[46 Wins]

 

[46 Wins]

Right now I don't know anything apart from what's on the poster, can't seem to find out about the weight stipulations, rematch clauses, PPV price etc.

It makes more sense for Harlem to be fighting Benn given their weight and experience level but I get it wouldn't cause as much fanfare as having the two sons in there, so here we are, another PPV show for UK and Ireland DAZN subscribers but I expect it to do well, the press conference should be a good one too, I'm expecting Nigel over from Australia for the launch presser at least and then of course both fathers on the live PPV broadcast, I also expect the undercard to be mediocre to poor and they'll get away with it too.

I wasn't really screaming for this but here we are, the rivalry continues.

 

[46 Wins]

 

[46 Wins]

So Coach Simms has confirmed that the contracted weight for this bout is 157lb, there is a "huge financial penalty" if the weight is missed and also if a fighter (so Eubank Jr) comes in over 158.5lb then the fight will be called off. He also confirmed there is a rehydration clause too but he didn't go into details as he wasn't sure if he was allowed to but one does exist.

I'm surprised it's at 157, I thought 155 would have been the more likely but I guess this is how they got it over the line.

 

[46 Wins]

Haven't watched it yet nor do I have time to today but I assume it was a good one given the characters involved

 

[46 Wins]

I just finished watching the presser, Eubank Jr saying he'll only be at 60% on fight night isn't what I want to hear tbh, I understand his explanation and it does make sense but if the rehydration clause means you'll lose 40% then don't agree to the terms, better to have no fight than one where the excuses are built in. Benn is also hindered by not being able to get to 157, he'll weigh in at 154 or 155 according to Coach Simms but Benn isn't making excuses, he says he's going to "handle the family business". The animosity simply isn't there this is nowhere near as hot as the fights between the fathers but the intrigue is still present.

I honestly would have been happyy with Harlem vs Conor but perhaps I'm in the minority there.

 

[46 Wins]

Taken at the weekend, just 6 weeks to go now

 

[46 Wins]

I've watched a number of Hearn interviews since this story broke and unsurprisingly he's consistently declined any invitation to criticise or condemn his fighter.

What also seems pretty clear is that;
1. He's known about this failed test for weeks
2. Whilst he prefers the BBBC to sanction the fight if they don't he'll look elsewhere in order to preserve the show on Saturday
3. If the DM didn't print the story he wouldn't have said a word about it to anyone

The BBBC seem to be getting credit now for the statement they released saying that they "prohibit" the fight but what isn't clear is;
1. How long did the BBBC know about this? If they knew weeks ago too then they've only issued a statement now and "prohibited" it because the DM went to print, therefore they're only looking after their own reputation and not Eubank Jr's health
2. If it becomes clear to the BBBC that Matchroom will seek sanction elsewhere in the absence of BBBC support, will they just sanction it themselves rather than lose their fee?
3. Did Sr also know about this weeks ago and is it this that had him desperate for his son not to fight?

I'm no doctor but I can't think of any legitimate reason a male fighter would have traces of a female contraceptive in his system. I have read, though, that this specific drug found in him can be used as a masking agent and that the low amounts found indicate that one was nearing the end of the cycling off phase.

The fight can't go on. It was borderline OK as it was, now Benn appears to have been caught cheating it absolutely cannot proceed.

 

[46 Wins]

Checking the DAZN website just now I see this fight is no longer on the boxing schedule. Katie Taylor on Oct 29 is next up as far as I can see

 

[46 Wins]

Kalle Sauerland and Eddie Hearn issue a joint statement, no questions just a brief statement confirming that this Saturday's "Born Rivals" show is to be rescheduled

 

[46 Wins]

View attachment 22441
Have you ever read such garbage?

Hearn and Sauerland took the decision to postpone the fight because in the end they had no other option and they obviously pursued many.

They are also attempting to paint the BBBofC as the bad guys in this when the BBBofC are the only party who have acted appropriately.

As for 'the fighter's interests', the only interest Hearn and Sauerland had here was their bank balances.

Yeah the statement is BS but the BBBC only withdrew sanctioning because the Daily Mail broke the story. @Dynamito has confirmed that the BBBC, like Matchroom Boxing and Wasserman, have known about this for weeks already, the cover up was well and truly on until the journalist let the cat out the bag.

I've watched a number of interviews with boxing people giving their opinions since the fight was postponed, of them all Dan Rafael's is the one I found most informative. He says that DAZN are the reason the fight was called off "100%" according to him. Now I want to know if DAZN knew weeks ago too, I wouldn't assume they did as they're just broadcasters but a definitive answer would be great

 

[46 Wins]

Yes, it does appear the BBBofC may have been somewhat complicit in the smokescreen but at least when things were made public they did act as the circuit breaker for the fight being cancelled. Or 'postponed' as the promotors are claiming. Sadly, their reward will probably be being sued.

As a result of the positive VADA test, someone has advised Benn to take a UK Anti Doping Agency test and it apparently came up clean. What I am really skeptical about is two things :

1/ Did the UK Anti Doping Agency actually test for fertility drug VADA found in Benn's system?

