Originally Posted by Canadian Psycho
I don't like Jake Shields enough to blindly defend him. If there was evidence that he tested positive for steroids, then you and I would not be having this discussion. As I said earlier, your consistently labelling your own scenario as 'much more likely' and 'common sense' doesn't make it either.
You call it the most possible scenario. You say it's common sense. And then you completely ignore the most relevant fact of all - that Jake was suspended for 6 months and not 1 year (which is standard as far as PED suspensions go). The one fact we actually have, and you ignore it. Funny how that works.
Well Bonnar was suspended for 9 months for steroid use after his 2nd fight with Forrest, not all suspensions are the same. There are other factors involved in that like first time offense, where the fight took place as well as other factors.
But yes, it very much is common sense to look at Jake's situation and say it's far less likely it was weed then it was some substance being used to help add bulk. It's far less likely Jake would hide a positive weed test then it is he would hide a test about a PED or some other banned substance. It's more likely it was a pain killer then weed as well. I don't see the point in hiding a weed test when that is the best possible scenario for Jake. Why leave room for assumption if the truth is the best possible scenario in that situation? Again, common sense.