Friend of our site


MMA Headlines


UFC HP


Bleacher Report


MMA Fighting


MMA Torch


MMA Weekly


Sherdog (News)


Sherdog (Articles)


Liver Kick


MMA Mania


Bloody Elbow


MMA Ratings


Rating Fights


Yahoo MMA Blog


Search this site



Latest Articles


News Corner


MMA Rising


Audio Corner


Oddscast


Sherdog Radio


Eddie Goldman


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 | »

Trapped: Ben Askren’s limited options

By Zach Arnold | November 15, 2013

Print Friendly and PDF

He’s the best free agent welterweight fighter available for any promotion in MMA to sign. In a sport-first climate, Askren wouldn’t be sitting on the sidelines. However, combat sports is and always will be entertainment-first. That’s especially true for Mixed Martial Arts, which is heavily reliant on pro-wrestling fans.

During his run in Bellator, Askren made it clear that he wanted to fight the best in the world and that meant going to the UFC. After he was granted his release from Bellator on Thursday, he reiterated his desire to go to the UFC to beat the best fighters. The problem is that UFC apparently isn’t interested in signing Ben Askren. Dana White seems too busy egging on Rory MacDonald to leave his training partners at Tri-Star in Montreal in order to set up Rory vs. GSP should St. Pierre beat Johny Hendricks on Saturday night in Las Vegas. Rory should ask Rashad Evans how Dana’s gym-busting shenanigans worked out for his career.

If the UFC won’t sign Askren, it means he will have to either go back to Bellator and cut a deal or else sign with UFC stalking horse World Series of Fighting. WSOF is bankrolled by Sig Rogich, top Nevada political fixer who is one of the men responsible for Keith Kizer having his job security at the Nevada State Athletic Commission. Rogich is very close to Marc Ratner & Lorenzo Fertitta. WSOF is UFC’s unofficial bastard child and exists for experimentation in different markets and to sign talent so that they don’t land in Bellator.

The problem for Ben Askren is that he’s all about credibility and relevancy. He didn’t view the competition in Bellator as being on his level. He’ll likely feel the same way about WSOF. Askren is stuck because he doesn’t possess much leverage at the moment with no bidding war on the horizon. Perhaps he (and many other fighters) should read this Cage Potato article about learning lessons from the sport of boxing when it comes to building leverage at the negotiating table.

If he wants to maintain exposure to MMA fans, Bellator remains his best option. If he wants to convince himself that going to UFC stalking horse WSOF means he’s a step closer to getting to the big show, then he’ll take the risk — but it is a mighty risk. He’ll be facing guys like Jon Fitch, Josh Burkman, and Steve Carl. UFC would love to see Askren in WSOF, as it would give them access to file tape to use to promote Askren on television should they decide to bring him in down the road.

All of this is irrelevant if UFC is hoodwinking everyone and is ready to bring Askren in as a surprise. That said, there are plenty of reasons the UFC legitimately isn’t interested in Ben Askren. His fight style is boring for their (shrinking) audience. He’s one of the good guys when it comes to calling out the rampant drug usage in the sport and that is a no-no in the organization that publicly backs anabolic steroid passes for certain fighters. UFC’s track record of bringing in guys from Bellator has been mixed.

So, where does Askren go from here? Bellator’s contracts are onerous but the Viacom-owned league remains his best option to stay relevant and in the public spotlight. If Bellator was gone from the MMA picture, he would have nowhere to go but to WSOF. Interesting to note how WSOF swept right in with a contract offer right after Dana White said they weren’t interested. Let’s see how many people in the press will connect the dots about the UFC/WSOF relationship.

Exit question: Is money really an issue in regards to UFC not wanting to sign Askren? Hard to believe, but this is the same operation that cut bait with Jon Fitch. They look like geniuses now for doing so, but at the time they got creamed for saying Fitch was too expensive. This is an operation that is making $90 million a year from Fox Sports and solid PPV revenue even if the buy rate numbers are in decline.

Topics: Bellator, Media, MMA, UFC, Zach Arnold | 47 Comments » | Permalink | Trackback |

47 Responses to “Trapped: Ben Askren’s limited options”

  1. Jonathan Snowden says:

    I thought it was interesting that the MMA media seemed to think Bellator and Rebney were doing Askren some sort of favor here. Just the opposite.

    It reminds me a bit of Strikeforce publicly stating a lack of interest in Jake Shields. How does it help Askren to tell the only players in the space there will be no competition for his services?

