Friend of our site


MMA Headlines


UFC HP


Bleacher Report


MMA Fighting


MMA Torch


MMA Weekly


Sherdog (News)


Sherdog (Articles)


Liver Kick


MMA Junkie


MMA Mania


MMA Ratings


Rating Fights


Yahoo MMA Blog


MMA Betting


Search this site



Latest Articles


News Corner


MMA Rising


Audio Corner


Oddscast


Sherdog Radio


Video Corner


Fight Hub


Special thanks to...

Link Rolodex

Site Index


To access our list of posting topics and archives, click here.

Friend of our site


Buy and sell MMA photos at MMA Prints

Site feedback


Fox Sports: "Zach Arnold's Fight Opinion site is one of the best spots on the Web for thought-provoking MMA pieces."

« | Home | »

More stupid human tricks with Dana White

By Zach Arnold | August 14, 2007

Print Friendly and PDF

By Zach Arnold

Related links: Criticism of White’s ESPN interview on steroids and Fightlinker on White’s absurd nandrolone claims

When it comes to the issue of MMA’s drug culture, there are plenty of smart people who work for Zuffa LLC (the parent company of UFC) who understand how big the problem really is. Marc Ratner and Dr. Margaret Goodman are two names that come to mind. There’s no question that both are respected individuals on the issue of drugs in combat sports. Eddie Goldman recently interviewed Dr. Goodman about this very subject.

So, to see someone like Dana White continue to play defense instead of offense in the mainstream media about MMA fighters failing drug tests is pretty pathetic. As I’ve stated before on past episodes of Fight Opinion Radio, White is starting to become a public liability in terms of UFC’s credibility — especially on the issue of drugs in MMA. Instead of forwarding all drug-related questions to Ratner or Goodman, he manages to screw things up by opening his mouth and making uneducated statements that will come back to haunt him one day.

Today, White inserted his foot right into his mouth during an interview with Steve Sievert of The Houston Chronicle.

“It’s a hot topic right now. I think it’s a bit of a witch hunt. It’s a fun thing to talk about for the media. At the end of the day, guys have been taking steroids since the (expletive) 1960s. I think the media is making a lot out of it. Steroids have been here forever, and they’re going to be here forever.”

“Now, to take it to that next level … I take care of all my guys (with bonus money). Now, I’m going to wait and see if they pass their drug test (before giving payments). That’s just brutal. These guys already lose the ability to make a living for a (expletive) year. These guys literally go broke for a year.”

(Is the third paragraph Steve’s quoting of a recent interview White did with ESPN or did Dana parrot his ESPN statements to Steve?)

“When these guys in MMA go out and compete, they’re tested by the government. And, when they get caught, they lose their ability to make a living. Imagine if you did something wrong and you had to lose your ability to make a living for six months to a year. People keep asking me, ‘What else are you going to do to these guys?’ What the (expletive) do you want me to do to these guys? Drag them into the street and have all the villagers stone ’em to death? You take this guy’s ability to make a living away for a year … you’re tarnished once people think you did steroids, then you have to fight your way back up to the top again. It’s like starting at rock bottom.”

Now, let’s go through what White stated here.

It’s a hot topic right now. I think it’s a bit of a witch hunt.

If the phrase ‘witch hunt’ sounds familiar to you, it should. It was (and still is now with a Congressional investigation happening now) a term that the McMahon family (WWE) used when the Feds were going after Vince McMahon in the 1990s on steroid charges. In a 1992 interview that Mike Mooneyham conducted with Linda McMahon, she was quoted as saying the following:

We’ve spent a great deal of time investigating and looking into the issues, looking into charges or allegations that have been made, to try to get to the cause or the reasons behind what’s promoting this witch hunt.

Mr. White may want to avoid using the term ‘witch hunt’ in relation to media stories on steroids in MMA in the near future.

It’s a fun thing to talk about for the media.

When I wrote the three articles regarding drug abuse in pro-wrestling and MMA (article links here, here, and here), I certainly didn’t have a lot of fun investigating the various kinds of horse steroids that fighters are currently taking. I sure didn’t have a lot of fun covering the deaths of many professional wrestlers (who are dropping like flies), which included deaths of some individuals who I was either a friend or acquaintance of.

It’s not fun for me personally to talk about fighters on growth hormone. It’s not fun for readers and fans following MMA, either.

White tries to minimize the impact of steroids in his next statement.

At the end of the day, guys have been taking steroids since the (expletive) 1960s.

