Performance-Enhancing Drugs: The Conversation Boxing Loves to Avoid
by Bad Left Hook on Nov 3, 2011 10:00 AM EDT
in Boxing Commentary & Opinion
Email
Print
Long-time members of the site may know Eddie Gonzalez by his old username, thebitb. Today he joins the Bad Left Hook staff, and will be doing a weekly column.
Once again, performance-enhancing drugs (namely steroids) are in the boxing conversation today as Bob Arum addressed steroid concerns yesterday in during a Manny Pacquiao conference call. This isn't new, as steroids come up often nowadays.
Whenever Victor Conte is mentioned. Or Shane Mosley, or James Toney. Or whenever Floyd Mayweather talks about Manny Pacquiao "taking the test." As always, it was kind of brushed over and we moved along.
Should we move along? Shouldn't we care more about PEDs being in the sport we love and follow endlessly?
PEDs are always a touchy subject and opinions vary. Some think their guy could NEVER be on them, some think EVERYONE is on them. Me? I don't know. But none would surprise me. The theoretical story of someone trusted by a fighter one day telling them "Hey, I got this stuff, called HGH. It will make you bigger, stronger, faster, give you more stamina and make recovery time shorter. Oh, and it can't be detected with a pee test (or most blood tests for that matter). You want some?" is an offer some guys can't refuse.
For me the biggest story to come out of the PEDs in baseball mess wasn't that they were being used, it was WHO using them. Sure, there were the hulking sluggers, and the career year guys, but there was also middle relievers, finesse pitchers, minor leaguers trying to hold on to a job, small middle infielders trying to turn a few singles into doubles. Guys in all shapes sizes and backgrounds were outed as users. Moral of the story is, nobody should be without suspicion.
James Toney isn't exactly the image you think of for a hulking steroid user. Shane Mosley kinda was. Point is, you never really know.
If America, and the sporting media cared about boxing like they cared about baseball in the 90's and early 2000's maybe it would result in a sort of witch hunt that baseball saw. A guy like Andre Berto, who earlier in his career was a little softer and chubby, then became affiliated with the aforementioned Conte, and now looks a little different (even though his stamina issues are still seemingly there), would maybe cause some eyebrows to raise. Instead, he is the guy dishing out steroid claims.
Of course the most famous steroid claim in boxing is Floyd Mayweather crying "steroids" toward Manny Pacquiao, and allegations being fueled by Olympic-style drug testing seemingly being the reason that a fight between the two has never been signed. As for Manny, my opinion is the same as it is with everybody else, I give him the benefit of the doubt that he doesn't use PEDs, but I don't put it past him. I would say the same about Mayweather, or any other fighter. We just CAN'T know. The testing is dated, and beating a pee test has become so easy it becomes laughable when a guy actually fails.
Do steroids and PED allegations hurt the sport? Doesn't seem like it. Does Angel "Memo" Heredia or Victor Conte's presence hurt the sport? Nope (I think it can be argued that he isn't making that big of a splash either. Berto still struggles with stamina, and Noninto Donaire didn't look like the world beater we have all expected him to be 2 weeks ago). Would a major steroid scandal be a black eye to the sport, just like it was to baseball? Sure, but just like baseball it will come and go and things will go back to the way they were before. The Mosley/Balco scandal was as big as it can get. The former pound for pound king admitting he used PEDs in preparation for his biggest and most famous fight is as big as it can get. And Mosley bounced back.
We live in a world where a google search will find you a picture of the most famous rapper in the world kissing his boss on the lips (not that there's anything wrong with that). People's attention spans are shorter and they just seem to care less. Bill Buckner has been forgiven. Chris Brown is just as famous today as he was pre-Rihanna. The idea of Steve Bartman being welcomed back to Wrigley Field is being tossed around now that Theo Epstein is supposed to usher in a new era. People just don't care when you fuck up anymore. They want to see how you respond.
Even if Manny or Mayweather were to fail a drug test, they, and boxing, would bounce back. Mike Tyson went to prison for sexual assault and was a hot ticket as soon as he got out and got back in the ring. Controversy sells, thats just the way it is. Mayweather himself is a prime example of this. The man has gone from the guy who said he wanted to beat Diego Corrales "for all the battered women in the world" to "Money" Mayweather who himself has a pending case for allegedly beating his ex, and the transformation has done nothing but pad his pockets. How would a steroid scandal be any different than the Margarito situation? Sure, some people will be mad, and a steroids scandal would never be good for boxing, but ultimately the show must go on. Remember, Margarito saw his richest fight after his scandal.