    • nottheface says:

      There’s some pretty big differences though. Askren said he was going to wait for a UFC offer, the UFC said they wouldn’t do anything while he was under a matching clause, and Bellator was getting the blame for the whole situation.

  2. Tomer says:

    Honestly, it doesn’t help Bellator, either, considering that pretty much all of the top guys at WW in Bellator lost to Askren so it’s basically his leftovers fighting amongst themselves for a trinket. Cutting Askren didn’t help him but it didn’t help Bellator’s image, either.

  3. clintboxe says:

    I don’t doubt that there may be a UFC/WSOF connection but where is the proof? How has WSOF experimented in new markets? Has the UFC used any footage yet?

  4. janklow says:

    the thing is, you’d expect WSOF to offer Ben Askren a contract even if they had NO connection to the UFC and the UFC expressed no/minimal interest in Askren.

    Bellator also seems to be getting a severe pass from talking up the legitimacy of their belts/tournaments while cutting their reigning champion.

  5. nottheface says:

    If true, I’m thinking it could be one of two things. First, that it goes hand-in-hand with their releasing of Okami and Fitch. They’re sending a strong signal to the fighters what kind of fighting is acceptable in the UFC. The fact that all of them are or were highly rated just demonstrates the position the UFC has over the market now.

    Second, i think it’s very probable that the previous Bellator offers from the UFC have caused problems for the UFC as much as they have for Bellator. Fighters pay attention to the fact that Lombard, Alvarez, and the Strikeforce guys got better deals than almost everyone coming up in the UFC. Nate Diaz is frustrated that the rest of the Scrap Pack make so much more than him. The leaked Lombard and Alvarez contracts caused more labor problems for them than anything since the Fitch image rights turmoil. Also, counter to most people’s thinking that the Alvarez case would keep fighters away from Bellator it was actually a pretty good advertisement fro going there. Go there and win a tournament against subpar competition and get more money. The UFC is putting an end to this by now completely ignoring the Bellator champ. No longer is there a big UFC payoff at the end of the rainbow.

    • 45 Huddle says:

      The big camps are already avoiding sending there best prospects to Bellator. And the writing on the wall for fighters is:

      You have to basically go undefeated for 3 to 4 years in Bellator…. And THEN go through a lot of legal issues…. Just for a small chance of getting a big payout.

      Bellator has had hundreds of fighters compete for them and exactly ONE so far has made it out alive with a big payday.

      You think Little Pettis had a chance in hell of signing with Bellator? Nope, that camp learned it’s lesson.

      So I’m not so sure this is much in a lesson the Bellator fighters as it is to Ben Askren for being super boring. If Askren was as exciting as Eddie Alvarez, he would have already received an offer, and a good one at that.

      • Nottheface says:

        We should probably ask Snowden to weigh in on this since he’s much more in touch with those in the biz than me, but based on the handful of fighters and the manager I’ve discussed this with the fact Alvarez still got an offer much higher than almost any other LW makes Bellator appealing to certain fighters, namely top prospects at the beginning of their career. What’s going to stop those types from signing with Bellator isn’t a one-time controversy over whether they matched or not, but refusal by the UFC to even go after them once they are finished with their Bellator deals.

  6. The Predictable Johnny Rodz says:

    “WSOF is UFC’s unofficial bastard child and exists for experimentation in different markets and to sign talent so that they don’t land in Bellator.”

    Prove this. And no, “the guy bankrolling WSOF knows Lorenzo Fertitta” is not proof.

    • Zach Arnold says:

      Rogich is a political fixer who used to be on the Nevada State Athletic Commission, is very close to Harry Reid, and is the primo political public relations firm guy in Vegas & has tentacles still in DC. The LA Times in 2009 labeled Rogich as Nevada’s political kingmaker.

      The nexus between the AG’s office (right next door to NSAC), casinos, and fixers is strong. AG’s office helps out with background checks (gaming).

      Ratner, Rogich, Lorenzo, Bill Brady, Avansino, and others in that nexus are … helpful … for Kizer’s job security. Ratner, Rogich, and Lorenzo all worked together at the athletic commission.

      Dana hasn’t said a bad word about WSOF because Rogich is very close to them. If Rogich was an enemy or stranger, WSOF would have been chased out of Las Vegas long ago for shows. Never happened. Zuffa only says positive things in the press about them — which is why when Fitch & Volkmann started ripping UFC for not treating them as well as WSOF, you could hear the horse laughter.