This line should sound familiar to pro-wrestling fans. It was trotted out during the Chris Benoit murder-suicide scandal, as people in or around pro-wrestling would state publicly that just because Benoit killed his family didn’t mean that steroids were the ultimate reason for him doing that heinous act. After all, steroids have been around wrestling since the 1960s.

That’s the context that White is essentially using here to justify that statement. He’s sounding an awful lot like Vince McMahon now.

I think the media is making a lot out of it. Steroids have been here forever, and they’re going to be here forever.

OK, fine. Steroids and growth hormone aren’t going away. I understand that. However, as the leading promoter of an industry that is growing in large numbers like MMA, your responsibility as a promoter is to ensure the credibility of the playing field in your sport. Without credibility, a sport isn’t that big of a draw. McMahon and WWE are the exception, not the rule. Furthermore, do you want to have the same level of credibility for your product as McMahon currently enjoys (which is next to none)?

Why don’t you just take the stance that McMahon did in the 80s when Jimmy Snuka got in trouble? “Look, I’m in the garbage business,” is what McMahon supposedly stated to an attorney.

“Now, to take it to that next level … I take care of all my guys (with bonus money). Now, I’m going to wait and see if they pass their drug test (before giving payments). That’s just brutal. These guys already lose the ability to make a living for a (expletive) year. These guys literally go broke for a year.”

Unless White can produce a contract that shows an out-clause in which UFC can refuse to pay a fighter what is stated on their contract, then what’s really going to happen when a big-name fighter tests positive for steroids? If a big-name fighter has a base pay of $200,000 or more plus a cut of the PPV revenue, generally those are stated in a contract. So how would bonus money effect that? The only fighters bonus money would severely effect happen to be the undercard fighters. What kind of message is that sending to fighters?

The irony in Mr. White stating that fighters wouldn’t be able to make a living is laughable because… drum roll please… many of the undercard fighters in UFC have to work day jobs because they don’t make enough money working for Zuffa LLC. Kind of like how a news oulet pushed a story angle about Frankie Edgar being a plumber during the day and a fighter at night. Wonder if a failed drug test suspension would keep him from working at that plumbing job, ‘eh?

When these guys in MMA go out and compete, they’re tested by the government. And, when they get caught, they lose their ability to make a living.

Claiming that ‘the government’ is doing drug testing of fighters. That is completely false. The fact that he can’t even get the concept of states’ rights and federalism correct is appalling. There is no uniform drug testing standard from state-to-state in America. There was no drug testing when UFC 69 took place last April in Houston, Texas.

And how does a drug suspension stop a fighter from making a living? It doesn’t. Whether it’s sponsorships or just heading to another country to fight during the suspension, there are plenty of ways that guys can make a living if they get suspended by a state athletic commission. Of course, not everyone agrees.

Here’s Sam Caplan to respond the rest of the way.

Topics: Media, MMA, UFC, Zach Arnold | 31 Comments » | Permalink | Trackback |

31 Responses to “More stupid human tricks with Dana White”

  1. Alex says:

    Zach,

    Good post, but you know this is a little disingenuous:

    “And how does a drug suspension stop a fighter from making a living? It doesn’t. Whether it’s sponsorships or just heading to another country to fight during the suspension, there are plenty of ways that guys can make a living if they get suspended by a state athletic commission.”

    If Sherk is suspended, you know he’s not going to go fight in Japan. He’s under contract with the UFC, and he knows that if he disobeys the commission’s orders, he risks not getting relicensed. For the top level guys, Dana is 100% right. For a guy like Franca, he can go work at Lowes or do some personal training in a gym to get by. Someone with a lifestyle like Liddell or Ortiz in terms of financial liabilities would be hurt with a mandatory year off and loss of sponsorships.

  2. Zach Arnold says:

    It’s a fair point, albeit I look at someone like Royce Gracie as far as heading to Japan even while suspended…

    It also depends on how hard UFC wants to keep a steroid cheater around or under contract. Plus, those contracts (to my knowledge) are the vaunted independent contractor-style deals, meaning if a fighter has enough money to challenge in court to break it to fight for someone else, it’s possible. You just don’t see it happen in WWE because all the workers have been so afraid to take on McMahon (mainly for financial reasons).

  3. 45 Huddle says:

    When he is talking about bonuses, I believe he is talking about Fight, KO, & Sub of the Night. For a lot of undercard fighters, that additional $30,000 can be more then their actual fight purse. So that is a legit punishment.

    I think you are grasping at straws at this point. It would be an issue if the UFC constantly avoided athletic commission states. They aren’t.