How much do you care about PEDs in boxing?
* * * * *
As an aside, I will offer my picks for the biggest fights of the weekend every week at the end of these columns, here are my picks for this weekend:
Angulo TKO 6 Kirkland: Kirkland has been shown to have a questionable chin until proven otherwise, but on the other hand Angulo's loss was to a taller rangy Kermit Cintron who simply outboxed Angulo. Kirkland isn't any of those things and won't outbox Angulo. I expect fireworks while it lasts.
Bute UD 12 Johnson: Johnson has lost all his recent fights against the top tier of the division and I don't expect it to change here. He will land the occasional overhand right but ultimately it won't be enough. If this is the fight where Johnson suddenly becomes old right before our eyes, Bute could stop him.
37 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Not related to the story, but Vic’s daughter is pretty hot.
As far as the story……. I care, but all you can do is have the most up-to date stringent testing. But it’s never going to end; too much $$$$ involved in sports.
Purity of the sport
I care and it’s just because I have this idea in my head that sports should be about hard work and dedication. It should be the ultimate test of skill, heart, and physical ability. It’s a way for us to see just what types of athletic feats the human body is capable of. It shouldn’t be because you took a special pill or took a shot in your ass. It should be because you busted your ass harder then the next guy. When he was sleeping, you were working. While he was out having fun, you were in the gym. Shit like that. It’s probably a stupid idea, but it’s what I like to believe.
"Boxing is like dealing with a ho"
-Bernard Hopkins
Very well said
To add a little bit to what erod just said, which was just perfect in my opinion. What baffles me the most about these types of discussions is that the two things I usually hear mentioned as the main roadblocks for implementing or even attempting to implement a better testing policy, not just in boxing but in sports in general are: 1) It’s too expensive, and 2) it’s too difficult.
With regards to money, like I mentioned in a couple of previous posts, the money is really not that onerous (~20K per fighter for a full year), at least not if you focus it on the upper echelons of the sport, and the money could come from fighters, promoters, comissions, and federations, so no one would be hit too hard in their pocket.
The second reasoning, that proper testing is too hard, that cheaters will always find a way and be a step ahead, and blah, blah, blah, is even more laughable, why? Not because that thinking is wrong, it is technically correct, usually a new substance comes up and then the technique is developed to detect it. The reason it is laughable to say that it is too hard and therefore why bother is because boxing and sports in general are not the ones developing the frigging tests. Let us scientists worry about the science. In this matter boxing is just a customer, all they have to do is say I’ll take every test you have right know and then go crazy with it applying them to boxers. When a new test comes up, say I’ll take that. It’s just like having an i-phone. Who cares or worries how hard or easy it is to build one? You just get the new one and use it when it comes out, do the same thing with tests.
Having the testing policy in place should not be a hard thing to debate, I find as crazy as having to debate whether or not should some get the best medical, police, or fire coverage possible, its one of those things where the answer should be: duhhh!!!!
Yeah the “it’s too difficult” excuse is baffling to me. Yes there are always going to be limits to the effectiveness of any testing regime, and yes the particular problems of out-of-competition testing will always be a very difficult thing for a decentralized sport like boxing to deal with. That doesn’t mean we should simply accept the status quo however.
I regularly hear journalists and others like Conte claim that Mayweather’s requested testing is just hot air since there’s no out-of-competition for him or his opponent. That’s a fair enough point, but even so, absolutely no one denies randomized blood and urine testing would be a huge step up from what the NSAC currently mandates. Making the perfect the enemy of the better in this situation will never lead to any improvements.
I think the best or most practical solution for boxing would be to hand over testing duities over to WADA (given its worldwide nature) or at the very least to USADA in the USADA in the USA and let them handle things, that is how most sports handle their testing.
As for Mayweather’s case I agree with you, what he propossed is better than the current system and a huge step upwards, the flack he got, and I admit I’m one of those who gave him some of it, was not because it was not good, but because he calimed he was doing it for the purity of the sport and doing the best testing available. Let me put it this way, after being used to eating out of the dumpster Floyd promised us a meal in a 5-star restaurant. Sure he got us a meal at the Olive Garden which was great and a big step up. Saying that is not a 5-star restaurant is not saying he was wrong, or we should not implement his plan, it’s not complaining about the mea, lt’s just saying ;)
Oh I have no doubt that Mayweather is not really interested in the purity of the sport, nor was I trying to lodge a defense of his actions. I just find it annoying when people seem to imply that because his proposal isn’t the absolute best, it’s somehow entirely pointless or just as poor as what’s currently in place.