      WSOF now has tentacles into Canada and Japan (through Pancrase in 2014). Guys like Fitch and Burkman didn’t go to Bellator to give Bellator a rub. Okami going to WSOF and likely fighting on the co-promoted Pancrase/WSOF Japan show in 2014 is another win.

      I’m not saying WSOF being UFC’s stalking horse is a bad thing. I think it’s brilliant and am entertained that more people haven’t linked up the political connections yet.

      If you want a piece of paper claiming UFC paid Rogich for WSOF, you’re not going to get that from me. Rogich is flush with lots of cash — WSOF is a fun side hobby for him that just happens to help benefit his close friends in Vegas (UFC).

  7. 45 Huddle says:

    1. I think it is pretty darn obvious that the UFC is filtering the “boring” fighters over to the WSOF. How deep that relationship is behind the scenes remains to be seen. But I tend to agree with Zach Arnold on this one. I do think there is much more talking behind the scenes with these two companies then we will ever know in public.

    2. There are MANY fighters who have no chances of fighting for a title, but they are still with the UFC. Yet the UFC cut Fitch, Okami, & Volkmann when they shouldn’t have been cut. And all because they were boring. Not wanting to sign Askren is just the icing on the cake.

    3. There is a small chance that the UFC is just posturing right now. They are saying they don’t want him. Then they can claim that the fans demanded his signing. And then the UFC can say they ONLY signed him to please the fans, and not because he is a “worthy” addition to the roster. This would be a way to not show that Bellator produced a border Top 10 fighter.

    4. No matter how you slice it…. The UFC has the money and the power to sign Askren tomorrow if they wanted to. So if Ben Askren’s next fight is NOT in the UFC, it is a HUGE black eye to the UFC’s reputation. You combine guys like Nick Diaz & Chael Sonnen getting undeserved title shots with fighters like Okami & Fitch being cut and fighters like Askren not being signed…. And it makes Dana White just as bad as the boxing promoters he claims to hate.

    • Jonathan says:

      If the UFC is the only game in town, then why does it need to worry about its’ reputation?

      • 45 Huddle says:

        People are not required to watch fighting. There are many other forms of entertainment out there they compete against.

        Pissing off a fanbase is not a good idea.

        • Jonathan says:

          I guess I should define what I mean more clearly.

          They are the only fight game in town that has the chance to pay big money, as in there is no other competitor that can legitimately challenge them for fighters.

          I do not think that they are alienating fans by not signing Askren, because at the end of the day, the percentage of people that like to watch him fight are perhaps, 5% of their overall viewing audience, if that?

  8. 45 Huddle says:

    Dave Meltzer pointed out on his website that basically all of the pro’s who were asked predicted Johny Hendricks to beat GSP. And the last time he saw something like that was with Weidman vs. Silva.

    I picked Weidman to win as well.

    I have thought Hendricks is the best challenger to GSP in a very long time. But I am still 50/50 on the fight. Could really see it going either way.

    • Jonathan says:

      Every fight between two fighters is 50/50.

      One will lose, one will win.

      That’s never changed.

      • 45 Huddle says:

        Jones vs. Sonnen was a 95/5 fight.

        GSP vs. Hardy was a 99/1 fight.

        Cain/JDS 3 was a 60/40 fight.

        So no… not every fight starts at 50/50.

        • Jonathan says:

          You are looking at the odds on who is going to win the fight as it relates to the betting lines in Vegas.

          When you have two fighters in the Octagon, one is going to win and one is going to lose. There is the chance that it might be a draw or some non-decision, but that rarely happens.

          I’m looking at the ratios.

  9. david m says:

    I have no reason to think Hendricks can beat GSP. In his last 9 fights he has a loss, 2 split decision wins, a majority decision win, and a fight that likely should have been a split decision against Condit. I thought he lost to Koscheck clearly. Koscheck got KOd by Robbie Lawler and Paulo Thiago, but people dare say Hendricks is the best KO artist in the division? What a fucking joke. RICK STORY was better than this dude over a full 15 minutes. Not a lucky KO, a full fight.

    GSP is better than Hendricks at everything. Hendricks hits hard and is a southpaw, but GSP he is not. GSP is sparring with Lucian Bute and JWP; Hendricks is sparring with Jake Rosholt. The speed and technique differences are going to be quite apparent.

