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


Bloody Elbow


MMA Ratings


Rating Fights


Yahoo MMA Blog


Search this site



Latest Articles


News Corner


MMA Rising


Audio Corner


Oddscast


MMA Dude Bro


Sherdog Radio


Eddie Goldman


Liver Kick 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 | »

Quote of the Week: Keith Kizer on drug testing

By Zach Arnold | December 26, 2009

Print Friendly and PDF

Dan Rafael’s new column on the negotiations between the Pacquiao and Mayweather camps provides this absolute gem from Keith Kizer, head of the Nevada State Athletic Commission:

Arum’s appeal for the commission to handle matters may be hollow because although it has protocols in place for random urine testing during training camps, it doesn’t for blood testing, and to put it in place in time for a March 13 fight is unlikely, according to Keith Kizer, the executive director of the Nevada commission.

We’re very confident that urine tests by themselves cover everything that needs to be covered, but if the camps want to do additional testing through a third party they are welcome to, as long as they also adhere to commission rules,” Kizer told ESPN.com. “Urine testing we could run with today. We could test their urine every day from now until March 13. But blood testing is trickier because we don’t require it. If the commission wanted to change the rule it would have to be at a public meeting and, at the earliest, that would be early to mid-January. We have done some urine testing during training camps. We have those protocols in place. Blood testing is a different story.”

When I wrote the article about The Regulators and The Drug Cheats, I was asked why I contradicted myself when I said that having regulation of the sport is a good thing and yet I provided examples of the various athletic commissions doing, in my view, a sub-standard job. In a perfect world, the commissions would aspire to do the best job possible in regulating the sport. After all, MMA is a sport, right? Treat it like one. Just because Keith Kizer continues to find new ways to astound me doesn’t mean that it dampens my spirit for the business to be regulated in a fair manner.

We’ve seen what the business looks like when regulation is in effect and when it isn’t in effect. I prefer regulation. That doesn’t mean that I’m going to celebrate fecklessness or cronyism when it’s on display, either.

OK, since traffic is slow during the Holiday season, let’s bust out a fun analogy here — I’d like to see MMA regulated and the fighters protected the same way people protect themselves by using condoms during safe sex. Does that illustrate my point better? Now, if you can come up with different analogies for levels of sexual protection as far as blood testing versus urine testing, well, good for you.

Topics: Boxing, Media, Zach Arnold | 18 Comments » | Permalink | Trackback |

18 Responses to “Quote of the Week: Keith Kizer on drug testing”

  1. 45 Huddle says:

    Fighting In Japan = One Night Stand WITHOUT a condom.

    Fighting In America With Urine Testing = Sex with recent ex-girlfriend WITHOUT a condom.

    Fighting In America With RANDOM Urine Testing = Sex with a girlfriend or wife WITHOUT a condom.

    Fighting in America With RANDOM BLOOD TESTING = Sex with a wife WITH a condom on. Plus you have 24/7 cameras on her to monitor what she does. The only way for you to catch her is if she has some technology to trick you…. And then she has to contract a disease…. Give it to you…. You must show symptoms…. And you have to be smart enough to go to the doctor, get the proper test to find out she was a lying whore….

    Too much information? hahaha

  2. Fluyid says:

    I don’t like wearing a condom.

    That’s my official statement for this entry.

    Thank you and goodnight.

  3. Steve4192 says:

    This comment section is going to go gloriously wrong. I look forward to reading it.

  4. Ivan Trembow says:

    “We’re very confident that urine tests by themselves cover everything that needs to be covered.”

    Wow. Quote of the Week, indeed, especially given that urine tests can’t detect HGH.

  5. IceMuncher says:

    Even blood tests can barely detect HGH. It’s already somewhat unreliable as a testing method, and the test has to be taken within 48 hrs of the most recent HGH injection to show up at all. Unless you get lucky with a random test, you probably won’t catch them.

  6. Chuck says:

    Well, if you are having sex with a girl, or performing cunnilingus, there is a chance that blood and/or pee could come out, and no one wants that. So what would you rather taste? Blood, or pee?

    Even thought the analogy here is that protecting the fighters is akin to wearing a condom, but you can still contract syphilis while wearing a condom (the analogy here is that HGH can still go under the radar). But if you DON’T wear a condom, there is a VERY high chance that you can contract AIDS, HIV, Syphilis, Chlamydia, crabs, Herpes, genital warts, etc. So while wearing a rubber (AKA blood testing) isn’t completely sure-fire, it is much better and safer without wearing a rubber (AKA doing just urine testing). Does that help?

  7. Alex Sean says:

    It’s kind of hard to say when virtually every regulated sporting event in the world has sub-standard testing procedures. The Olympics are always given this aura of infallibility when their testing procedures and regulating bodies are some of the most corrupt to ever be involved in sports.

