Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: NFL Players Ready To Welcome Gay Teammate

Drug Testing Issue Targets Manny Pacquiao, But It's Not Just About Manny Pacquiao

Former BALCO head Victor Conte has been advising athletes in all sports -- including boxing -- since his release from prison. (Photo by David Paul Morris/Getty Images)

It's the topic that won't -- and you can argue should not -- go away. And it's perhaps good that it doesn't go away, but this isn't just about Manny Pacquiao, or the fanatics on either side claiming that he cheats or he doesn't.

This was the official statement from Team Pacquiao (whose lawyers drafted and released it) regarding the whole idiotic hoax from last week:

"I have never taken steroids, HGH, or any kind of banned performance-enhancement drugs. Period. My success in the ring is due to hard work, belief in God, and the support of my fans. Like every boxer, I'm required to take drug tests in connection with every professional fight I have in the United States. I have passed every one, including my victory against Oscar de la Hoya and my most recent victory against Shane Mosley. I will fight to protect my hard-earned good name and reputation."

While it's a solid public statement, look, you cannot get around the fact that the drug testing used by U.S. boxing commissions is weak. Fair being fair -- so let's be fair -- saying, "I take drug tests for every fight," should not by itself erase doubts if anyone has them. It just shouldn't work that way because the drug tests can't detect the stuff that someone of Pacquiao's means would in theory be using. I'm not saying Manny Pacquiao can tell you what he would theoretically be on, I'm saying the guy someone would hire for someone like Manny Pacquiao could.

And before anyone takes that the wrong way, or you can't read so great: I'm not accusing Manny Pacquiao of using anything. This is hypothetical and you could replace the name "Manny Pacquiao" with the name "Floyd Mayweather" or the name "Shane Mosley" (who also never failed a drug test when he was a BALCO client) or the name "Ricardo Mayorga." And again: I'm not accusing any of them, or anyone, of using anything. I don't know if anyone does anything or who does what, but I'm also certain that unless you're being truly careless about it, the tests that boxing commissions use don't know either.

Truth be told, not many things involving boxing these days are bigger than Manny Pacquiao. But this subject is.

Star-divide

It has gotten to the point now where those not involved in the whole Pacquiao/Mayweather business are speaking about the subject.

Andre Ward talked about the idea of using Olympic-style testing, which as some pointed out could be a bit curious given that he currently works with former BALCO head Victor Conte. Here's what Ward said:

"I think it is [necessary for boxing]. I would welcome it. I think it's great. That way there is no confusion about who's playing on an even playing field. This is a dangerous sport. You hear whispers about guys, what they're doing and not doing. You have to figure out who's oing to pay for it, but once we get past that - I think it should be something that's mplemented in every big fight," Ward said.

As for the Conte connection, it is what it is. This is the land of opportunity and all that crap, and a land of second chances. Plus I just can't get myself worked up the way some do -- we're talking about a guy who used his knowledge to help willing athletes cheat at sports, not a dangerous predator or something like that. This is not about keeping the pedophile away from the middle school, which is the way some seem to take it. A version of Victor Conte not bent on cheating the system is valuable because he has the knowledge to beat the system if he wants to, but that doesn't mean he has to, and he knows very well what he's doing. I understand some don't trust Conte to not cheat, and I don't either, the same as being the Average Joe I am, I wouldn't trust Michael Vick to watch my dogs while I went on vacation, or any other similar situation. But he works with Ward, Nonito Donaire, and Eddie Chambers, among others, and hey, maybe he's legit now. I can see it.

Ward is right that the issue of paying for this testing -- which is much more expensive than the current system -- is an issue. Obviously unless something major happens and this is funded through an outside source, you can't test everyone this way. It's also just not reasonable for any commission anywhere to run around chasing guys on the undercard of club fights in some podunk town to take random tests. It won't fly, and it's silly to try that.

Leo Solis offered this in the comments of one of our threads on the topic:

Maybe a way to increase the coverage in boxing would be to link the requirment of the test to the overall cost of the card and not necessarily the purse of one particular fight. So if say the cost of the putting together a whole card exceeds say 30K (or whatever number you like), then mandate that all fighters on the card get tested. This could be a good initial step.

A better option for the long term, given that for these tests to work as they are intended they should be applied year round, would be for the commissions to ask both fighters and promoters for a fee (tax) proportional to their yearly profits to pay for tests year round, even if the fighter does not have a fight scheduled.

And it would be a good step. But the question now is, when will the boxing commissions stop acting like they have a real testing system in place? When will they stop trying to hide from their inadequacy? I don't believe that Nevada or California or anyone truly believes they've got the best system in place. I do believe they have the best system in place that will keep everyone happy. And if they suddenly started making moves in the "right" direction, how quickly would major promoters go against them, citing concerns about cost instead of the possibly more realistic concerns about some of their star fighters being exposed, either through failing a test or what happens in the ring when the reality of fighting without artificial aid does arrive?