    • david m says:

      I was inspired by this topic to write a blog post on the subject. Check it out if you get a chance. http://jews4ginobili.blogspot.com/2013/11/why-hendricks-is-fools-gold.html

      • Nepal says:

        Just read your article. I think you are spot on in almost everything. I would say GSP won 8/8 against Koscheck, I know 2 of the 3 judges gave the round to Kos but review the fight. Kos did next to nothing and GSP won that round.

        The other thing, Hendricks did beat Pierce in that SD. By any standard, PRIDE or otherwise, Pierce did well but didn\’t deserve a decision.

        Otherwise, Johny has nothing for GSP. Maybe GSP can finish in the 4th or 5th if Johny tires, otherwise 50-45 same same.

        • david m says:

          Thanks man. Hmm, it is possible I need to rewatch Hendricks v Pierce, it has been a while. I rewatched Kos v JH.

          If GSP wins, I expect him to fight winner of Rory v Robbie, if Robbie wins. If Rory wins, we shall see..

        • david m says:

          I rewatched. I think Pierce won. Also, Hendricks landed the Anderson Silva vs Okami DQ kick from his guard, and should have had a point deducted CLEARLY.

    • Nepal says:

      Yeah, the reason Hendricks is given a good chance is the media. They are buying and selling the Hendricks hype. Hendricks has a puncher’s chance (which really is no chance at all). GSP is too smart, we’ve never seen him engage in the pocket and it won’t start in this fight. Hendricks couldn’t even hold Condit down, GSP could be taken down but I suspect will sweep or go for subs from the bottom. Hendricks has nothing, nothing at all other than great power. His stand up has improved over the years and he could land a shot but we’ve seen what GSP does. When Hendricks throws the heat, GSP double legs him and top controls him. 50-45 GSP.

      • 45 Huddle says:

        He has a punchers chance WITH good takedown defense. He has a puncher’s chance WITH a GSP who post surgery had a hard time takibg down Nick Diaz in the late rounds.

        There is a reason the pro’s are picking Hendrick. They know there stuff.

        My pick is now officially for Hendrick. GSP got serious testing for the first time in his career and looks noticably smaller then ever before. He is also the oldest UFC Champion. He is also missing that explosive shot due to knee injuries.

        And Hendricks has found enough of a balance between wrestling and striking that he is much improved over his early UFC days.

        Don’t forget that weidman had some horrible showings early. he still beat Silva.

        Hendricks by 2nd round KO.

        • Jonathan says:

          I am officially going GSP 5 round decision.

          45 Huddle and I are on!

        • david m says:

          On sherdog the majority of fighters took GSP in their predictions. I think also lots of guys just don’t like GSP, mostly out of jealousy. What do you say to the world when you think a guy who got gift decisions against Koscheck and Pierce can beat a guy 10x faster and more athletic, and more technically sound?

          Hendricks cuts a massive amount of weight as well; this is his first 5 round fight, and if it doesn’t go well early, he has no shot and will fade.

        • 45 Huddle says:

          I agree, if the fight goes into the championship rounds, Hendricks could fade. He doesn’t have the best cardio. You see that with some wrestlers. They were built for a 7 minute wrestling match but can’t handle the long grind.

          My prediction still stands…

  10. Jason Harris says:

    Your tireless beating of the drum as VADA being the only infallible option for cleaning the sport has gotten more than a little tired. It’s clear you have an agenda to push that company for one reason or the other, but it’s hurting your credibility on everything else when you look for every reason to advertise VADA’s business. Just give them a banner ad at the top of the site and stop ruining otherwise interesting commentary, please?

    • Zach Arnold says:

      Purposeful misrepresentation.

      1) The idea of drug tested gets neutered when the promoters and the regulators they lobby are giving out anabolic steroid passes. That’s the whole ballgame.

      2) If you’re going to drug test, then do it right. And right now the most effective testing has been done by Goodman’s operation. Their testing has busted guys for microdosing on testosterone pellets. That’s not subjective — that’s a fact. It’s a fact that VADA testing catches guys cheating when the Nevada tests don’t.

      Relatively clear.

      • Jason Harris says:

        You represent VADA by their brand name as the best and only option at any opportunity. You advocate testing and on nearly every occasion use that to promote VADA’s business. You continue to propagate the idea that anyone who doesn’t use VADA is wrong and bad and you attempt to discredit and shame them until they pay for VADA’s services. And most importantly you make sure that you promote their brand name in every post you make waving the flag against testosterone usage.