  4. 45 Huddle says:

    A few other points.

    1. Last time I checked, the states do have their own governments. So he is right in saying that they have the government drug test.

    2. If a fighter is under UFC contract, thy can’t fight anywhere else. And they aren’t getting paid for fights while under suspension. So they are losing out on making a living.

    3. The McMahon vs. White comparison is a joke. McMahon is a roider himself who gives his biggest pushes to big roided up freaks. By his booking practices alone, he is promoting steroid use. White promotes many fighters, not all of them who are ripped. There is no centralized pressure from the UFC to use these type of drugs like there is in the WWE (whether it is spoken or unspoken).

  5. Zach Arnold says:

    I think you are grasping at straws at this point. It would be an issue if the UFC constantly avoided athletic commission states. They aren’t.

    White claims that fighters are tested by the government. They’re not. It’s a state-to-state issue.

    Where did I accuse him of running away from athletic commissions? I didn’t. That’s a red herring you’re floating out there in your rebuttal.

  6. 45 Huddle says:

    They are tested by the government. They are tested by the STATE GOVERNMENTS. And the UFC’s policy is to not run in states until they are regulated.

  7. Just another MMA mark says:

    Dana needs to keep his mouth shut for the good of the company, but I think he just loves the spotlight too much to restrain himself from taking interviews and getting personal mainstream attention from ESPN, SI, etc… They need a real promotional spokesman.

  8. jgass says:

    How are they going to make a living if suspended? How about go out and get a job just like everyone else?! I have no sympathy. If they get suspended that is their own fault.

    White’s comments seem to imply that people have they right to go out and fight for money. No they don’t. It is a privilege extended to certain individuals by the state, in the same manner as a drivers license. If you do not meet the criteria for a drivers license, you don’t get one and you have to find another way to your job. If you don’t meet the criteria for a professional fighter (in this case competing drug free) you lose your eligibility to compete and have to find some other way to make a wage. Just like everyone else.

  9. Ivan Trembow says:

    The whole “witch hunt” angle sounds remarkably similar to Vince McMahon saying that the media is picking on him for asking questions about steroid use in WWE.

    “Steroids have been here forever, and they’re going to be here forever” is also something that Vince McMahon, Jerry McDevitt, and Co. have said numerous times in so many words.

    The whole “What the (expletive) do you want me to do to these guys?” aspect of this is getting old quickly, as the “what to do” is very simple: Institute random, year-round drug testing.

    Zuffa could hire WADA or USADA to carry out such a program using a small fraction of the company’s annual profits, or they could use the same amount of money to fund the athletic commissions’ ability to carry it out.

    With Kenny Florian, Kalib Starnes, Rob McCullough, and other Zuffa-contracted fighters in calling for random, year-round drug testing (and numerous other fighters saying that they would welcome more testing in general), it just highlights how unusual the situation is for a major sport.

    Usually, if the management or owners in a given sport push for comprehensive drug testing, the athletes and their union fight against it (paging Donald Fehr).

    In MMA, the athletes are publicly calling for year-round testing and the management has repeatedly said in interviews that they don’t know what else they can do besides supporting the athletic commission’s legally binding suspensions that they’d have no choice but to support anyway. It’s exactly the opposite of the way it is in most major sports.

    PS: It’s a red herring to say that these guys can’t make a living for a year if they can’t fight in MMA for a year. For many of them, they don’t make a living just from MMA anyway. That includes world-class fighters like Jon Fitch, and even Frank Mir when he was the UFC Heavyweight Champion.

    45 Huddle said: “And the UFC’s policy is to not run in states until they are regulated.”

    I suppose that’s why they ran an event with their own regulation in Manchester, and in Belfast, and soon to be London.

    The UFC has publicly taken the position that MMA promotions should not run shows in areas where MMA is legal but not regulated, and yet they have defied that stance on multiple occasions with the U.K. shows.

  10. Torgo says:

    “White claims that fighters are tested by the government. They’re not. It’s a state-to-state issue.”

    Wow. Be wrong-er, somehow?

    And with that one, this site’s credibility plummets further. The bit about how easy it is to deal with suspensions is pretty laughable too.

  11. Ivan Trembow says:

    In regards to “government testing,” the test sample is going to the same Quest Diagnostics or equivalent lab that any other drug testing program would use. That’s not a major difference.

    What IS a major difference between MMA’s drug testing and that of every other major drug-tested sport is that other sports have random, out-of-competition testing.

