the levels and tolerances were? Do you think he should go for the wiki defense like Floyd Landis? Although he was ruled against he did build a lot of support and sympathy.

Noob
10-08-2007, 04:46 AM
:deadhorse: Can anyone tell me exactly it was that he tested positive for? and what the levels and tolerances were? Do you think he should go for the wiki defense like Floyd Landis? Although he was ruled against he did build a lot of support and sympathy.


Sherk tested positive for Nandrolone. If I remember right, the Athletic Commission stated in a report that they consider 2-6ng/ml to be the range of a normal athelete. Sherk tested in at 12ng/ml.


However, there have been multiple studies cropping up in the last several years that have cast some doubt on the acceptable levels of Nandrolone in athletes. Variables such as cardiovascular exercise, recency of exercise to the time of testing, electrolyte beverages, and a number of other factors have all been suggested to heavily influence the readings on such a test.


Two particular studies (I'm too lazy to go find them again, but they were last posted by Rufio in a thread in the main forum about Sherk) suggest that the upper limit could only reasonably be set somewhere around 100ng/ml in order to prevent mis-testing and occlude these extraneous factors.


With a recommended upper limit of 100ng/ml, Sherk would have tested at just over 1/10th of the proposed limit. I'm not saying I agree or disagree with this number, but it puts his test into perspective as opposed to people making the blanket statement that "he's roided up."


It's not hard-and-fast literature, but it's late and I'm too tired to go digging through science journals right now, so:




Urine analysis as a method of detecting nandrolone abuse has recently become somewhat controversial, following studies by the University of Aberdeen (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_of_Aberdeen) showing that the metabolite (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metabolite) product can also show up in urine in quantities above the upper limit from a combination of high-protein (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protein) diets utilising the legal nutritional supplement (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nutritional_supplement) creatine (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creatine) and hard cardiovascular exercise (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cardiovascular_exercise). The reason for this unexpected result has not been determined.



High-protein diet, hard cardiovascular exercise, and use of creatine would all seem to be pretty normal, and expected, parts of a professional athlete's routine. So hence the less-than-open-and-shut nature of this case. Though some people enjoy jumping the gun, and are quick to condemn Sherk for something that it's possible he didn't even do.

Nutsblood
10-08-2007, 05:25 AM
If I recall correctly, his appeal date is on October 31.

Noob
10-08-2007, 05:29 AM
YOu must have money bet on sherk, Noob?


LMFAO...


I do to, odds were too good, hell I might throw a few more dollars at it.


I bet vbookie money like it's water. This is starting to become like Hughes/Serra, it's just gone on so long now that I'm sick of hearing about it. I don't even really care what the outcome is, I just want it to be over with.


It's like making out with a hot girl you just met. You're kissing, touching, 30 minutes go by and you're still kind of playing the game and taking it slow. But good fucking Lord, after a while you just have to start taking shit off, pulling her hair, and letting her have it. You can only sit around and get blue balls for so long. Eventually Mr. Willie is just going to say 'social norms be damned, I'm coming out to play.' This is how I feel about Sherk, and Hughes/Serra. Not the sexual part, lol, just the fact that I'm growing old on the same tired debates when no one has said anything new in two months.



Just finish it already. This was beyond old a month ago. And Fedor too. Just fucking sign or something. Or don't. But this hokey-pokey incessant indecisiveness is becoming more played out than David Hasselhoff at the Icecapades. I don't even know if he's ever even been a part of the Icecapades, but if he was then I'm sure it would have played out really fast. Who would want to watch that?

Noob
10-08-2007, 05:37 AM
Time.

Once upon a...



Or, ...Is on my side?

sandywh
10-08-2007, 06:12 AM
A) Sherk keeps going with the appeal because he believes that he is innocent.

B) He stays champ as long as he is appealing the suspension

C) If he wins, the suspension could be reduced to the equivalent of "time served"

D) He did fail the test, but as Noob brilliantly (suck up) posted, the testing maybe flawed and if he can change that it would only serve to help.

E) His entire career could be on the line. If labeled a juicer, every fight from then on becomes about the steroids. The UFC can't & won't tolerate a black eye everytime he fights.

F) I'd rather see Sherk / BJ than any other LW fight. All the other guys are exiting, but that match up is awesome.

Noob
10-08-2007, 03:09 PM
I watched like a 9 hour program on time and how it relates to everything. Science channel. Pretty fucking trippy.


Time is the enemy.

Fucker.



I read a book on that once. Fabric of The Cosmos by Brian Greene. 'Trippy' is exactly the right word for it. Completely changes the way you look at things.