        It’s the equivalent of when I watch them turn the Miller Lite label towards the screen on Sons of Anarchy, except it’s not being portrayed as sponsorship when you do it even though you clearly have a vested interest in the company.

        The fact that VADA has successfully done what they say they do as a business is fine, but is your argument that they are literally the only company capable of doing testing that you deem “good enough”? Because they’re the only brand name you ever mention, and you go out of your way to mention them every single time you can even remotely get the opportunity. For example, an article about Ben Askren, which has almost nothing to do with the subject.

        I honestly find it hard to believe that you have no ties nor vested interest in the company, because you basically post like you’re their PR team.

        • Zach Arnold says:

          I have zero business ties with anyone in combat sports. It’s why I’ve been honest my entire writing career.

          You don’t see sponsors on here. There are no ad networks. There is nothing under the table. I’ve never accepted “free” tickets for a show. Nothing. Ask my fellow peers and they can back this up.

          But if you want to sound like PRIDE fans did when I was writing about their collapse, go ahead. I was plenty accused of being on UFC payroll.

          You continue to propagate the idea that anyone who doesn’t use VADA is wrong and bad and you attempt to discredit and shame them until they pay for VADA’s services. And most importantly you make sure that you promote their brand name in every post you make waving the flag against testosterone usage.

          I do not make such claims. All I claim is that the testing VADA does is currently the most effective in combat sports. That is fact, not opinion.

          If you want to continue asserting that I have business ties to Margaret Goodman, I will be more than happy to oblige if you want to sue me in court. I would be more than happy to go through both discovery and deposition. Consider it an invitation. I do not violate any laws when it comes to Fight Opinion.

          Time for you to put up or shut up.

        • Jason Harris says:

          “If you want to continue asserting that I have business ties to Margaret Goodman, I will be more than happy to oblige if you want to sue me in court.”

          You are using very specific wording there. You don’t have any ties business or otherwise to anyone involved with VADA?

          Sue you in court? I’m not in the habit of suing bloggers who decide to sacrifice their credibility to promote somebody. I’ll just stop reading.

  11. Diaz's cashed bowl says:

    “If you stand up consistently at every press conference and in every media scrum and say the greatest fighters in the world fight here, and the No. 6 ranked welterweight in the world becomes available unrestricted with no matching rights – and you don’t even make him an offer – then you need to stop saying the best fighters in the world fight there.”

    Thats a fact, jack!
    Another fact, many b grade ufc fighters would fail in bellator, you know the type… no wrestling bangers.

    Another fact, GSP has been putting on askren esque fights for a while now and they go to decision hardy shields koscheck condit diaz. However the last couple of askren fights he has actually finished opponents with pure superior wrestling and ground and pound.

    And the fact is that neither dana or bjorn want askren, mainly for fear that he will remain undefeated and be the unflushable nugget champ.

  12. 45 Huddle says:

    Getting on my soap box….

    Tri-Star Gym has truly ruined Rory MacDonald. An unbelievable prospect who they have basically trained to avoid fighting during a fight.

    He threw almost no strikes in the first round and gave that one away.

    When he was in top position he literally did nothing for 15 seconds at a time.

    Tri-Star is a cancer to the sport at this point.

  13. Jonathan says:

    Why do you think that is 45 Huddle?

    I’m apt to agree with you.

    • 45 Huddle says:

      The camp is using the formula that works for GSP and trying to apply it to other fighters.

      The problem is that GSP is a freak of nature who cannot be duplicated. Using that boring style is just bad for lesser fighters and makes them worse overall.

  14. 45 Huddle says:

    4 rounds into the title fight. I have Hendricks winning 1, 2, & 4. GSP only won round 3. Round 2 was the only debatable round.

  15. Jonathan says:

    We both might be wrong with our picks. You picked Hendricks by KO, and I said GSP by decision. I’m reading the Shedog PBP, and they had it going to Hendricks by one round.

    • 45 Huddle says:

      You got it right, but that was a bad decision.

      GSP got beat up in that fight. No way he should have won it.

      • Jonathan says:

        I didn’t see it, so I can’t speak to it. I guess I won, so I’ll take it.

        He’s the champ, and in those razor close decisions, it’s tough to dethrone the champ.

        I’m sure we’ll get an immediate rematch.

        • 45 Huddle says:

          GSP says he is stepping away from the sport for a while… So no rematch.

          Every single website I can find has Hendricks winning the rounds I said he did.

  16. Jonathan says:

    Like I said, I can’t speak to it as I did not see it.

    I’m not disagreeing with you however.

