Q & A with Sherk
MMAPlayground.com »
Community »
MMA News Share Forum »
Q & A with Sherk
cmill21
12/19/07 2:22:14PM
After successfully defending his UFC lightweight championship with a decision win over Hermes Franca it was revealed that then champion Sean Sherk and Franca both tested positive for banned steroid substances in pre fight tests. Franca admitted to knowingly using steroids in an attempt to heal from a late developing training can injury but Sherk maintained his innocence and chose to appeal the suspension of one year that he received from the California State Athletic Commission.
Link
Link
CantAndleDaRiddum
12/19/07 2:54:06PM
he says if asked to fight in jan could he hav done it, and he replies by saying he could not be ready to fight in 5 weeks notice.
anyone else think thats kinda odd?
i got my reasons for why he couldnt make it on 5 wks notice but not sure what is considered bashing, especially since he IS a CONVICTED steroid user, but anyways, if one of my fav fighters cant be ready in 5 weeks notice, then i prolly wouldnt have that fighter be a favorite of mine
WE NEED BJ v SHERK----THATS A F'N SUPER FIGHT IF I EVER HEARD OF ONE
anyone else think thats kinda odd?
i got my reasons for why he couldnt make it on 5 wks notice but not sure what is considered bashing, especially since he IS a CONVICTED steroid user, but anyways, if one of my fav fighters cant be ready in 5 weeks notice, then i prolly wouldnt have that fighter be a favorite of mine
WE NEED BJ v SHERK----THATS A F'N SUPER FIGHT IF I EVER HEARD OF ONE
tuvok500
12/19/07 3:02:49PM
i think that Sherk is more mentally exhausted that physicaly and that's why he would have not been ready in 5 week notice.
but he can consider himself lucky to have a direct fight with the futur champs Bj or Joe !!
but he can consider himself lucky to have a direct fight with the futur champs Bj or Joe !!
roadking95th
12/19/07 3:58:47PM
After reading this article I think the fans and fighters should let bye gones be bye gones. Sherk is free to pursue this farther and try to completely clear his name. I feel there is just too much doubt in the state's case and in the way they've handled the appeals process.
pgally2000
12/19/07 4:56:44PM
He had a positive urine test and a clean blood test? That doesn't make sense, that carry-over argument is starting to become a legitimate argument now. In my personal opinion, after reading this article, I think he's clean, because I'm sure that stuff stays a lot longer in your bloodstream than it does your urine...
JimiMak
12/19/07 9:49:50PM
Posted by pgally2000
He had a positive urine test and a clean blood test? That doesn't make sense, that carry-over argument is starting to become a legitimate argument now. In my personal opinion, after reading this article, I think he's clean, because I'm sure that stuff stays a lot longer in your bloodstream than it does your urine...
Well then you can change your mind. The kidneys and liver clean the blood. Bloodstream measurement determines immediate use. The urine holds many substances (drugs) for much longer than the blood. Kidney and liver output show recent toxins that wouldn't still be in your blood.