I've said before that I don't simply buy that anyone is clean. Not Manny, not Floyd, not Shane, not a co-feature prospect on Solo Boxeo Tecate or Box Azteca. It's because I don't know. The only things I know for sure are this: Yes, some of your favorite boxers cheat. And no, this last idiotic Pacquiao accusation doesn't prove that he's one of them, but the fact it was a hoax also doesn't prove that he's not.

The rise of performance-enhancing drugs in the last 10-15 years has made many of us cynical. But as Rafael Palmeiro taught me, sometimes the loudest voices against it are the ones you have to watch. Like in that instance, at some point, something is going to come of all of this. But names like Pacquiao and Mayweather will probably be long retired by then, because no one is in any rush to improve the current system.

Comment 17 comments  |  0 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

Fair being fair — so let’s be fair — saying, “I take drug tests for every fight,” should not by itself erase doubts if anyone has them.

Exactly. It’s like me saying I’ve never failed a Quantum Physics test and you have no proof to say I don’t know everything there is to know about Quantum Physics. Both statements are true. I have also never taken a quantum physics test, and the only way you can prove that I don’t know shit about physics is to test me. Same applies. You can’t fail a test you never take.

With regards to the cost of implementing this system, Leo brings up a good solution. i do have one question about it though. If one commission in one state applied this, would promoters balk at having big fights there in order to save money, or a fighters reputation, if another state didn’t require it? For example, say California starts requiring random olympic drug testing, would promoters just go to Nevada since they don’t require it? Would California be shooting themselves in the foot? Could a place like Nevada be able to implement this independent of any other state because of the clout and money they can make for a fight? Or would promoters then avoid Las Vegas to save a little money? My point is, would this need to be applied across the country in order for the states to accept it?

by erod on May 17, 2011 1:02 PM EDT reply actions  

I think Nevada has to back it. They’re the biggest dog in the pack here by far.

Bad Left Hook
"To the town of Agua Fria rode a stranger one fine day..."

by Scott Christ on May 17, 2011 1:04 PM EDT up reply actions  

Like taxes, you make them and everyone seeks loopholes

The simple answer is yes. Of course promoters will avoid locales that challenge their ability to build a fighters resume and implement testing fees.

Why go to Vegas with a young prospect when you can fluff his record cheaply in some Indian or Riverboat Casino off the grid…..without the added cost and risks of testing.

It’s universal or forget about it.

"Silence is golden when you can't think of a good answer"
---- Muhammed Ali

by pakinpower on May 18, 2011 3:03 AM EDT up reply actions  

Agree with Scott, Nevada would be the key here since it is the biggest market for major fights. The way I see it, since fighters have to renew their licenses every year to fight in Nevada or any state for that matter, whether they actually fight in that particular year or not, paying this test fee to cover the year round tests, and then taking the tests when required, would be mandatory to maintain the license. Technically as long as one state does it the rest do not need to do it since the tests would be applied whether the fighters fight or not, regardless of where the fighter lives, to avoid fighters doping during their off periods.

I don’t think any fighter or promoter would be willing to walk away permanently from the money they can make in Vegas just to avoid paying the test fee. So Nevada is the key in this.

Another player that could have some say in this are the TV networks (HBO and Showtime), if they agree that they’ll only buy fights from figters that are in the program it could put more pressure on the fighters and promoters that might otherwise be reluctant to do so.

by leo_solis on May 17, 2011 1:36 PM EDT reply actions  

i say if boxing has olympic style drug testing.. every sport should have it

main concern is the cost for olympic style drug testing is too much for these sport associations to afford for all their players/fighters. it’s understandable that this is a combat sport, but we have to consider that all sports have their liabilities and dangers with contact.

by D00M on May 17, 2011 3:12 PM EDT reply actions  

Like hockey. And football. For examples.

"Silence is golden when you can't think of a good answer"
---- Muhammed Ali

by pakinpower on May 18, 2011 2:56 AM EDT up reply actions  

Re Manny, not one shred or iota of probative proof. None.

"Luck is when preparation meets opportunity." - Mike Quarry

by Boss Man on May 17, 2011 3:13 PM EDT reply actions  

Please, writers are all barking at the wrong tree.

Petition the boxing commissions to adapt the Olympics Test or whatever is the best test in the world, and Pacman and all the rest will comply.

Now, it’s all talk, and boxers take the tests required. It’s not their fault if they don’t take other tests, and they are not obligated to.

Therefore, consider all, I mean ALL, pro boxers and MMA fighters to be guilty since they are just passing the commissions tests, not just Pacman. Otherwise, it reeks of ulterior motives by the accusers to single out one man.

by Eric Henry on May 17, 2011 6:41 PM EDT reply actions  

YES!
Petition the boxing commissions to adapt the Olympics Test or whatever is the best test in the world, and Pacman and all the rest will comply.

That’s exactly it. Everything else is just baying at the moon.