  17. Zach Arnold says:

    Jason Harris wrote in response to Zach Arnold in response to Jason Harris:

    “If you want to continue asserting that I have business ties to Margaret Goodman, I will be more than happy to oblige if you want to sue me in court.”

    You are using very specific wording there. You don’t have any ties business or otherwise to anyone involved with VADA?

    Sue you in court? I’m not in the habit of suing bloggers who decide to sacrifice their credibility to promote somebody. I’ll just stop reading.

    I have zero business ties to any promoter or sponsor in combat sports — boxing, MMA, muay thai, kickboxing, etc. period. Zero ties.

    You asserted factual claims that were false. I’ve addressed these claims specifically. I stated to you that if you want full disclosure in discovery and deposition in court, I am willing to do that in terms of e-mails, bank records, phone records, etc.

    If you continue to make false factual claims about me in relation to VADA, you are committing libel. I am 100% transparent in my opinions & articles as far as where I am coming from. There are zero conflicts of interest.

    Any assertions that I have business ties to Margaret Goodman or VADA impacts the perception & credibility I have with people in and out of the fight industry when it comes to my writings about drug testing, drug usage, and regulatory bodies.

    • Jason Harris says:

      You continue to be very specific in your wording about business ties to Margaret Goodman and not answering the broader question, and that’s fine.

      The fact is, you use your site like a PR mouthpiece for the organization. Your reasoning not withstanding, you’ll spend 10 massive articles digging deep into the inner workings of the CSAC but gloss over anything negative about VADA while trumpeting everything positive at every opportunity. You can argue your reasoning all you want and that’s fine, we’ll probably never know why you do what you do, but it’s poisoned the writing on this site.

      Your favorite pet topic anymore is spinning every article into a PED tirade, and then trumpeting VADA as the only possible solution. Why you do it? Who knows. But it reads like commercials. Your articles about the CSAC don’t all end in you advocating someone’s business, but somehow your articles about PEDs do. I’ve been poking around reading your stuff for a long time, and this used to be one of the few places for a thoughtful discussion about the sport on the internet. But watching you continue to push a specific agenda at every opportunity, and then push someone’s business as the solution to the huge problem that you are talking about, just feels hollow.

      Maybe you’re just doing it because you actually believe it. Maybe you don’t care about any of the negative or shady things VADA has done because you believe they’re going to clean up the sport. But your articles read like you’re VADA’s version of Billy Mays.

      If you aren’t promoting their business, how about you stop writing articles promoting their business?

      • Zach Arnold says:

        You continue to be very specific in your wording about business ties to Margaret Goodman and not answering the broader question, and that’s fine.

        How much clearer do I have to be in stating the following: I accept nothing in terms of money or gifts from anyone connected to the fight business or regulators? I challenged you to go to court to defend your libelous statements against me.

        You’ve provided zero proof for any of your factual claims about me. If you continue to make libelous statements in an attempt to damage my reputation, then be prepared to go to court.

        The fact is, you use your site like a PR mouthpiece for the organization. Your reasoning not withstanding, you’ll spend 10 massive articles digging deep into the inner workings of the CSAC but gloss over anything negative about VADA while trumpeting everything positive at every opportunity. You can argue your reasoning all you want and that’s fine, we’ll probably never know why you do what you do, but it’s poisoned the writing on this site.

        You claimed that I have a business relationship with VADA or one of the people associated with it. I have no relationships of the sort.

        I’m very transparent about the articles I write — because I am a true believer in the words I type.

        Your favorite pet topic anymore is spinning every article into a PED tirade, and then trumpeting VADA as the only possible solution. Why you do it? Who knows.

        I do not trumpet VADA as the only possible solution. Again, you are making a factual claim that is libelous.

        I have mentioned VADA testing in the past because their testing has caught fighters doping when other kinds of drug testing from different regulators has not caught fighters doping. Lamont Peterson is the perfect example of this. It is not VADA testing per se but rather the kind of test used — Carbon Isotope Ratio — that caught the doping. If NSAC or CSAC used CIR, they would have caught Lamont Peterson microdosing on testosterone pellets.

        Your articles about the CSAC don’t all end in you advocating someone’s business, but somehow your articles about PEDs do.

        How many articles have I written about the commissions giving out anabolic steroid passes and not mentioning VADA? The answer is many — because there’s no point in talking about drug testing when the administrators who are doing drug testing are giving out steroid passes to fighters they are regulating in the first place.

Comments

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