WASHINGTON, DC - DECEMBER 10: (L-R) Lamont Peterson celebrates with the belt after defeating Amir Khan during the Capital Showdown: Khan v Peterson WBA/IBF World light-welterweight title bout at Washington Convention Center on December 10, 2011 in Washington, DC. (Photo by Al Bello/Getty Images)
Before writing up my last update on the Lamont Peterson vs. Amir Khan situation with Peterson failing a pre-fight test administered by VADA (Volunteer Anti-Doping Agency) I had left a message with Keith Kizer and hadn't heard back yet. I just got off the phone with the Nevada State Athletic Commission executive director and have more details on the situation.
- In mid-April, the "A-Sample" for Peterson came back positive. This led to Team Peterson challenging the findings and having the "B-Sample" tested. At that point, Peterson was "shocked" and couldn't see any way he failed the test.
- Once the B-sample came back positive as well, Peterson remembered that he was given a "testosterone pellet" by his doctor before the first fight with Khan in December. Kizer said that, from what he understood, they are saying that he has not used it since, and that they're blaming it on that pellet back in December. No word on why the doctor gave it to him to begin with.
- Kizer had to call the Mandalay Bay, HBO and Golden Boy to inform them of the positive test. Golden Boy is claiming that they had no idea, which would mean that Team Peterson did not inform them of any of this going on during the almost two months prior.
- From his understanding, Peterson did not disclose any testosterone pellet on VADA paperwork.
Obviously, there's not a lot that needs to be said here. It sounds like they're going with the predictable "my doctor gave it to me" excuse, which hasn't worked at any point recently that I've seen.
I've covered a few of these stories on the MMA side of my job and guys like Alistair Overeem and Muhammed Lawal who have tested positive and blamed it on either a doctor's prescription or tainted supplements have still been smacked with a suspension or a denial of license.
I'd expect (but to be clear, Kizer did not say this) that the NSAC will deny Peterson's fighter license and lay down a ruling that he can not re-apply for one year. That's basically their maximum punishment in this situation. Then, he can re-apply in a year and they can decide if they're willing to grant it again or if they'll make him wait another length of time. The Nevada decision would be upheld by every state with a reputable commission, so effectively I'm expecting to not see Peterson fight for at least one year.