    The truth is, whether people want to believe it or not, but MMA has never truly ever been legitimately regulated. Even with pre or post fight urine testing that still doesn’t account for blood testing or out of competition testing. That right there already leaves the door wide open, and that’s not even covering the inaccuracy or methods to cheat these tests.

    There’s a great documentary called “Bigger, Faster, Stronger*” which is about steroids and steroids in our culture. One point that was raised, which I believe to be very relevant, is that these substances are banned due to their ability to enhance performance. Tiger Woods a few years ago got Lasik eye surgery which gave him 20-15 vision. Is that not performance enhancing? And to expand upon that, what about the surgery that Nick Diaz and Wanderlei Silva have gotten to reduce cuts? Are those not performance enhancing? How about fixing a deviated septum? Doesn’t improving your ability to breathe enhance your performance? We overlook the countless things athletes have done or consume that enhance performance that are perfectly legal, yet demonize others. I’m not saying steroids or any performance enhancing substances should or should not be legal, but how about we as a culture and the people who represent these states in charge of regulating this sport come to an actual cohesive and non-contradictory consensus.

    Ultimately with all the advances in science, the methods of cheating, and the inaccuracy in testing, no sport will ever truly be regulated. The question is; Do we regulate as much as we possibly can, which is very costly and subject to error, or do we choose not to focus on regulation and perhaps use that money elsewhere like having more comprehensive methods of making sure fighters are healthy?

  8. 45 Huddle says:

    Tommy John Surgery is the pinnacle of performance enhancing….

    They put a tendon in your arm that I believe is from your leg….

    The fact that it is acceptable in baseball is beyond comical….

  9. Grape Knee High says:

    45, you never cease to amaze.

    But I am certainly not surprised that a Yankees fan could possibly be ignorant to baseball reality, much less the facts surrounding Tommy John surgery.

  10. 45 Huddle says:

    Tell me the error of my ways smart one….

    the surgery isn’t just fixing something that is wrong. Most doctors say it actually improves on nature. Hence the issues with it…..

  11. Grape Knee High says:

    LOL. No, they don’t.

    The small sample of pitchers who are supposedly throw better after the surgery is because of more rigorous conditioning and changed pitching mechanics.

    And if by “improve on nature” you mean, fix something that wouldn’t have otherwise broken down because one played a sport, then by that ludicrous definition, you might be right. You must be against ACL reconstruction as well.

    “Baseball wisdom” from a Yankees fan: the ultimate oxymoron. What next, you going to use Eric Gagne as your example for why Tommy John makes pitchers throw harder? LOL.

  12. smoogy says:

    Hey 45 Huddle: “Rookie of the Year” was a fictional story, not a documentary.

  13. 45 Huddle says:

    Not sure what my favorite team has to do with this. I live in the North East. I have lived near both Boston and New York. I have talked with both devoted Red Sox and Yankees fans. They happen to make up some of the most educated baseball fans in the world. And when talking about this surgery, some fans believe there should be an (*) next to the pitchers name in the record books.

    Even Yankee announcers have talked about the surgery during the telecast and both pitchers and hitters alike have agreed that it is almost an unfair advantage. These are legends who have played the game and have seen the results first hand.

    Taking a ligament from your leg and putting it in your arm is not normal. When a pitcher comes back pitching the ball faster then before, it is because of the surgery. You don’t see a guy getting reconstructive knee surgery and then becoming faster on the bases. The vast majority of them slow down because of it. With TJS, more often then not they are better pitchers afterwards.

    That makes it performance enhancing….

  14. samsc says:

    Back to the issue at hand..I think Zach is being a bit silly, as are most of the mayweather-backers in this scenario. I’m not saying Zach is pro-Mayweather, but my point is that this whole blood testing request i’m pretty sure is going beyond what any of the top sports in America require…

    Correct me if I’m wrong (and i could be) but the NFL, NBA, and MLB do NOT require blood testing. And doesnt the NFL test for EPO using urine??

    I’m not saying that these organizations are drug-free…theyre certainly not..but they all are the pinacle of their respective sports, and only require urine testing. Why are you (Zach) having this holier-than-thou attitude with respect to Kizer’s statement, when EVERY other major sport in this country does the same thing?

    I know…youre gonna say: ‘well those sports should have blood testing.’ Sure, maybe they should, but the fact of the matter is that currently they represent the highest caliber athletic leagues in the world and they DO NOT require blood testing…yet Zach and the Mayweather-backers are acting like its outrageous for anyone (Pacquiao/Kizer) not to do blood testing…

  15. Grape Knee High says:

    With TJS, more often then not they are better pitchers afterwards

    Facts are important. Old wives’ tales about Tommy John are not.

    http://www.scientificamerican.com/blog/post.cfm?id=does-tommy-john-surgery-give-pitche-2009-04-05

  16. Dave says:

    Did Alex Sean just imply getting a broken nose fixed is somehow wrong? WTF.

  17. sammy says:

    Nice….good response Zach.

    I know you read my post.

Comments

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