Absolutely. Yes.
Glad I’m not the only one who thinks so.
There is no safety in numbers, or in anything else--James Thurber, 1939
I disagree with the idea that boxing would bounce back from a PED scandal.
First, there’s no doubt in my mind that baseball’s popularity was in fact harmed by the steroid allegations, and things aren’t exactly what they were before (nowadays it’s a story whenever a baseball playoff game manages to do better ratings than even a poor NFL game).
Beyond that though, boxing is in much more tenuous position, at least on the American sports landscape, than baseball has ever occupied. A steroid scandal would even further marginalize the sport and might make it impossible for it to ever come back in this country. Look at how cycling is treated; it was never the most popular sport in the world, but it’s essentially become nothing more than the butt of jokes as far as mainstream sports coverage is concerned, and there’s a black cloud perpetually hanging over every single competitor.
You suggest that testing is so dated in boxing that it is difficult for anyone to know who is using PEDs and who isn’t, and I agree with that view. The logical question to ask however is why it is the case that it is so dated. One damn good reason is that absolutely no one benefits from a PED scandal in boxing; not commissions, not promoters, and not most boxers themselves. The reason this is a conversation that boxing loves avoiding is because it’s generally bad for business, and that indicates to me that few share your somewhat optimistic take on the ability of the sport to come back from such a scandal.
You’re right, but if they went about it right (oh hahaha), that it, into the future with plenty of warning, and not in a way that exposes past behaviours, it could be a good thing to start the testing. That is, “In 6 mo. all boxers expecting to be licensed to fight will have to sign up for year round testing,” not, “Zap!! We’re at your door, we’ve got you now!!!!!!!!!!!” no reason not to. They could even keep the first rounds of testing confidential, with warnings kept confidential, until some of them have time to get clean. No problem is unsolvable, and this one’s not either.
There is no safety in numbers, or in anything else--James Thurber, 1939
yea baseball isnt what it once was.. sure
but then u come across stories with headlines like this too
and its not doing too bad either
i just think people have pretty much decided that scandal is a part of sports and will eventually begrudgingly come back. it would HURT a lot, especially if it were one of the major stars or a widespread thing. but if there was a movement to fix the problem (like baseball) people will come back.
"After this, I'm gonna kick Bob Arum's ass."
-George Lopez
by Eddie Gonzalez on Nov 3, 2011 2:44 PM EDT up reply actions
Yes, I care about it
I think it’s a Bad Thing in any sport, but especially in martial arts, because injury is already the norm. Souped-up, ’roid-raging macho youths are going to do far more damage than necessary to get the win.
Allthough more experienced, older boxers are probably aware of what they’re getting into, young ones—and boxing has lots of young ones—probably don’t: They’re in a position where they must trust coaches and advisers, and their corrupters aren’t going to say, “Here, take some HGH.” They’re going to say “Here, drink this Green Tea Super-Extract with Mega Vitamins, you can beat anybody drinking this tea.” If that’s coming from someone the athlete has always trusted, s/he’s not going to suddenly stop, that’s not human nature.
We haven’t even researched or taken the question this far, but IMO PEDs use has got to raise health issues long term. For one thing, just the fact that they’re willing in the present to take more punishment is logically likely to increase exponentially the incidence of dementia pugilistica, Parkinson’s, early Alzheimers etc., which we all stand around rueing and feeling guilty about all the time. Moreover, and I havent’ researched this, but the kidneys and liver are filters, and have just got to be stressed by these additives. Don’t know where that will lead. Nowhere good, most likely.
I sometimes wonder if some who condone/accept it, do so because in the short term it leads to more exciting fights, a kind of chemical gladiatorial attitude, subliminal/unconscious I suppose, that really isn’t cool. “Who cares what they do, as long as they hit harder and the fights last longer” sort of thing.
Not at my house, thank you.
There is no safety in numbers, or in anything else--James Thurber, 1939
who administers drug tests in boxing? is it the athletic commissions? sanctioning bodies? i guess it’s something that can also be negotiated directly between fighters.
even if the various powers that be thought that more stringent drug testing was in their best interests (and i’m not convinced they do), how would it be executed?
unfortunately, it seems like another example of the drawback to not having one commission/promotion/sanctioning body in charge.
