Early UFC 74/75 Lines - Page 7

Thremp · #61 07-19-2007, 07:50 PM

[ QUOTE ]
There's no real thing as a false positive

[/ QUOTE ]

WTF?!? I've read quite a bit about juice and if I'm not mistaken there are numerous non-banned substances that you can take to elevate hormone levels that can indeed give a positive without taking a banned substance.

igetbadbeat · #62 07-19-2007, 07:52 PM

Must clarify...

Nitro tech postiive means you did take the steroid and you show the metabolite but you didn't MEAN TO. It was an accident and you did nothin illegal. The company scrweed you(This happened in an NFL case)

the ohter false positive case was the one where I was referring to myself. Some tests measure elevated test levels and not specific metabolite levels. I beleive there is such a thing as a "False" positive here...such that you could elevate your levels to that height without using an illicit substance because nutritional technology is ever increasing.

igetbadbeat · #63 07-19-2007, 07:54 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
There's no real thing as a false positive

[/ QUOTE ]

WTF?!? I've read quite a bit about juice and if I'm not mistaken there are numerous non-banned substances that you can take to elevate hormone levels that can indeed give a positive without taking a banned substance.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not very articulate. Basically I meant there is no such thing as a false positive because there is a reason for everything.

1) The tester messed up and somehow you got a false positive...that has nothing to do with you

2) You took the drug by accident and didn't know and got a positive test.

3) The test is incorrect because nutritional technology has gotten to a level where you can test positive without doing anything illegal..

IMO none of these are "FALSE POSITIVES", there is a reason behind each one and a possible true explanation.

igetbadbeat · #64 07-19-2007, 07:56 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Personally, when reading MMAthreads I get flashbacks from a long time ago where me and my best buddy were 6-7 and argued til we got physical about who'd win between the Hulk and Superman (everyone with a clue knows Superman would win)

[/ QUOTE ]

No...jsut because little children argue about who would win between hulk and superman doesn't mean that by the time you are 25 you can't still argue about it but now be mature. The simple fact of the matter is no one is guaranteed to win and what we do here is try to figure out what the right line is on superman and the right line is on the hulk. I do agree that Superman woud be the favorite but he will not win everytime. You=mrbiggums.

He has a good heart, but his anaylsis is that of a 5 year old who thinks these events are deterministic. There are random factors.

igetbadbeat · #65 07-19-2007, 07:58 PM

FYI "the hulk" beat superman a couple months ago....back @ UFC 65 in the main event. It happens man. Longshots happen.

igetbadbeat · #66 07-19-2007, 08:01 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
There's no real thing as a false positive

[/ QUOTE ]

WTF?!? I've read quite a bit about juice and if I'm not mistaken there are numerous non-banned substances that you can take to elevate hormone levels that can indeed give a positive without taking a banned substance.

[/ QUOTE ]

At the end of the day...if you donno exactly whats going on, you donno what's goin on at all. So if we are to discuss "false positives" we must discuss specific tests, what they are testing for and what happened. Something like marijuana where the positive comes from the metabolite of THC...that cant' happen by accident. The problem with science is that there is actually no real truth, it is also iffy at the highest levels. All you can do is choose a proper confidence interval and be right almost all the time. But as technology increases the tests have to move along with it because perhaps somethings that weren't possible before are possible now. For example, does anyone remember that it was scientifically impossible to run the mile in a certain amount of time? Oh wait...that's until someone did it.

Thremp · #67 07-19-2007, 08:23 PM

Okay, I'll go with that. That people who didn't take drugs can test positive and there is a reason.

Not knowing doesn't cut it for me. IIRC modern supplementation can eff up your epi/test ratio which is a very std benchmark in Olympic testing. Not to mention that most of those guys juice themselves into the high normal levels and are very aware of the tests and what levels they are at.

Its somewhat pathetic to get popped for a positive nowadays as a pro athlete.

MikeyPatriot · #68 07-19-2007, 11:25 PM

Sherk takes something like 22 different supplements. I assume that could be the reason for the positive result, if he didn't take steroids.

trixtrix · #69 07-20-2007, 12:32 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Everytime I read trixtrix's posts I see ill-intent in his statements as he is out to prove people wrong and make them feel dumb.

Everytime I read Mr.Biggums posts I imagine a young child wanting to honestly explain why he's right, but I see a HUGE HOLES in his logic and his evidence.

I guess i'm trying to find the nice givingness of biggums with the knowledge(lack of bitterness/anger) of trixtrix? I certainly value advice even when it turns out to be wrong as long as probabilistically it was right/made sense but I understand I do not want rationalization either.

Trix trix,any chance you can send me back the Rampage Liddell msg I PMed you back in January? it's not in my outbox and I love reviewing my old thoughts...that one is one I didn't have a chance to jot down in my betting diary.

[/ QUOTE ]

ill-intent, that's me.. not a single +ev worthy post in the entire world

Performify · #70 07-20-2007, 01:17 AM

FWIW just being nitty, False Positive is a logic and statistics term. Its prevalently used on the information security side (my "real job" field). A real world example from there:

voice recognition security product. Alice provides a voiceprint, it is used by an application to authenticate Alice (identification) for entry to a door.

Alice steps up and properly authenticates: This is called a "True Positive" result -- Alice receives entry.

Alice steps up but the system fails to authenticate her: this is called a "False Negative" result. or a type II statical error. The system falsely gave you a negative response when you should have received a positive. Alice does not receive entry even though she should receive entry

Bob steps up and provides Alice's voiceprint command. The system allows him entry. This is a "False Positive" in that the system falsely provided the "positive result" to an inappropriate actor. This is also called a type I statistical error.

The fourth possible condition is a "True Negative" -- for example Bob steps up and provides Alice's voiceprint command and the system correctly denies him entry.

Longwinded way of saying that "False Positive" is the very correct terminology here from a stastical or logical sense -- as it is frequently applied in the field of medical testing as well. In the event that for whatever reason he was not actually on steroids (not that I'm saying this is the case) the test result would officially be a "False Positive" test for steroids. Likewise if he was actually on steroids but succesfully masked them in the test, that is a "False Negative".

-P

PS: my call is Sherk gets the title stripped. Penn fights the winner of Stevenson vs. Pellegrino from UFC 74 for the vacant title sometime around October -- Maybe Penn goes through KenFlo first, depending on timing.

When Penn wins against Stevenson/Batman, he steps up to 170 and becomes the first person to consolidates two UFC weight classes. His first title defense is then back at LW against Sherk when he comes off suspension next summer...