2/ Benn was tested by VADA in I think early August and the result for the test provided on I think August 23rd. When was the UK Anti Doping Agency test done? As the VADA test only detected a trace of the fertility drug, was there long enough between the two tests for that trace to be no longer detectable?

OK so I cannot readily recall who said what now as I've watched so many interviews today with different people but

1) It's possible (though I don't know) that this fertility drug isn't on UKAD's prohibition list just like the Saunders nasal spray wasn't either, if that's the case then no doubt they wouldn't have screened for it
2) Dan Rafael said that the urine sample was taken on September 1st, you're saying August 23 so maybe VADA took it in August and UKAD in Sep? Although I'm pretty sure DR was talking about VADA testing because he was making the point that by mid-September the results would have been in

I think the public outrage at Matchroom's behaviour in trying to continue with the fight will save the BBBC from being sued, filing against them would be a terrible miscalculation of the public mood, Barry surely can see this even if Eddie is too blinded with rage.

 

[46 Wins]

I think there was potentially weeks and weeks between the VADA test being conducted and the UKAD test. So even if the UKAD test did include testing for the fertility drug it may not have been detectable after weeks and weeks previously having only been present as a trace.

Yes that's true. Although even if they tested 48 hours after VADA and didn't find the drug it wouldn't make any difference. No one (Team Benn included surely) is disputing that the drug was in his system when VADA tested him but if he is then he should have demanded right away that the B sample was tested, he didn't do that and so he knows what he's done. Not calling for the B test to be tested means you expect that if it's tested it will return the same result, you don't lack confidence in the integrity of the testing because you know you were cheating

 

[46 Wins]

• Below are a couple of relevant paragraphs from UKAD. ( there is no innocent explanation for having a female fertility drug in the system.)
• 
  
• 
  
• Not all substances are specifically named on the List. The List states that any other substances with a similar chemical structure or similar biological effect(s) are also prohibited even if not specifically named
• 
  
• Non-specified substances are those where there is no non-doping explanation for having these substances in an athlete’s system

When I read the second bullet-point I thought wow that's harsh, imagine items not named on the banned list being banned and it being your fault still if you take them even though you can't see the name on the list. But then I read the last bullet point and that makes it all alright, it's crystal clear after you read that. In plain English it means the substance is not naturally-occuring, isn't used to treat any condition and will only be found in the body if wilfully ingested for the purpose of gaining an unfair sporting advantage.

I think Benn needs to hold his hands up here before it gets any worse. We gave Miller a second chance after he apologised, I recommend that route for baby Benn too and fast. Taking us for fools won't do him any good in the long run.

 

[46 Wins]

Yep from what I can tell from Eddie Hearns ramblings on Wednesday was that VADA is not the official testing agency of the British Board so there tests have no official relevance ..Because his UKAD tests were negative Conor Benn has not committed any violation. So essentially the Board should not have intervened.

Even Conor Benn when asked on Wednesday did not deny having the drug in his system. He stated he has not committing a violation. I presume from their legal teams perspective it cannot be a violation if it did not show up in the UKAD.

Sounds about right and I agree. For all we know the offending drug is not even on UKADs prohibition list so they wouldn't test for it anyway. And therefore if the promoters sued the BBBC (assuming that they are the reason the fight has had to be cancelled) I'd expect them to be successful. But that's a short term victory which imo will cause long term reputational and financial harm to the business.

 

[46 Wins]

I think Benn will likely cling to the hope that the UKAD negative test can make the VADA positive test go away. It worked for Dillian Whyte. His situation for the Rivas fight was very similar to Benn's here and as we saw, he was never handed a penalty. Or if he was, it was never made public.

It makes me think it was Hearn's idea for Benn to take the test with another authority, as that's what Whyte did under him.

Would love to read and hear the communications that took place between Hearn, Sauerland and Benn.

Do we know if UKAD were actually called in to test Benn as I'd been assuming that they just turned up routinely and at random?

With Whyte (fortunately for Matchroom) the public only found out about the failed test after the fight. I bet they were begging the DM not to run the story. The one interview I haven't seen yet is the FW one, I hope that's in my recommended when I wake up

 

[46 Wins]

VADA is voluntary they carry out testing when fighters volunteer to be tested.

True athough it's worth noting that once ranked in the WBC's top 15 you're required to enrol in the programme and failure to do so results in removal from the WBC rankings. Benn here was at no.5 in the WBC list of Welterweights and Eubank Jr at 3 in the Middleweight list, however, with the fight being at a catchweight and no WBC title on the line it's not clear whether this was a WBC ordered test or if the two parties just agreed on the tests between themselves.

 

[46 Wins]

The Dark Destroyer speaks. I won't comment on his comments, that's his son after all (vid only 30 seconds long)

 

[46 Wins]

 

[46 Wins]

It's been a long time since I last saw one but an interview with Robert Smith is needed now, his organisation has questions to answer. Wasserman too since they were happy to let their fighter get in there drained and against someone who failed a drug test, seems as if everyone was thinking about the money. Markowski also needs to get on camera and let us know when it was DAZN were informed of the failed test. Boxing Social or TalkSPORT to conduct the interviews preferably.