    MMA fighters know when they’re going to be tested, and there’s a reason for the old saying that when an athlete knows the date of an upcoming drug test, it’s more of an IQ test than an actual drug test. The majority of cheaters will pass their drug tests if they know the date of the test, and if you don’t believe that, then you don’t know very much about drug testing.

    As for suspensions and fighting overseas, this is an area where the athletic commissions have implied in the past that promotions could lose their promoters’ license if they use a suspended (or “license denied”) fighter overseas, or that a fighter who competes overseas while under suspension would be unlikely to be granted a license to fight in the state again.

    In both of those cases with high-profile, recent examples, that has proven to not be the case. Hong-Man Choi was denied a license in California due to the life-shortening tumors in his brain. Yet, the CSAC says that they have no jurisdiction on overseas events and that FEG/K-1 would not face any repercussions in California if they chose to use Choi on K-1 events overseas, which K-1 recently did.

    The Nevada commission has also said in the past that a fighter may not be granted a license to fight in Nevada again if they fight overseas while serving an NSAC drug suspension. Yet, Vitor Belfort openly defied his NSAC drug suspension by fighting for Cage Rage in England, and according to the Wrestling Observer the NSAC says that Belfort would still likely be granted a license to fight in Nevada if he applies for one in the future.

    Obviously, if a fighter is under an exclusive Zuffa contract with the UFC or WEC, they’re not going to fight overseas while serving a drug suspension. But if a fighter is released from their Zuffa contract, or if the last fight on their Zuffa contract was the fight after which they failed a drug test, they could absolutely go overseas and fight to their heart’s content even while being under a drug suspension in the United States.

    PS: The statement about Hong-Man Choi’s brain tumors being “life-shortening” was not a flippant remark; it is the reality of what happens if you have Acromegaly and you don’t get it treated, particularly if the tumors have been shown to be hemorrhaging in at least one brain scan.

  12. Zach Arnold says:

    “White claims that fighters are tested by the government. They’re not. It’s a state-to-state issue.”

    Wow. Be wrong-er, somehow?

    And with that one, this site’s credibility plummets further. The bit about how easy it is to deal with suspensions is pretty laughable too.

    Saying drug testing happens by ‘the government’ is the equivalent of stating that a police investigation ran by city and state police is being ran by ‘the Feds.’ Give me a break. State government vs. *the* government. The semantics do matter here PR-wise, which is why saying ‘we’re drug-tested by the government’ sounds like pretty nice PR, doesn’t it?

    This site’s credibility plummets further? Really? Let me know when I’ve made major mistakes in terms of writing, reporting, or analysis that are so egregious that they are credibility-killers. Obviously it hasn’t harmed you to the point of not coming to this site any more.

    Mocking “how easy it is to deal” with suspensions… you mean kind of like how Choi Hong-Man fought (and beat) Gary Goodridge in Hong Kong the day before a CSAC hearing to determine whether or not he could ever get licensed in America? You mean like when Armando Garcia admittedly publicly that California (as a state athletic governing body) couldn’t keep Hong-Man on the sidelines outside of the state of California?

    Stop being a mark. Feel free to not come back any time soon, either.

  13. Ivan Trembow says:

    Zach, some of those posts are too long to be lumped into one post. Normally I appreciate it, but some things are meant to be separate such as the part that begins ” 45 Huddle said: “And the UFC’s policy is to not run in states until they are regulated.”

  14. Torgo says:

    “Saying drug testing happens by ‘the government’ is the equivalent of stating that a police investigation ran by city and state police is being ran by ‘the Feds.’ Give me a break. State government vs. *the* government. The semantics do matter here PR-wise, which is why saying ‘we’re drug-tested by the government’ sounds like pretty nice PR, doesn’t it?”

    “THIS JUST IN: DANA WHITE FAILS TO SPECIFY BETWEEN STATE AND FEDERAL GOVERNMENT! HOPELESS IDIOTS EVERYWHERE CONFUSED! SAVE US, ZACH ARNOLD, YOU’RE OUR ONLY HOPE!”

    And no, I mean more like Wanderlei being kept off the final Pride show in Japan because of his NSAC suspension

    OOPS

  15. Zach Arnold says:

    They wanted to book Silva vs. Sakuraba for the 4/8 PRIDE 34 show, but it didn’t happen because the request was made to K-1 (who has Sakuraba under contract) a week before the show. Furthermore, Silva’s medical suspension was set to expire on 4/11 — only three days after the PRIDE 34 show, meaning that if PRIDE really wanted to they could have had a doctor medically clear Silva and the NSAC would have considered it.

