No Drug Testing at Strikeforce "Destruction"

by weoweoweo on Nov 27, 2008 8:51 AM EST Comment 15 comments

Fronted by Kid Nate.

From insider.mmaweekly.com:

MMAInsider happened upon something unusual on Monday when it spoke to the California State Athletic Commission to acquire live gate, fighter payout, and drug testing information.

A CSAC representative said no drug testing had been conducted for Strikeforce "Destruction" on Friday, Nov. 21st.

Bill Douglas, now the official CSAC assistant executive officer, returned comment on the testing situation.

"I've cancelled all drug testing across the board while I revamp the entire process from start to finish," Mr. Douglas wrote in an email. "I expect the new and improved program to roll out next week."

Given all the mishaps and controversies they've had before, the idea of putting out a new and improved program next week is very favorable. But cancelling all drug testing for events in that short time period is just unprofessional. They pride themselves from having a strict anti-doping program, but they let major events slide without having fighters tested. For what? in order to get out that new program next week? That i dont get.. Why not have them tested, then implement the new program for the following events?

The FanPosts are solely the subjective opinions of Bloody Elbow readers and do not necessarily reflect the views of Bloody Elbow editors or staff.

0 recs | Comment 15 comments |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

They should've at least taken samples for storage, but...

The silver lining on this black cloud is stunning. Maybe the CSAC is feeling the hurt of missing UFC revenues and is taking the critics seriously. With the controversy around Bigfoot (Fightlinker has done great work on this) and Sherk, I’ll take trading away the legitimacy of one event’s drug policy to enfore the legitimacy of hundreds of others.

by subo on Nov 26, 2008 1:07 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Well ya, they could have just taken samples to be tested when they release the new program.. then at least that way they would keep the legitimacy of the event.

http://weoweoweo.deviantart.com/

by weoweoweo on Nov 26, 2008 8:35 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Maybe they are changing the collection protcol?

by szucconi on Nov 26, 2008 9:01 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I guess.. but that still doesnt excuse letting a major event slide without any type of drug testing..

http://weoweoweo.deviantart.com/

by weoweoweo on Nov 26, 2008 9:07 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I agree 100%. You need some interm measures, but collecting and sample in a flawed way and getting a false positive could really damage a fighters rep.

by szucconi on Nov 26, 2008 9:28 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Well you have to wonder how good those samples are. Maybe they aren’t using Quest anymore so they have no place to store it.

by zeroword on Nov 27, 2008 1:03 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Was wondering how Kim actually won a fight..

by lbk on Nov 26, 2008 1:40 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

the real question is did the fighters know that in advance?

and yeah Kim Couture…she loves her man and wants to make him rpoud but please stop fighting. that thing friday was not a fight….it was like an afterschool bully stealing lunch money.

by Headkick on Nov 26, 2008 3:09 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

i doubt they knew that but they probably knew something was up because they didnt get tested prior to the event..

http://weoweoweo.deviantart.com/

by weoweoweo on Nov 26, 2008 8:36 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

His statements indicate the testing could be extraordinarily flawed. These are incredibly troubling. To put a moratorium on them? That’s so strange.

by Luke Thomas on Nov 26, 2008 9:47 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Yup his statement really makes it sound really bad.. i’m actually starting to think that maybe sherk was being honest..

http://weoweoweo.deviantart.com/

by weoweoweo on Nov 26, 2008 9:51 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Perhaps there is an innocent explanation, like it required re-training of collectors or other staff. But I’d agree it does not reflect well on the quality of their existing procedures if they decided to junk the whole system, obviously

by smoogy on Nov 26, 2008 9:56 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

If they have serious doubts about the testing procedures, ie. chain of custody, etc, they would have no reason to collect samples until they are ready with new protocols.

by dualdiagnosis on Nov 26, 2008 9:49 PM EST reply actions 0 recs