Each athletic commsion mandates what testing gets done right now. Ideally you want all of them to adhere to one standard, say USADA (which in turn adheres to WADA’s), and let them (USADA) run the show with regards to testing. In this scenario all boxing has to do is read the results from the lab and sign the checks from the bills. That’s the way that basically every other sport in the world does it.
I don't want to be a contrarian
because many here have made eloquent and lovely points about purity, honor, etc…. but in all fairness, I like to approach this topic as rationally as I can, with a few questions.
1) Do I care what an adult chooses to put in his body?
No. It’s their choice, they can kill themselves if they choose as long as it does not harm me or those I love. It is not my responsibility nor place to demand that an adult follow my wishes about something that does me no physical harm.
2) Do I care about even playing fields?
Yes and no. As with baseball and cycling, etc., my suspicion was that everyone was on it, so the playing field was as level as it was without it. Of course there are many guys who choose not to partake for whatever reason, and those guys get screwed, true enough. I just don’t put much stock in the etherial glory of the record books and Halls of Fame. None of that shit matters to me. I only care about the contests themselves, and with prices what they are, I almost appreciate a guy, cheating or not, trying to be the extreme best he can be. Is that selfish on my part? Yes, of course. But, again, I’m not holding a guy to anyone’s head and saying use or die.
3) Do I have some kind of moral objection to the legality and law-breaking of steroid use?
No. I do not. The war on drugs, or whatever you want to call it, is as stupid and wasteful as it is ill informed. So, if something is illegal that I think is absurdly so, it cancels out my moral objection to the law breakers. Sodomy was technically illegal in the state of Georgia back when I was a resident. I, along with millions of others I’m sure, chose to ignore that statute.
4) Is the use of PEDs any different than other scientific advancements in the history of sport?
Eh, I want to say no, but let’s think it out. I’d have to establish a baseline. Let’s say a guy blew out an ACL in 1930. Could he recover and become a top athlete again. No, of course not. The surgical techniques of that era were nothing, literally, compared to todays. So, does an athlete today hold an unfair historical advantage? Who gives a shit? The same line of reasoning can be applied to vitamins, exercise equipment, joint braces, other dietary supplements, diet, and on and on. I just have a difficult time finding exactly where the line should be drawn. Is it at protein shakes? Creatine? There are so many different types of steroids that do so many different things to the body it a blizzard of information.
5) Does the increased strength gained from PEDs increase the chances of inflicting permanent injury?
Probably, but do we think Ray Mancinci was on steroids for the Duk Koo Kim fight? No, but Kim died anyway. The point is boxing is risk. Everyone knows that and enters the ring of their own free will. Permanent injuries happen in professional boxing. They always will.
I guess my overarching point here is that the world has made entirely too big a deal out of steroid use in sports, but it always seems to come from some kind of moral, judgemental place instead of a clear-headed and reasoned one. I’m not saying I’m right, I just want this point of view to be included in the conversation without getting a heated, emotional response.
Wear something sexy to my funeral.
Interesting points Pops, but let me throw a hypothetical scenario at you..
I believe you’re part of the Broner team. If Broner was brutally KO’d, and it was found out later his opponent was on PED’s, would it change your opinion on PED’s?
Or do you just accept it’s the risk a boxer takes when stepping b/t the ropes?
brutally KO’d and brain-damaged, that is.
And this comment raises the question, or red flag even, Is Broner on PEDs?
There is no safety in numbers, or in anything else--James Thurber, 1939
Now, now...
No Bill O’Reilly logical fallacy argument tricks. I may be in boxing, but I’m far from stupid.
Wear something sexy to my funeral.
Hmmm.
Well, first, I’m with the amateur program that produced Adrien not the professional team. I assume he is clean, but I have no idea. If I’m honest with myself, am I pissed? Sure, that’s human nature. But would I try as hard as I can to end up with a clear-headed evaluation of the situation? Yes, I would try. Not sure if I would succeed there, but I would try. I still stand by what I said above, but with a hypocritical caveat.
Wear something sexy to my funeral.
Great stuff! I think you read my mind.
I just have a real hard time giving a shit about PEDs. I get why people care, but I don’t really have a big moral or ethical issue with them personally. I say just make it an option for everybody. Every fighter has the option to create a level playing field by using some PEDs.