  16. Torgo says:

    Exactly, if they really wanted Silva on the japanese show the NSAC would have considered allowing it

    I realize the CSAC does things a bit differently… but Armando Garcia does EVERYTHING differently, doesn’t he

  17. Jack says:

    Those with enough intelligence to actually follow what you’re saying perfectly understand the issue that this is NOT testing by ‘THE GOVERNMENT’. Marks like Torgo seem to have no concept of how much Mr. White like to spin his web of deceit to his newfound ‘mainstream media’ marks. The ‘fanboy’ sites will call a spade a spade, something Mr. White cannot tolerate.

    Has anyone seen any UFC steroid scandal stories on ESPN (TV, web or print) or in Sports Illustrated throughout this spectacle?

    Keep your ear to the ground and your back to wind Zach, the audience is listening; there will always be marks there in need of guidance.

  18. Rohan says:

    Whatever your position on steroids, White is making a huge mistake taking this position in public. All it will take is one more mainstream news programme to take an interest in an MMA piece and put White’s comments to him on screen and ask him to justify his stance on “boys will be boys”, and “it’s right I pay them anyway”. I hope he would avoid doing a “Costas” but the mud would stick, and stick bad. It would not quite be a death in a cage story but it would have sufficient legs to endanger TV deals potentially.

  19. Fred says:

    Fighting steroids is not Dana’s problem. He’s an MMA promoter, not an anti-drug crusader. To Dana’s credit, he understands that athletes in all sports (including MMA) use roids for primarily for injuries and recovery time, not to get big and buff. Using steroids is not like Popeye eating his spinach and getting instantly supersized to knock everybody out. That being said, Dana seems to respect the position of the Commissions on steroids, and Dana said he would “probably” strip Sherk if the CSAC upholds his suspension. What more is he supposed to do?

    The steroid “problem” didn’t develop overnight, and it’s not going to be solved overnight. Putting it all on Dana’s back is a bogus solution to it.

  20. Grape Knee High says:

    “And the UFC’s policy is to not run in states until they are regulated.”

    45 Huddle, did you actually write this or did your inner retard sneak it in?

    “If a big-name fighter has a base pay of $200,000 or more plus a cut of the PPV revenue, generally those are stated in a contract. So how would bonus money effect that?”

    Zach, if Matt Hughes is to be believed, he recently said in an interview that PPV cuts are no longer happening (with the implication that it is all paid as straight bonus). This bit of news, in conjunction with Dana’s “we’re not paying their bonuses until they pass their piss test”, seems like it is a pretty good deterrent for the marquee fighters.

  21. Zach Arnold says:

    I’d be shocked if the PPV % cuts were eliminated. If so, the question then is this: Is Dana going to raise the base pay or is he short-changing the fighters by paying the same base amount but no longer doing the cuts? If it’s the former, then that actually would be a positive step and could give him leverage in punishing fighters who fail tests. If it’s the latter, it’s a double-whammy for him PR-wise (paying the fighters less, which in turns sends a message that either business is down or UFC is keeping more of the money).

  22. AS says:

    I think Dana makes several valid points.

    1)The media does love the story. If you cover MMA the story has been a banaza thanks to the timing with the Benoit tragedy and Bonds chase. Not to point fingers or say theres anything wrong with it, but Zach you yourself got a nice byline on Sportsline thanks to the this issue. Business is business, and this story has been good business for the MMA media.

    2)Steroids will always be a part of competitive sports. The testing will always lag behind the cheating. HGH anyone?

    3)What more do people want? The commissions will suspend the guys for a year and Dana won’t pay them. That will get people’s attention more than anything else that could be done. As for the idea that the UFC’s contractors are less than iron clad, if anyone takes their contract with Zuffa to court, I’m going to bet on Zuffa’s skilled in-house team anytime. Contracts is the foundation of thier business, I have to believe they get it right.

    The only thing I dsiagree with is why Dana’s out there saying these things himself. In general I think Dana is over exposed. They could really use a spokesman.

  23. Zack says:

    Great article Zach.

  24. Grape Knee High says:

    “I’d be shocked if the PPV % cuts were eliminated. If so, the question then is this: Is Dana going to raise the base pay or is he short-changing the fighters by paying the same base amount but no longer doing the cuts?”

    Zach, why does he need to raise base pay? He can just hand them optional bonuses not explicitly tied to PPV cuts (or wins).

    Think about the bonus Babalu received in the ambulance after being knocked out by Liddell. Zuffa pays bonuses whenever they please, and this can form a total compensation package equivalent to PPV shares.