FFFRpickup
10-08-2007, 03:44 PM
Your treatment of this is laughable. You have obviously invested no time in researching anything that has gone on in this case.


I'm not even saying that he's innocent. But to use your phasing, "it's an undeniable FACT" that all human beings produce the same chemical that he was tested for. He just happened to have more than was considered normal. And "it's an undeniable FACT" that there have been several studies that suggest the current testing system, and guidelines for acceptable testing limits are out of alignment with the biology and chemistry of that particular compound. Not to mention at least two studies have recommended that the upper limit be more than 10 times what it is now.



If he took something, then strip him. But I'm tired of these black-and-white treatments of these issues as though everyone is suddenly a pharmacological expert with specialties in performance-enhancing supplements. You don't know what you're talking about.


Yes i do not study these situations to the degree that others do. Yes the testing is arguably old school and obsolete not acounting for routines and suppliments and the body naturally producing more in certains situations. theya re looking to raise the limit or what ever. That's all fine and dandy. I don't study and spend all my time doing sherks and his lawyers homework. I don't look at studies the universities do.

Maybe i shouldn't jump the gun and call him a roid case...but I can if i want.
I jsut feel i't's lame for somebody to get caught with to much of a substance in his body and NOW will question it!

I'm entitled to say what i want. I didn't verbally assault you or your family. I can say what I want. Do all posts have to be serious and methodiacally planned out. oh ya and don't forget the research everybody must do before posting! ..HMMM I may have to hire a team of edtiors and researchers to OK my posts before i post them.

I appreciate the fact that you didn't go off and curse and insult me. You were straight forward with your replies and that's great. I just do not have the time to research and read absolutally everything before I post.

that said...you posted this..."If he took something, then strip him. But I'm tired of these black-and-white treatments of these issues as though everyone is suddenly a pharmacological expert with specialties in performance-enhancing supplements. You don't know what you're talking about."

He was over the limit...right?
so NOW fight the rules..that's a little to late. OBVIOUSLY sherk didn't do his research. the way he was training and taking all those supplements. Sherk must have know that the rules were outdated regarding the actual amounts of stuff.

I've been following MMA for about 13 or 14 years. I love watching it..i love fighting..and submitting people. It's enjoyable. I wish I had the time to train with a team. I get to these websites and i can't voice my opinion...even in teh noob section..hehe. I lose 20 rep points for my opinion in this post. becasue I don't have time to study facts figures and university studies...not to forget all the substances that are NOT allowed and their legal limits..AND how these limits have to be revisited and revised!



Thanks noob. PLEASE check out all my other posts and let me know if i've reseached properly. hit me up for -reps.

Noob
10-08-2007, 04:06 PM
I jsut feel i't's lame for somebody to get caught with to much of a substance in his body and NOW will question it!

Should he have questioned the limits beforehand? He's a fighter, not a biochemist or a member of the Athletic Commission. His job is to fight, I doubt he spends much time in a laboratory studying the metabolite processes of various sports supplements.


I'm not going back to the "he didn't know so he shouldn't be guilty" argument, but putting the impetus on Sherk to dispute current level-testing criteria before he has a problem with them is a bit much. Very few people tackle any issue before they have a problem with it, fighters or not.





Maybe i shouldn't jump the gun and call him a roid case...but I can if i want.


You can say a lot of things. Maybe I shouldn't call you out for it...but I can if I want.



I'm entitled to say what i want. I didn't verbally assault you or your family. I can say what I want. HMMM I may have to hire a team of edtiors and researchers to OK my posts before i post them.

You can say what you want. And apparently you say say "I can say what I want" multiple times in a single post. And let's not forget that this is a two-way street. If you "can say what {you want}" then that would entitle me and everyone else on here to the same privilege.


Of course you can say what you want (within reason). I never indicated otherwise. If you like popsicles, be sure to share that. If you are very fond of The Olsen twins, also, cool thing to announce. Your opinions on Sherk? Okay. This was never in dispute. You are welcome to post your opinion.




I just do not have the time to research and read absolutally everything before I post.

No one does. But this information isn't hidden and maintained in a secret vault by a team of blind monks that form the nucleus of an ages-old secret society with the sole purpose of protecting hidden scientific information. This information is on the same forum you're posting on.


You don't need the time to read "absolutely everything," just time to read something, anything about the topic on which you're posting.




I lose 20 rep points for my opinion in this post. becasue I don't have time to study facts figures and university studies...not to forget all the substances that are NOT allowed and their legal limit


Very few people have the time to do hard-and-fast medical research on these subject. But you don't have to. If you had read any of the 20 threads about the Sean Sherk situation that we have had in the past 2 months you could have picked up all this information and more. It's not a matter of digging through scientific journals for hours on end. It's just a matter of 4 clicks, and 10 minutes of reading.