There is no safety in numbers, or in anything else--James Thurber, 1939

by BoxAnne on May 18, 2011 5:32 AM EDT up reply actions  

ALL the boxing commissions

Surely, eventually, even the Texas- and Arkansas-type Commissions would follow along.

There is no safety in numbers, or in anything else--James Thurber, 1939

by BoxAnne on May 18, 2011 6:13 AM EDT up reply actions  

Seriously, how do you apply any protocol in some cases and not others.

Let’s say a guy shows up from Country X or State Y with a pumped up undefeated record full of victories achieved ‘outside the grid’. Does he desereve to be a candidate for a big money fight. He’s undefeated…but we know nothing not only about his victims but about him; at least not in term of having been drug tested.

Then Fighter X arrives among the elite and we know he’s been fighting in a ‘clean’ state where testing is mandatory all his life. And so have his victims.

How do we know if or how to judge and thus match them.
We don’t. We can’t.

Not unless testing protocol is universal and enforced.

"Silence is golden when you can't think of a good answer"
---- Muhammed Ali

by pakinpower on May 18, 2011 2:51 AM EDT reply actions  

Agree that the testing should be universal and enforced as globally as possible, however that does not happen and is not going to happen, not for boxing, not for any sport, even the olympics. The olympic style stesting applied to the olympics only is implemented for the actual olympics and the top tier qualifying events, at the lower levels, the testing could vary a lot by region or country. For professional soccer, the testing that goes on at the different leagues in the world can vary by country, however, once teams or players become involved in international torunaments sanctioned by FIFA, then they must adhere to the testing FIFA stipulates. In other words, we may not know for certain how they got to the big stage, however, once at the big stage, we could be more confident of their progress forward. If we assume boxing in the US is like the equivalent of playing in the major leagues (in terms of the size of the purses), a nation wide program that at least gives better certainty about fights and fighters fighting in the US is a doable thing if (and that is a big if), all the players involved agree to it.

by leo_solis on May 18, 2011 1:24 PM EDT up reply actions  

 

In other words, we may not know for certain how they got to the big stage, however, once at the big stage, we could be more confident of their progress forward.

Exactly—surely fighters would see that cheating to get to the upper echelon, if it’s going to be prevented when you get there, isn’t going to be a career extender overall.

if (and that is a big if), all the players involved agree to it

They’d look kind of suspect if they didn’t, though, wouldn’t they? Even en masse, plus, if the commission says do it, they’d kind of have to, wouldn’t they? That is, they can’t say no now to the tests currently available and be licensed to fight, wouldn’t it just be an extension of that?

There is no safety in numbers, or in anything else--James Thurber, 1939

by BoxAnne on May 18, 2011 4:41 PM EDT reply actions  

Sorry for the late reply, I just saw your post. In my comment about all the players involved having to agree before any system is implemented I meant also the commissions and promoters, not just the boxers. It’s true that once the commission says things are going to be this way then that’s it, there is no way around it if a fighter wants to fight. But based on some of the points people have touched on on the thread, and the fact that changes in boxing are pretty hard to come by, I think there is and probably there will still be reluctance from everyone (commissions, promoters, fighters) to implement the necessary changes, since everyone will be looking after themselves and people’s goals are hardly always the same.

by leo_solis on May 20, 2011 2:14 AM EDT up reply actions  

I had misread “players” as meaning fighters. You’re right about the promoters and trainers. Change seems to be the last thing anybody wants in any sport, disrupts exactly what needs to be disrupted, always uncomfortable.

There is no safety in numbers, or in anything else--James Thurber, 1939

by BoxAnne on May 22, 2011 11:13 AM EDT up reply actions  

It makes me sad to say but I don’t think it’s coincidence that BALCO broke at about the same time Roy did. Just my opinion.

Disarm you with a smile ....

by Sir Jack Daniels on May 28, 2011 2:28 PM EDT reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recent FanPosts

Zoom_2_small
Ward needs to leave SM, and SM needs him to leave
Reds_small
Ray Robinson And Cassius Clay, Together For The First Time
Buchanan
David Price and Seth Mitchell: How to Properly Develop a Heavyweight
Small
Sterioids in Boxing!!
Ali-frazier_small
Aaron Pryor vs Floyd Mayweather.
017_small
Adrien Broner - Real or Imitation
Small
Press Release: Top Rank purchases WBC
Buchanan
Is Boxing Dead?
Singleton04_small
It's Not if but When, they're fires stop burning
Reds_small
A Few Ballroom Bout Results

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >


Managing Editor

206480_10150226708710923_747385922_9037192_4017321_n_small Scott Christ

Editors & Moderators

Aki_hair_cropped_small Brickhaus

Boxing_icon_small Matt Miller

Profile_picture_small Brent Brookhouse

Ingo_small A.F.

Contributors

Henry_leeds_small Oli Goldstein

Chris_celletti_headshot_small Chris Celletti

Duran4-470x308_small Kory Kitchen

051_small Thomas Hill