  25. The Gaijin says:

    2)Steroids will always be a part of competitive sports. The testing will always lag behind the cheating. HGH anyone?

    There is a test for HGH – and a rather inexpensive one at that. Most pro sports just support this false claim so that they do not have to test for it.
    (Source: Dick Pound)

  26. Torgo says:

    “Those with enough intelligence to actually follow what you’re saying perfectly understand the issue that this is NOT testing by ‘THE GOVERNMENT’. Marks like Torgo seem to have no concept of how much Mr. White like to spin his web of deceit to his newfound ‘mainstream media’ marks. The ‘fanboy’ sites will call a spade a spade, something Mr. White cannot tolerate.”

    Listen, just because you’re a zach arnold mark and I disagree with you doesn’t make ME a dana white mark. You’ll notice I never protest when there’s an ACTUAL legitimate complaint about the guy. Just stupid manufactured highschool drama like this little situation is too much for any rational person to stay quiet about.

    The labored logic it takes to twist Dana White’s “government testing” remark into an untrue statement is a good example of “No True Scotsman,” (perhaps in reverse) an insane little line of twisted reasoning that goes something like this

    Argument: “No Scotsman puts sugar on his porridge.”
    Reply: “But my uncle Angus likes sugar with his porridge.”
    Rebuttal: “Aye, but no TRUE Scotsman puts sugar on his porridge.”

    Oh sure… the government enforces and oversees fighter steroid testing… but not THE GOVERNMENT. You know, the REAL government. The Federal one. The government you KNOW dana white was trying to make you think tested… you just KNOW it. Because he’s a LIAR.

    Redefining a word in order to make someone into a liar is just absolutely insane. Complete tin foil hat stuff.

    Credibility = 0

    And the real shame of it is, there’s plenty of REAL problems to worry about here without having to invent them. The fact alone that the UFC seems to be full of roid monkeys lately should be enough to write about without having to abuse the English language like this in a petty game of semantics.

  27. Grape Knee High says:

    Gaijin, saying that there is an HGH test is a straw man. You’re not addressing the point that performance enhancing drug testing will always be behind the performance enhancing drug technology. Always.

    Look at Balco’s Cream and Clear combo. The only reason they know to test for that now is because a track and field coach blew the whistle. Before that? Nothing. No one even knew it existed.

    What about gene doping? Nothing yet (that I know of).

    Much of the time, athletes are not caught because they piss out a performance enhancer; they get caught because they piss out a substance that is not a performance enhancer in and of itself, but because they piss out a substance that is used as a masking agent for the enhancer. This is another potential point of failure to keep up with.

  28. The Gaijin says:

    I don’t follow your point…how is it a “straw man” that his statement was absolutely false?

    There EXISTS a test for HGH and there has now for some time. People like MLB and Dana etc. just feed off this and many other misconceptions so that they can shrug their shoulders and say “hey there’s no test, these guys are just ahead of the curve”.

    Yes people are ahead of the curve on some things, HGH is not one of them, so why don’t they test for it?

    It’s piss poor rhetoric to say “ooh there will always be cheating, because there is lag”. Well should that stop people from testing? Should you just let people abuse dangerous performance enhancers?

    My answer is a resounding “NO”. People, such as Dana need to start taking some more responsibility and be part of the movement to make a statement and severely penalize people who are caught and to start enacting more preventative measures.

  29. Grape Knee High says:

    No argument here on the steroid testing. I just think your way of trying to discount his point about testers being behind the cheater by using the HGH test was a bit disingenuous since it didn’t address his point. HGH test or not, testers will always be behind the cheaters.

  30. Ivan Trembow says:

    “There is a test for HGH – and a rather inexpensive one at that. Most pro sports just support this false claim so that they do not have to test for it.
    (Source: Dick Pound)”

    That is correct, and there isn’t a valid reason for the athletic commissions to still not be testing for HGH. Yes, the current testing techniques only detect a failure if the athlete takes HGH within a couple of days of when the test is administered, but the same is true for cocaine and we’ve still had several failures for that.

    I also agree with you that the testers will always be behind the cheaters (as that is just the nature of sports drug testing in general), and I hope you’ll agree with me that the absolute most that can be done in terms of testing, should be done, even with the knowledge that many cheaters will be a step ahead.

  31. […] – Zach Arnold talks about Dana White’s stance on steroids from a fighter’s perspective. […]

Comments

*
To prove you're a person (not a spam script), type the security word shown in the picture.
Anti-spam image