If you guys have Netflix or a similar service check out the documentary, “Bigger, Stronger, Faster”. It might change how you think about PEDs.
You raise some good points but I think that specially for combat sports you really can not leave morals outside of the question. I had this discussion a while back with some people here and I think everyone would object with allowing a flyweight fighting a heavyweight, or allowing a fighter to load his gloves or alter his gloves in any manner, and the reason is that these types of advantages would probably end up seriously hurting or killing one fighter. We all know that boxing is a dangerous sport even when all possible precautions are taken, the point is, why make it even more dangerous by allowing substances that would give an advantage to one fighter in strength or endurance or speed over another?, all of which in the end could translate to much higher risk of damage.
I can understand why it can seem hard to see where to draw the line in what to allow and what not to, like you say, technology advances, and things that athletes today legally have at their disposal where not available to athletes 10 or 20 or 50 years ago. But actually I think the line is very simple to draw.
EPO, HGH, steroids, surgeries, all of these were researched and/or developed as therapies or interventions to medical condictions, to correct health problems, which is why you need a doctor get a prescription for any of them. No ethical doctor would prescribe HGH to a person without a hormonal deficiency for example. Very few of the known PEDs were actually developed with the sole purpose of being used as a PED.
Vitamins, dietary supplements, better training regimes, etc are not medical treatments.
I’ll give you a more personal example. I work in the field of neuroscience and rehabilitation medicine. Every researcher in this field is trying to prevent/restore functions lost due to neurological diseases like parkinsons or ALS or injuries like spinal cord injury. Some advancements at the laboratory level have made it possible to have paralyzed test subjects to control robotic arms or computer cursors with computer chips implanted in their brains. This means that some years down the road a fighter could say, you know what, screw this PED bullshit, why am I wasting my time getting just a bit stronger than the next guy, when I could get robotic arms and be as strong as robocop.
So at least to me the line is not that hard to see, if the original intent of the substance or intervention is to treat a medical condition, then it should only be used for that purpose and under medical supervision. Everything else, use as you please.
I care, but to be honest, I feel like I don’t know enough about this incredibly complex topic to have a very valuable opinion. Lots of shades of grey here. I would prefer a more rigorous testing regiment, managed by proven experts, for big fights, but I’m not going to let the issue get in the way of my enjoyment of boxing in the meanwhile. I guess I’m selfish that way.
Boxing writer: "Iran, what are you going to do when you retire?"
Iran Barkley: "Rob your house"
Also, this is a top story right now on my Google news feed.
Nice job.
Boxing writer: "Iran, what are you going to do when you retire?"
Iran Barkley: "Rob your house"
DOPE!
(no pun intended.. ha)
"After this, I'm gonna kick Bob Arum's ass."
-George Lopez
by Eddie Gonzalez on Nov 3, 2011 2:40 PM EDT up reply actions
The war on peds will prove to be about as useful...
as the war on drugs.
roids should be allowed.
The next step is a feasible (cost effective) implementation
One potentially false opinion that came out of the baseball steroid scandals is that the commission and owners secretly want or encourage to be used.
I personally don’t think this is the case with boxing, not out of altruism but because boxers are just so many pawns to promotional interests whether they all use steroids or no one uses steroids the system wouldn’t benefit the money makers more necessarily.
Olympic style drug testing is more expensive and time consuming ergo it isn’t used, ergo there are potentially abusers ergo there is doubt shed on everyone.
I think a solution is to have a sort of “franchise player” distinction granted the top 5 contenders. These contenders must be tested randomly and continuously all year in exchange for title shots and access to television dates. The amateurs and journeyman will be tested using the old system, but once they want to step up they have to undergo the procedure. If you drop out of the franchise status you have to work your way up and “sit out” a year of eligibility for championship belts again.
Wouldn’t t be grand if there was a commission strong enough to demand all that?
ive always liked the idea that world title fights feature usada testing (or the equivalent)
i think that is realistic (as it can be in boxing) and would make sense.
is this the end all be all solution? ehh its close enough
but this would involve innumerable commissions and sanctioning bodies all agreeing on something so who knows if we’ll ever see something even close
"After this, I'm gonna kick Bob Arum's ass."
-George Lopez
by Eddie Gonzalez on Nov 3, 2011 5:44 PM EDT up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Bad Left Hook
Related FanShots on Bad Left Hook
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
