... I would ask D if he would "allow" me to post the results when I get them. ...
Just go ahead and post them right here, please. I'll critique them for you. Like these for example:
Say you have a make-believe compound like this: 4-chloro-17a-etioallochol-4-ene-17b-ol-3,11-dione
1. There is a molecular ion of 335 indicating parent less a proton (parent: C19H25O3Cl, MW of 336). There would, in all probability be an ion of 350/349 if the methyl group were present (parent: C20H27O3Cl, MW of 350), and it's NOT there, at least in this hypothetical example I'm using.
2. There is an ion of MW, 301 (parent less Chlorine)
3. There is an ion of MW, 285 (parent less Cl and an Oxygen)
4. There is an ion of MW, 269 (parent less Cl, OH and a methyl group) and 254 (an additional methyl group loss)
5. There is an ion of MW, 238 (parent less Cl, OH, 2-methyl groups and an additional Oxygen)
If one goes through the spectrum, assuming that there is a methyl group on the 17a position, you cannot come up with a similar pattern [i.e., 315, 299(present), 283, 268, 252, respectively]. Therefore, it becomes clear that this compound DOES NOT POSSESS a 17a-methyl, but rather a 17a-H. See what I mean?
Please go ahead and post your results, just like you said you would. This is gonna be fun watching you squirm and explain to all your buddies why you couldn't just STFU when you had a chance!