FFFRpickup
10-08-2007, 04:30 PM
Should he have questioned the limits beforehand? He's a fighter, not a biochemist or a member of the Athletic Commission. His job is to fight, I doubt he spends much time in a laboratory studying the metabolite processes of various sports supplements.


I'm not going back to the "he didn't know so he shouldn't be guilty" argument, but putting the impetus on Sherk to dispute current level-testing criteria before he has a problem with them is a bit much. Very few people tackle any issue before they have a problem with it, fighters or not.






You can say a lot of things.




You can say what you want. And apparently you say say "I can say what I want" multiple times in a single post. And let's not forget that this is a two-way street. If you "can say what {you want}" then that would entitle me to the same privilege.


Of course you can say what you want (within reason). I never indicated otherwise. If you like popsicles, be sure to share that. If you are very fond of The Olsen twins, also, cool thing to announce. Your opinions on Sherk? Okay. This was never in dispute. You are welcome to post your opinion.





No one does. But this information isn't hidden and maintained in a secret vault by a team of blind monks that form the nucleus of an ages-old secret society with the sole purpose of protecting hidden scientific information. This information is on the same forum you're posting on.


You don't need the time to read "absolutely everything," just time to read something, anything about the topic on which you're posting.




I lose 20 rep points for my opinion in this post. becasue I don't have time to study facts figures and university studies...not to forget all the substances that are NOT allowed and their legal limits]


Very few people have the time to do hard-and-fast medical research on these subject. But you don't have to. If you had read any of the 20 threads about the Sean Sherk situation that we have had in the past 2 months you could have picked up all this information and more. It's not a matter of digging through scientific journals for hours on end. It's just a matter of 4 clicks, and 10 minutes of reading.
I understand. I'm not angry withanybody. I jsut want to be able to post my opinion(without insulting anyone, of course) and not have negative reps because somebody doesn't agree or feels like I should have stufied more befoe i post.. take care.

Noob
10-08-2007, 04:35 PM
I understand. I'm not angry withanybody. I jsut want to be able to post my opinion(without insulting anyone, of course) and not have negative reps because somebody doesn't agree or feels like I should have stufied more befoe i post.. take care.

As a fellow poster: You are welcome to post your opinion. And other people are welcome to agree or disagree with you. That is their opinion. If you are going to share your thoughts, you have to expect others to share theirs as well, both positive and negative.



As a mod: You have had a series of sort of 'opinion pieces' to the threads you have been starting that have been more or less apropos of nothing. They are not really news, more just kind of a personal diary of sorts. I'm not telling you that you can't share your opinion, but these threads don't really add much to the conversation here.


Nothing is being said in the threads you are starting that couldn't have been put in one of the many existing threads about the same topic. Sometimes (most of the time) it's better to add to an existing thread rather than create a new one if the topic is the same. This is especially true if you want to share your opinion or thoughts on an existing topic. It is much easier (and less cluttered) to share your thoughts about a topic in the thread designated for that topic. As opposed to creating new and unecessary threads.

sabreclaww
10-08-2007, 11:08 PM
I am much smarter now from this exchange.
Noob, as usual you have stated clearly a valid point with both accuracy and knowledge. I must say, in the thread a few months ago about this very topic I stated much the same about the recent article that had come out. 12 Could be reached naturally, and some were crying out for higher levels.

Holy grail? yes...again, agree with Noob

I love the hack hack idea of sport. The "I heard that someone did something and so obviously boot them cause i'm angry."

I'm with Noob. I wont believe anything till the designated appeal system is in motion. It can be flawed. I for one HOPe that Sherk is NOT abusing, and to me, it seems that if anyone...he is the one who takes this seriously.

War noob....

sandywh
10-08-2007, 11:41 PM
As a mod: You have had a series of sort of 'opinion pieces' to the threads you have been starting that have been more or less apropos of nothing. They are not really news, more just kind of a personal diary of sorts. I'm not telling you that you can't share your opinion, but these threads don't really add much to the conversation here.


Nothing is being said in the threads you are starting that couldn't have been put in one of the many existing threads about the same topic. Sometimes (most of the time) it's better to add to an existing thread rather than create a new one if the topic is the same. This is especially true if you want to share your opinion or thoughts on an existing topic. It is much easier (and less cluttered) to share your thoughts about a topic in the thread designated for that topic. As opposed to creating new and unecessary threads.

:agreed:
:pwnt:
:bowsucka:
:werd:
:clapping:
:adminpower:
:modpower: