Friend of our site


MMA Headlines


UFC HP


MMA Torch


MMA Weekly


Sherdog (News)


Sherdog (Articles)


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."

PR on Wednesday Sacramento AB2100 hearing

By Zach Arnold | April 24, 2012

UFC is bringing in the big names to schmooze with the politicians about not supporting new amendments to AB2100 that would, by law, prohibit many contractual provisions that Zuffa currently uses in standard fighter contracts. Reportedly, Chuck Liddell and Matt Hughes were in Sacramento to shake various hands.

I heard names like Urijah Faber & Jon Fitch bandied about as pro-UFC witnesses for tomorrow’s testimony. It takes place in Sacramento at 2 PM EST/11 AM PST and you can listen to the hearing live by clicking here. If anyone can record the audio, please send it my way. I would greatly appreciate it (for transcription purposes). The California Channel will not air the hearing live and does not plan on airing the session any time soon on the network. So, any help here from you would be greatly appreciated.

Press release on tomorrow’s Sacramento hearing on AB2100

For immediate release

Contact: Marva Diaz (916-319-2028, [email protected])

Professional Bill of Rights for MMA Athletes
AB 2100 Reforms Contractual Practices in MMA

(SACRAMENTO)— Assembly Member Luis A. Alejo’s (D-Salinas) AB 2100 would protect professional mixed martial arts (MMA) fighters in California from certain exploitative business practices.

“Tragically, many athletes who compete professionally in mixed martial arts in California are subjected to pervasive exploitation by some fight promoters,” said Alejo. “These fight promoters exploit the dreams of young fighters by promising lucrative careers. But once these fighters enter the business, they are required to surrender many of their rights. As a result, these talented athletes are often unable to make enough money to support themselves and their families in the sport they love.”

The bill would protect professional fighters licensed in California from the following exploitative, oppressive and coercive practices:

The bill also would extend certain legal protections already afforded to professional boxers under the federal Muhammad Ali Boxing Reform Act of 2000.

The following California fighters will testify in support of the bill at an April 25th legislative hearing in the Assembly Committee on Arts, Entertainment, Sports, Tourism and Internet Media: Retired four-time defending, undefeated Ultimate Fighting Championship (UFC) champion Frank Shamrock; current lightweight fighter and former Maximum Fighting Championship (MFC) champion Antonio D. McKee; and former UFC light heavyweight turned attorney Christian Wellisch.

Others expected to testify in support of the bill is a representative from the Mixed Martial Arts Fighters Association (MMAFA) and a broad coalition of labor unions.

“As a result of coercive contractual practices, competitive market forces have been strangled, future earnings power of the athletes is stripped away by the promoter, and purses to the athlete are artificially depressed,” said Rob Maysey, founder of the MMAFA. “There is no legal, economic or other legitimate explanation as to why mixed martial artists should be afforded less protection or have fewer rights than their boxing counterparts.”

Luis Alejo represents the 28th District in the California State Assembly, which consists of San Benito County, the Salinas Valley, North Monterey County, South Santa Clara County and the city of Watsonville.

Topics: Media, MMA, UFC, Zach Arnold | 11 Comments » | Permalink | Trackback |

A predictable day for Keith Kizer & the NSAC with Alistair Overeem

By Zach Arnold | April 24, 2012

Over the last few weeks, Dave Meltzer has reported on a number of scenarios that Alistair Overeem’s camp was allegedly going to pursue in order to stay out of hot water over his failed ‘random’ drug test in Nevada due to high T/E levels.

According to Dave, the first story was going to involve a plea for Testosterone Replacement Therapy. However, Overeem had given the NSAC blood test results instead of urine test results last November. When Bas Rutten alluded to Overeem getting clearance, I suspect this is what he was talking about. Plus, Overeem had passed previous urine tests from Nevada. So, according to Dave, this strategy fell apart.

The second story allegedly was going to involve a ‘Viagra defense’, citing a need for Viagra & testosterone due to impotence. However, as widely reported in media circles (such as the BBC), Viagra is not recommended for those with low testosterone levels.

Which leads us to yesterday’s explanation, where Overeem claimed that a doctor gave him an anti-inflammatory medication that was supposedly mixed with testosterone. You can make of this what you will.

The end result is that, today, Overeem was told that he could reapply for a license in Nevada… at the end of December.

Unbelievably, Overeem presented the doctor in question (Dr. Hector Oscar Molina) from Texas. I suppose that’s better than Nate Marquardt who never mentioned his testosterone-administering doctor’s name, but…

When the name of Dr. Molina surfaced, MMA message boards quickly went nuts and started digging dirt (no matter if it was true or false). Cage Potato promptly dropped the proverbial hammer on Dr. Molina.

Victor Conte was not impressed:

The strict liability rule defeats Overeem’s arguments. He is responsible no matter how it got into his body. “I didn’t know” is unacceptable. Why would Overeem’s attorney bring in a doctor with a history of illegal medical prescription problems to testify? Makes no sense. Does Overeem’s lawyer actually think MMA scribes are going to believe that Overeem voluntarily gave up the fight? Rather interesting that Overeem’s doctor injected him wth a water based testosterone, which clears the system faster than oil based.

Mike Chiappetta posted some interesting observations online about today’s hearing. The first point of order — how ‘random’ was the NSAC drug test?

Keith Kizer says Overeem initially sped out of building when faced with random test. UFC tracked him down short time later. Overeem’s lawyer says Reem was trying to avoid being served legal papers in public, and that’s why he bailed random test.

Second point of order — the medication.

Overeem’s lawyer: We will turn over the vial to you. It says “anti-inflammatory.” No indication on vial it contains prohibited substance. Overeem’s lawyer saying he is not questioning the test results, but then he said he does question some parts of procedure. Says it was an intentional ingestion of a mixture provided by doc “without knowledge of substance you would frown upon.” Overeem says he first took the injection which he believed was anti-inflammatory, on Jan. 1.

Overeem says he had no knowledge that he was gonna be tested. Says he doesn’t know why Kizer would say that he was informed before presser. Overeem asked on his feeling about the doc who gave him shot. “I’m not upset because no evil will was intended.” Overeem tells the NSAC that he injected a 2nd shot in his own shoulder. Overeem’s doc: Shot was insufficient to raise testosterone levels and give anabolic advantage. Doc says usually, patients know what is in their shot, but he and Reem “didn’t go into specifics.” Doc says he included test in shot to “promote faster healing” b/c Reem was not going to be able to take any time off.

NSAC called his presentation “superlative”! Seriously. Wow.

Our friend MMA Supremacy notes recent history:

Lorenzo gave Overeem a $1M signing bonus after Strikeforce firing… 1st installment was for Lesnar fight, 2nd & 3rd in next 2 fights.

How much money will UFC try to get out of Overeem now? Here’s a clue:

Once Overeem’s team changed reason about 3X’s, UFC pulled plug… no need to wait for today’s hearing. Can book AO in NYE card.

Pathetic work by Nevada, but entirely predictable given what else happened today. Brent Brookhouse:

The NSAC basically ended that by going “great job, great defense, you’re a champion, please come back and fight here.”

Jordan Breen:

Overeem denied license. He can reapply in nine months from the test, meaning he can’t fight before Dec. 27. Gee, what a convenient time.

A well-connected MMA player wrote me the following after today’s hearing:

What did this decision ultimately do? Not much. If the commission had wished to look strong they would have thought about the big picture. They treated Overeem like he was some misled angel. They would have discussed how tough it will to come back. Instead, they made it seem like they are welcoming him with open arms in December. They made little or no big deal about him skipping out on the test in the first place.

Given today’s circus, there was something poetic about Nevada clearing the way for Chael Sonnen to fight Anderson Silva in Las Vegas at UFC 148. Chael fights in Vegas for the Summer and Overeem fights in Vegas for NYE. Funny how that worked out.

Topics: Media, MMA, UFC, Zach Arnold | 24 Comments » | Permalink | Trackback |

UFC 145: Jon Jones does what Jon Jones does (plus a few big underdogs win)

By Zach Arnold | April 21, 2012

Event: UFC 145 (Saturday, April 21st, at Phillips Arena in Atlanta, Georgia)
TV: FX prelims, PPV main card

Dark matches

Main card

Continue reading this article here…

Topics: Media, MMA, UFC, Zach Arnold | 95 Comments » | Permalink | Trackback |

Aoki’s Bellator experience pretty much goes the way you thought it would

By Zach Arnold | April 20, 2012

April event results & cards

Date: Friday, April 6th
Location: Caesars Windsor in Ontario, Canada
TV: MTV2 (9 PM EST/PST)

Date: Friday, April 13th
Location: Boardwalk Hall in Atlantic City, New Jersey
TV: MTV2 (9 PM EST/PST)

Date: Friday, April 20th
Location: I-X Center in Cleveland, Ohio
TV: MTV2 (9 PM EST/PST)

Continue reading this article here…

Topics: Bellator, Media, MMA, Zach Arnold | 56 Comments » | Permalink | Trackback |

Three revealing psychological UFC moments

By Zach Arnold | April 18, 2012

There’s been a lot of crazy things going on in the lead-up to UFC 145 this weekend in Atlanta, Georgia. The press conference today featuring Rashad Evans and Jon Jones was rather subdued. There has been an extensive paid advertising campaign by UFC to move the needle on this fight. On that front, the company has done just about everything possible. You know the fight is happening on Saturday. The question is whether or not you’re interested in purchasing the PPV. The reported internal estimate target for buys is 800,000. Given that I think fans see the fight as so one-sided, I have reservations about what the buy rate will be. If I had to come up with an over/under PPV buy rate figure, I’ll say 600,000.

While the focus is in Atlanta this weekend, there have been three interesting & curious events that have taken place in Zuffaland that I think reveal the current psychology of the company. All of them may not interest you, but I think at least one of the three will be revealing to you for your own reasons.

Continue reading this article here…

Topics: Media, MMA, UFC, Zach Arnold | 39 Comments » | Permalink | Trackback |

Juicy new fight odds for big name UFC Summer fights

By Zach Arnold | April 16, 2012

Gray Maynard -285 vs. Clay Guida +215

Rich Franklin -325 vs. Cung Le +255

Michael Bisping -315 vs. Tim Boetsch +245

Forrest Griffin -295 vs. Tito Ortiz +225

***

The inimitable Jon Luther & myself appeared on Nick Kalika’s show to talk about the odds for these fights and why we picked the fights we did. (Jon and I agree on two of them and disagree on two, as well.)

Which of these four fights intrigues you the most?

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

Dana White’s stressing out over steroids comes off as incoherent

By Zach Arnold | April 16, 2012

Kenny Florian may be mad about drug usage in MMA, but his bosses have spun a rather conflicting message on this front.

The back drop of what happened in the UFC over the last two weeks should be established here. For UFC Sweden, you have Thiago Silva headlining a main event against Alexander Gustafsson. Silva was coming off of suspension from Nevada because of an altered urine sample for his drug test. Hacran Dias, who was supposed to be on The Ultimate Fighter Brazil but failed a drug test due to usage of diuretics, got signed by UFC to a contract. To add a touch of irony, Fuel TV hired Karyn Bryant to do the fighter interviews. Yes, that Karyn Bryant who Rampage motorboated and name-dropped his chiropractor (Dr. William Kessler) during an interview when he was praising his usage of testosterone.

So, we know where UFC stands based on their recent actions when it comes to the usage of drugs by fighters in MMA. Don’t hate the player, hate the game? Well, when the game is about whether or not UFC is a sport, part of that process is drug testing and cleaning up rampant drug abuse. It’s not just an image thing, it’s also a health & safety thing, too.

Which is why these two headlines from Dana White this weekend at UFC Sweden made him sound as out-of-touch as Bob Arum:

Money quote from the first article:

“The [expletive] testing in this sport is insane. It is literally the gold standard in all of sports.”

And as for the guys who get caught by that testing? White had some words for them as well.

“You’re grown men. You’re [expletive] adults. You’re professional athletes. How many times do you have to be told not to do this? To the point where you just completely blow you’re entire [expletive] career?”

Money quote from the second article:

“I have 375 fighters in every country all over the world,” White fumed. “The battle that I have to get these guys to get their [expletive] bout agreements back and show up for press is un[expletive]believable. The fact that I have to make personal phone calls to tell guys to talk to the [expletive] press. Now I’m going to start making personal phone calls to go show up for random drug tests? The general public and the media need to grasp some [expletive] concept of reality, okay? The reality of us doing all the [expletive] things that we’re doing, when we already have the gold standard in drug testing, and then trying to chase 375 guys all over the world to randomly test them too? It’s impossible.”

What’s funny about this quote is that no one is asking Dana to personally hold a cup and take a urine sample from 375 fighters around the world and do the drug testing himself. The Voluntary Anti-Doping Agency, a non-profit organization set up to help out with advanced & independent drug testing in combat sports, is right in Las Vegas. VADA works with WADA-accredited labs, something that many athletic commissions currently do not. For the UFC, all they would need to do is support an independently-operated drug testing program that would administratively take the issue right out of their hands. No more drug testing while running ‘self-regulated’ shows, either.

Earlier, I remarked that Dana sounds as out-of-touch as Bob Arum does on this issue. Truthfully, we know Dana knows better than what he’s spouting off here. He knows drug usage is a big problem and his company is facing chaos because guys are getting suspended. That’s what makes the UFC’s predicament so intriguing here — the current drug testing protocols are nowhere near what they should be and yet many fighters are failing a standard IQ test by being sloppy drug users or shamelessly begging for a hall pass to use testosterone. Combine that with the number of fighters who are using designer steroids or growth hormone quietly and you can see just how out of control things are right now for drug usage in the sport.

UFC is at a crossroads here. Promoters want certainty. An environment with no drug testing would provide certainty, but that world is not going to exist. So, it’s time for UFC to cooperate with independent agencies that can handle the drug testing issue for them and do the job right. Sunlight may as well be exposed on all the fighters.

It’s not as if independent drug testing on a world stage isn’t currently being done. It’s done with Olympic competitors. It’s done with tennis players. Drug testing in tennis blows away what’s currently happening in MMA.

And, yet, you will see people basically take a realpolitik stance on the matter. “Hey, Chael Sonnen’s fighting in Brazil while using testosterone. Thiago Silva’s headlining UFC Sweden. How much more proof do you need that they don’t care about PEDs?” The way in which this dropped during a conversation is more or less in a ‘hey, if they don’t care, why should I care?” kind of tone.

Why the UFC should care about the drug issue

Liability. Forget pushing pipe dream, no-name international MMA sanctioning bodies. It’s simply not going to work. What will work is if the UFC works with someone like VADA and actually stops hiring guys who are prominent drug users. Fighters wouldn’t risk using drugs as often if they knew the price to be paid was their job security. UFC has the power of message to send to fighters not to use testosterone or else they won’t be coming back to the organization. Instead, guys who recently miss failed drug tests get hired right back or back within a year.

But what happens on a self-regulated show if a testosterone user like Sonnen ends up crippling or killing a fighter? There will be hell to pay on many fronts and the legal front is a guaranteed avenue of pain for Zuffa. They should clean things up as much as they possibly can now before it mushrooms into a giant legal headache later on. Take a look at the legal issues the NFL is facing right now from having over 1,000 former players sue them over concussions.

Image & credibility. How on Earth can a bunch of men who look like Greek Gods be crying hypogonadism with a straight face and telling fans that they have to use testosterone because they suffer from a medical condition that less than 2% of the adult male population in the world suffers from? It’s embarrassing to see play out the way it is right now. On Tuesday (7-8 PM EST, 4-5 PM PST) in Nevada, there will be a 1 hour meeting of the NSAC’s medical advisory panel to talk about Therapeutic Use Exemptions. What exquisite timing given Alistair’s hearing coming up next week. The varying standards between different AC’s over TUEs and what the process should be is a perfect reason as to why TUEs for testosterone shouldn’t be happening in the first place. If the WWE, of all companies, can see what a fiasco a TUE for testosterone is for a professional wrestler, why should an MMA fighter get a hall pass to use testosterone? Dr. Margaret Goodman of VADA is largely opposed to TUEs for testosterone. I’ve said that TUEs for testosterone shouldn’t be happening. Others who come from the pro-wrestling business see the oncoming train wreck in MMA over the testosterone issue and they, too, are sounding off against testosterone usage in MMA.

Last week, Siena released the latest poll results about the image of MMA & MMA legislation in the state of New York. 38% approval, 52% disapproval and the numbers amongst women continue to be horrific – 26% approve, 60% oppose. UFC has spent millions of dollars trying to get MMA legislation passed in the state despite the fact that UFC has not cultivated grass roots support for MMA in the state amongst key Democratic voter blocks. If you’re a parent and your kid wants to get involved in MMA, you might have second thoughts about it because of the current drug culture of the business. It’s not as if the fighters who are using drugs in MMA are low-profile people. We’re talking big names here, household names for MMA fans. The drug issue isn’t the #1 primary cause of low approval ratings for MMA in New York, but it’s a hell of a hammer to slam the business with. And who can blame the politicians for not approving MMA legislation in the state if they aren’t receiving any pressure from influential voters to pass such a bill?

It’s time for a total overhaul of the mindset at Zuffa headquarters over the way the drug issue is being handled in the sport now. It’s not just about the health & safety of their fighters, it’s also about their corporate image which is getting chipped away every time a high-profile fighter gets busted for drug usage. When you are a facing a problem like this, rewarding guys who recently fail drug tests sends a loud message and it’s not a positive one. Both in terms of public relations and business actions, UFC needs to dramatically change the way business is being handled. It’s in their best financial interests to do so, whether they realize that right now or not.

Topics: Media, MMA, UFC, Zach Arnold | 17 Comments » | Permalink | Trackback |

Bas Boon statement on Golden Glory petitioning for K-1 bankruptcy in Tokyo

By Zach Arnold | April 14, 2012

Update: Here’s an official reply from K-1 (Douglas Kaplan) regarding comments made by Bas Boon on Saturday:

K1G is organizing great events in the US, Europe and Asia. Mike and I are working with our team to bring together the best fighters for the fans and will do exactly that. Tanikawasan and Ishiisan are not involved. I know this because I am involved and know what is going on intimately. I don’t know why Bas Boon is spending so much time in the press but we are busy focused on delivering the fans what they want, incredible K1 events.

****

The following is a press release issued by Bas Boon of Golden Glory on Saturday morning. The comments made in this press release do not necessarily reflect the personal or professional views of Fight Opinion or anyone else in the press who received said statement on this mailing list. Make of this press release as you wish.

It should be further noted that the name Miro Mijatovic is listed during this statement. When admitted K-1 yakuza fixer Seiya Kawamata sued Nippon TV over the New Year’s Eve TV contract, it was Miro who won a lien in Tokyo District Court against anything Kawamata won in his lawsuit against N-TV. The court considered Miro to be of good faith & character.

You will notice a couple of [later on…] marks during the statement. This is due to focusing on the main claims made in said statement.

If any parties named in this statement would wish to send us a statement for rebuttal to post on the site, we will gladly do so.

Continue reading this article here…

Topics: Japan, K-1, Media, Zach Arnold | 6 Comments » | Permalink | Trackback |

Nick Diaz attorney Ross Goodman to Nevada: If you don’t give us our hearing on April 24th, your suspension is invalid

By Zach Arnold | April 14, 2012

Ross Goodman of the Goodman Law Group P.C. sent this letter to Nevada’s Attorney General on Friday. Here’s the text of the letter.

******

GOODMAN LAW GROUP, P.C.
Ross C. Goodman
Oscar B. Goodman
Virginia Tomova

April 13, 2012

Via Hand Delivery

Christopher Eccles
Deputy Attorney General
OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
Business & Taxation Division
555 East Washington Avenue, Suite 3900
Las Vegas, Nevada 89101

Re: Hearing of First Amended Complaint against Nick Diaz

Dear Mr. Eccles:

We have received no response to our correspondence dated April 12th, 2012, seeking confirmation that the NSAC’s complaint against Mr. Diaz will be heard on April 24th, 2012.

Our client’s license is presently suspended on a summary basis until a final determination of any disciplinary action to be taken against him, under an order made by the NSAC pursuant to NRS 467.117(2) and NRS 233B.127(3) on February 22nd, 2012 (the “Summary Suspension Order”).

The law does not permit the NSAC to suspend our client indefinitely pending a hearing and determination of the complaint, but imposes a reasonable and definite time limit when which the complaint must be heard and determined. By enactment effected May 22, 2009, Nevada’s legislator amended NRS 233B.127(3) to provide that “[p]roceedings relating to the order of summary suspension must be instituted and determined within 45 days after the date of the order unless the agency and the licensee mutually agree in writing to a longer period.” [emphasis added] (Prior to this amendment, the time limitation was that the proceedings be instituted and determined “promptly”.) Requests for documents, including documents which are not relevant to the matters in dispute and which are protected by statutory and common law privilege, do not operate to extend the time limit within which a hearing must be held pursuant to the statutory limitation.

The final day for the hearing and determination of the NSAC’s complaint against Mr. Diaz was therefore April 6th, 2012 — 45 days after the date of the Summary Suspension Order. In discussions with Mr. Kizer, following the Summary Suspension Order, Mr. Kizer informed me and others that this matter would be placed on the NSAC’s April agenda. Our client was and is confident that there is no basis for disciplinary action against him and therefore did not object to a delay beyond the required 45 day time limit as long as the matter was heard and determined in April.

However, our client objects to any further delay.

We presume that the NSAC will comply with its statutory obligation to have this matter heard on April 24th, 2012. If not, my client takes the position that the NSAC has by virtue of its delay irrevocably elected to discontinue or abandon its complaint against Mr. Diaz. The NSAC has no authority to hear or determine the complaint at a later date, and any such purported hearing or determination of the complaint would be ultra vires the NSAC’s statutory powers.

We expect your response no latter than 4 PM, Monday, April 16th, 2012.

Very truly yours,

Ross C. Goodman, Esq.
GOODMAN LAW GROUP, P.C.

Topics: Media, MMA, UFC, Zach Arnold | 17 Comments » | Permalink | Trackback |

Siena poll details reveal lousy news for NY MMA backers & UFC

By Zach Arnold | April 13, 2012

Overall poll summary here (April 13th, 2012).

Fifty-two percent side with opponents of mixed martial arts (MMA), who say that it is dangerous, even barbaric and that we should not allow such a violent sport to be practiced in New York as opposed to 38 percent that agree with supporters that say it should be legal as it is in many states and that if legal, MMA would generate fan interest, direct revenues and be an engine of economic development.

“While a majority of New Yorkers oppose the legalization of mixed martial arts, young state residents strongly support MMA as do fifty percent of men. MMA is strongly opposed by women and older residents. This is one issue where lines are drawn by age and gender and feelings are strong in each direction,” according to Levy.

807 New York adults polled 3/25-3/29 and 4/1-4/3. +/- 3.5% margin of error.

Lastly, there is an issue being debated in Albany whether or not New York should legalize mixed martial arts, known by some as cage fighting or ultimate fighting. Supporters say it should be legal in the state of New York. Mixed martial arts or MMA is already legal in many states and if legal here in New York would generate fan interest, direct revenues and would be an engine of economic development. Opponents say MMA is dangerous, even barbaric and we should not allow such a violent sport to be practiced here in New York. Do you side with the supporters of MMA or with the opponents?

March 2011 – 39% support, 41% oppose, 19% undecided
September 2011 – 39% support, 48% oppose, 12% undecided
April 2012 – 38% support, 52% oppose, 9% undecided

How the poll crosstabs break down:

April 2012 – 38% support, 52% oppose, 9% undecided

Takeaway: In short, the two sides (pro and con) for MMA legislation in New York remain solidified and unshakeable. The problem is that the undecideds, as they start formulating an opinion on this issue, are all breaking towards opposing legislation in the state.

This is a symbol of the failure of UFC’s public relations campaign in New York to win over hearts and minds. It’s also proof that no matter how many different ways you try to present the public with your dog food, they just aren’t interested enough in it. Given the recent reported issues involving the New York State Athletic Commission, this may be for the best right now.

A further detailed look into the numbers shows how awful the public relations battle has been for UFC so far in terms of persuading residents in the state. The profile of someone in New York who supports MMA right now – male, 18-to-34 year old demo, nothing special employment wise. In the crosstabs, only 11% of those responding were Latino, so that support split doesn’t look so robust there. What makes the numbers even worse is that Democrats made up 44% of those polled — and the majority of online MMA fans are just like pro-wrestling fans, very much liberal in political beliefs. UFC’s not persuading New York liberals, conservatives, or independents on getting legislation passed.

Bottom line: given all of the cash UFC has spent so far in New York, they have yet to produce any sort of political coalition of certain voters (especially women) to make the case as to why MMA legislation should be passed in the state. Given how solid these trends have been with Siena’s polling over the last few years, it should be alarming to UFC that few minds have been persuaded to support their cause — and those who are making a decision one way or another are opposing legislation.

Topics: Media, MMA, UFC, Zach Arnold | 16 Comments » | Permalink | Trackback |

Text of Team Diaz rebuttal to Nevada commission

By Zach Arnold | April 12, 2012

If you have not kept up with the details & statements made in the legal battle between Keith Kizer & the Nevada State Athletic Commission vs. Nick Diaz & his lawyer Ross Goodman, here are the necessary primers;

The second link is the filing that Team Diaz responded to you yesterday with the following text.

The first document text here is an attached exhibit filing from Nick Diaz’s doctor.

Date: April 6, 2012

To: Nevada State Athletic Commission

Re: Nickolas R. Diaz

Dear Sirs,

I am a board-certified physician in good standing continuously licensed to practice medicine, in California for the past 40 yeas. During the previous nine (9) years! have primarily performed medical cannabis evaluations in accordance with the California Health & Safety Code 11362.5. After reviewing medical records, which reveal a diagnosis of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (“ADHI ”), taking a patient history and performing an examination, I have approved Mr. Diaz’s use of medical marijuana. this approval to use medical marijuana is not a prescription. In addition, medical marijuana is not an “over the counter medication” or “over the counter product” in California,

Further, pursuant to the Code, I issued a Physician’s Statement dated June 25, 2009, which states that “[Diaz) has a serious medical condition which in my professional opinion may benefit from the use of medical cannabis.” The statutory definition of what constitutes a ‘serious medical condition” under this regulation is a physician’s responsibility and not the patient’s. The term is not part of my discussions with my patients. Instead, I focus on their particular medical problems, the benefits from use of medical marijuana, what effects a patient may experience, how to use it safely, etc. Even though the Physician’s Statement does not expire, Mr, Dlaz’s ADHD remained unchanged and after my examination of Mr. Diaz I issued another Physician’s Statement dated February 28, 2012.

As a physician, ADHD is a persistent condition that qualifies under the California statutory definition of “serious medical condition”. I believe most lay people would consider “serious” medical conditions to include cancer, heart attacks, strokes, a broken neck, AIDS, etc, but would not include ADFFID on that list.
Sincerely,

Robert E. Sullivan, MD

Continue reading this article here…

Topics: Media, MMA, UFC, Zach Arnold | 16 Comments » | Permalink | Trackback |

California Assembly Bill could give fighters new rights, challenge UFC contracts

By Zach Arnold | April 11, 2012

Our friend Rob Maysey pointed out recent developments in California that deserve your attention.

Luis A. Alejo, California Assemblymember (Democrat, 28th district – Salinas), is proposing big changes to Assembly Bill 2100. The bill, which is a Bill of Rights for both professional boxers & Mixed Martial Arts fighters, currently is laid out as the following according to this AB 2100 fact sheet.

CALIFORNIA LEGISLATURE

LUIS A. ALEJO, Assemblymember, 28th District

STATE CAPITOL
Room 2137
Sacramento, CA 95814
(916) 319-2028 Phone
(916) 319-2128 Fax

DISTRICT OFFICE
100 West Alisal Street
Suite 134
Salinas, CA 93901
(831) 759-8676 Phone
(831) 759-2961 Fax

AB 2100: Professional Bill of Rights for MMA Athletes Fact Sheet

Summary

AB 2100 authorizes the State Athletic Commission to revoke or refuse to renew the license of any mixed martial arts (MMA) promoter in California that participates in coercive and unfair contracting practices. This bill also extends the scope of the Boxers’ Pension Plan to include professional MMA fighters licensed in California.

Purpose

The purpose of the bill is to prevent the mistreatment of MMA fighters in California by banning certain exploitative contracting practices that violate athletes’ freedom to work and their ability to support their families. Many California MMA fighters have retired after suffering multiple concussions, bone fractures, muscle tears, nerve damage and spine injuries, which threaten their ability to earn a living and support their families as they grow older. AB 2100 enables MMA fighters to benefit from the pension fund that has been available to boxers in the state since 1981.

Background

Mixed martial arts, also known as MMA, is one of the fastest growing sports in the world. Many of the most talented and well-known professional fighters in the sport live in California and are licensed to compete in events held in this state. Since 2006, California has hosted more than 60 professional MMA events, making California a center of the mixed-martial arts world.

Fighters licensed in California who compete in these contests often undergo years of demanding training, and risk serious injury. Despite these physical risks, California MMA fighters have no pension benefits and limited protection against exploitation. Promoters often require that MMA fighters in California agree to coercive and oppressive contract terms that can include exclusivity clauses, unlimited merchandise rights agreements and legal waivers among other things.

This bill will protect professional MMA fighters from unethical business practices and would extend legal protection currently afforded to professional boxers by the Boxers’ Pension Plan and the Muhammad Ali Boxing Reform Act of 2000.

For more information on this bill, please contact Erika Bustamante at (916) 319-2028, e-mail [email protected].

*************

Now that you’ve seen the fact sheet for AB 2100, you have a sense of what the legislation is about. However, this week new changes were proposed by Assemblyman Alejo to AB 2100 that would change the landscape in a significant way. The proposed changes could give California MMA fighters a significant boost in terms of contractual rights and would take away some legitimate power from the major player(s) in MMA.

Let’s just say that Zuffa (UFC) will not be very happy about the proposed contractual changes. The proposed changes in this bill could spark a legal battle given that UFC contracts establish jurisdiction in Las Vegas, so how would a Zuffa fighter based in California be able to legally challenge the terms of the Zuffa contracts?

Continue reading this article here…

Topics: Media, MMA, UFC, Zach Arnold | 27 Comments » | Permalink | Trackback |

Two plausible paths for Alistair Overeem to get licensed in Nevada

By Zach Arnold | April 10, 2012

Karim Zidan (@theflyingkneeto) of The Flying Knee MMA noted on his site last Sunday (item here), Alistair Overeem will in fact attend a scheduled April 24th hearing in Las Vegas in front of the Nevada State Athletic Commission to apply for a fighter’s license. In addition, so far, he is not asking for his B urine sample to be tested in order to nullify the initial drug testing result of his A urine sample.

So, what’s going on here?

Everyone is guessing about what his strategy will be if it’s not predicated on getting the B sample tested with a Carbon Isotope Ratio test. When the news broke on Sunday, there was plenty of mockery and plenty of ‘horse meat’ reasons being dished online.

What makes this situation fascinating is that UFC reportedly is the party that set up the licensing request for Overeem with Nevada for the April 24th hearing. Either UFC is confident that Overeem has a plausible reason to get licensed or they are basically putting the pressure on Overeem in a ‘OK, you made this mess, now go clean it up’ kind of way.

In the embedded Inside MMA video clip at the top of this post, Kenny Rice & Bas Rutten had one hell of a panel on their show to discuss the issue of drug usage in MMA — Michael Schiavello (happy birthday), Joe Rogan, and Josh Barnett. If you had told me ahead of time that Schiavello would have the most controversial comments about PED usage out of those three names, I would have never believed you.

Schiavello says that, off the record, fighters tell him that the rate of PED usage in MMA is ‘about 99%.’ He went on to present some reasons to use to defend Overeem. His two arguments:

Even Joe Rogan pointed out the obvious in saying that there’s a reason why random drug testing is used. I was taken aback by the assertion that basically it’s OK to use testosterone or whatever you want to use as long as by fight time you are down to a 6:1 T/E ratio. It’s an assumption that basically relies upon a premise that everyone is using, why fight it, and just recognize it for what it is. It’s also an argument that nullifies the point of drug testing in the first place, which is to try to catch guys who are using banned substances in order for a performance-enhancing benefit in preparation of a fight.

The last point is a salient one given that there are recent articles published quoting Swedish scientists as claiming that once someone uses steroids, they gain whatever benefits from steroid usage long after they stop using steroids.

So, given how everyone is playing the guessing game as to what Overeem will say on April 24th, there are two plausible paths that I could see UFC & Overeem arguing at the Nevada hearing. Michael Schiavello hinted at the first path.

Door #1 – How can you randomly drug test someone who isn’t ‘officially’ licensed?

Last week during a radio interview featuring Keith Kizer & Mauro Ranallo, this issue became a contentious one because a lot of people are totally confused about the way Nevada has handled the licensing procedures for Overeem. Let’s summarize what has happened so far:

If this process sounds absurd to you, that’s because it is. Nevada got their money for the Overeem/Lesnar fight while Overeem was fighting on a conditional temporary license. Now that he failed a drug test, he’s caught in the same limbo that Josh Barnett found himself caught in with the California State Athletic Commission.

PR-wise, attacking Nevada over this licensing process is probably better than the other plausible path Overeem has to pursue for licensing but it’s also a lot riskier & is likely going to really anger the commission.

The other path is a not-so PR friendly one these days.

Door #2 – Hypogonadism (testosterone replacement therapy)

A couple of weeks ago, Mike Chiappetta of MMAFighting.com wrote an article in which he stated that Keith Kizer had told him that the process for getting a Theurapeutic Use Exemption in Nevada for testosterone takes 20 days. I kid you not, 20 days.

You can see where this is going. Damon Martin:

Keith Kizer confirms with me today that a fighter can apply for TRT exemption either before or with their application for a license.

Overeem’s T/E ratio was reportedly 14:1. When Chael Sonnen tested positive in California, his T/E ratio was nearly 17:1. Sonnen then came out and had his appeals hearing where he said that Dr. Mark Czarnecki, a general practitioner, wrote his prescription for testosterone. In Sonnen’s case, he was already licensed and got suspended. In Overeem’s case, he is nebulously not ‘officially’ licensed to fight in Nevada. They have him classified for a ‘conditional’ license even though he’s already fought once (the Brock Lesnar fight) and the commission got paid because of the box office that bout did.

So, let’s say Overeem does claim hypogonadism and goes the TRT route. Keith Kizer has left the door open for Overeem to claim hypogonadism and the need for testosterone. If Nevada gives him his Exemption, the fight with Junior dos Santos is on.

If Nevada rejects Overeem, he could easily go to another state where Therapeutic Use Exemptions are issued with less scrutiny and fight there. Or… he could simply fight for the UFC on shows that they regulate under the auspices of using a TUE for testosterone and that Dr. Jeff Davidson would manage the situation.

So, Overeem’s options for fighting still exist no matter what happens in Nevada.

What would make Overeem applying for TRT so interesting is whether or not any testimony he would give on April 24th would conflict with the testimony he gave under oath to Nevada a few months ago. After all, UFC President Dana White has readily admitted that many MMA fighters who are applying for TRT are previously anabolic steroid users.

Outside of applying for a TUE for testosterone or aggressively attacking the ambiguity of Nevada’s licensing process, I don’t see why Overeem would even bother attending the April 24th hearing if he’s not having the B sample tested with CIR. It’s hard to see what other angle he could come up with here. He’s stuck in a very tenuous position. He split off from Golden Glory, so that bridge is burned and they are going after him for cash. UFC is his only big meal ticket. DREAM is dormant and not active. There’s no major player in Japanese MMA any longer on a national level. One FC likely isn’t going to be able to afford him. He got stiffed (allegedly) by K-1 on a lot of money and Ishii is back with K-1 Global Holdings and is supposed to be working with Simon Rutz of Its Showtime, a mortal enemy of Bas Boon & Golden Glory. I suppose there’s that route… but it’s simply not UFC money.

If Overeem presents a case that doesn’t revolve around the need of testosterone to function, what angle does he possess? Is it simply to say, yeah, I screwed up, I’ll wait a year and then get licensed after that time period in hopes of getting a second chance with UFC? It’s hard to say.

Topics: Media, MMA, UFC, Zach Arnold | 30 Comments » | Permalink | Trackback |

« Previous Entries Next Entries »