The recent spate of failed drug tests has underscored an obvious – and troubling – problem in boxing.
Thus, THE RING Editorial Board decided it was time to make a strong statement: From now on, any fighter who tests positive for a banned substance will immediately be removed from THE RING Ratings.
That fighter would be reinstated if the testing agency reverses its decision. And he will be allowed to earn his way back into the ratings after any suspension.
Here is the new RING policy:
THE RING will remove from its ratings any rated fighter – including a champion – if such fighter at some point undergoes drug testing (Olympic-style or otherwise) and that fighter tests positve for a banned substance.
In the event that a fighter has undergone testing in which the fighter provides two samples ("A" and "B") and the fighter's "A" and subsequent “B” samples test positive for a banned substance or if his “A” sample tests positive and he waives his right to have the “B” sample tested then the fighter shall immediately be removed from the ratings.
A fighter whose “A” sample tested positive and is awaiting the results of his “B” sample will not be allowed to fight for a championship or rise in the ratings.
A fighter who is removed because of a postitive test will have the opportunity to earn his way back into the ratings after any suspension period is completed.
A fighter who is dropped also may be reinstated if the testing agency subsequently reverses its decision or a court of competent jursidiction finds that the test result was invalid.
This means that Andre Berto, who had been rated No. 3 in the welterweight division, and Lamont Peterson, No. 1 at junior welterweight, have been removed from THE RING Ratings.
Berto’s rematch with Victor Ortiz, scheduled for June 23 in Los Angeles, was canceled after Berto tested positive (both “A” and “B” samples) for the steroid norandrosterone. Peterson tested positive (“A” and “B”) for synthetic testosterone, which scuttled his May 19 rematch with Amir Khan in Las Vegas.
Peterson, who said he had a testosterone pellet implanted for medical reasons, has applied for a license with the Nevada State Athletic Commission and is awaiting a hearing. He must convince the commissioners that the violation was inadvertent.
Berto and Peterson were tested by the Voluntary Anti-Doping Association.
Cruiserweight Antonio Tarver tested posititive for the steroid drostanolone after he fought to a draw with Lateef Kayode on June 2 in Carson, Calif. The California State Athletic Commission, which conducted that test, suspended Tarver for a year.
However, Tarver will remain in the ratings for now because he has said he will exercise his right to have his “B” sample tested. THE RING will not make a decision on its No. 6-rated 200-pounder until the process has played out.
The decision to drop Peterson elevates Nos. 2 and 3 junior welterweights Amir Khan and Danny Garcia to Nos. 1 and 2. Thus, their fight on Saturday in Las Vegas will be for THE RING 140-pound championship.
http://r i n g t v.craveonline.com/blog/173769-ring-ratings-update-those-who-fail-drug-tests-are-out
What about fighters who refuse testing? I don't think they should stop there....i think they should just outright do not include fighters who refuse testing.
This is my only call.
Past due...
I looked at the ratings the past week and had an issue with these fighters still being ranked where they were as if the situations never took place. I think that the exit shouldn't be permanent, as long as they were to earn their ranking this is a temporary setback...
Peterson twiced pulled out of his hearing...
IBF are just blind and they simply dont like khan..
they will probably strip peterson when khan moves up.
There are rumors that the IBF is biased towards black fighters.
No, drugs are suppose to increase your HEALTH. Bring you back to the state you were in pre-illness.
Taking a pill to cure a headache doesn't enhance your performance, it takes you back to the you, you were before the headache. You don't develop strength from Tylenol.
Taking anything containing testosterone, which gives someone an edge on strength, ability to build muscle etc, is an unfair advantage and would give the person an unfair advantage over someone who is solely relying on their body's natural product of it? At least that's the way I see things ...
Good post
There are banned substances that do EXACTLY the same thing.
These "performance enhancing drugs" allow your body to recover faster i.e. bring your body back to a pre-stress state-- so that you can get back to the gym and train more.
Whey Protein claims to do the same thing, albeit to a lesser degree. The line at which one goes from legal to banned is entirely arbitrary.
These wholly arbitrary lines are drawn by testing organizations, labs, and athletic commissions that need a reason to exist so that they can have jobs so that they can get paid so that they can pay their mortgages.
But you have to draw a line somewhere. It's like the age of majority, it's arbitrary but necessary. Many substances can enhance your performance, a lot of them naturally, but that doesn't mean there isn't a category of substances that are much more effective than the other. You have to make a distinction.
If this rule was put in effect after Berto and Peterson tested postitive, and they still got punished, then JCC Jr should be out too. Now if the rule was in effect, and then Berto and Peterson were punished, I would understand JCC Jr not getting punished.
I agree 100%.
My only problem is with the hypocrisy of the athletic commissions, testing organizations, and boxing writers that act like one type of performance enhancing drug is evil whereas others are perfectly fine.
Just be honest and admit that you ban some for being "too effective". Whereas the sh#tty ones are fine because they don't work that well.
But they are ALL meant to be "performance enhancing".
I can agree with the bold.
As to the last sentence, I still don't see how every drug is performance enhancing when some are meant to maintain health and restore health.
Bulls hit. There is such thing as a healthy level of testosterone. If a person has less than needed (see James Toney), they are in an unhealthy state without it.
Right, but if someone has a lower than average or 'normal' production of testosterone, taking something that contains it to bring them to their opponents level not above it, surely isn't cheating, but evening the playing field is it not?
Taking anything above that, that would increase it above and beyond his opponent is.
There are banned substances that do EXACTLY the same thing.
These "performance enhancing drugs" allow your body to recover faster i.e. bring your body back to a pre-stress state-- so that you can get back to the gym and train more.
Whey Protein claims to do the same thing, albeit to a lesser degree. The line at which one goes from legal to banned is entirely arbitrary.
These wholly arbitrary lines are drawn by testing organizations, labs, and athletic commissions that need a reason to exist so that they can have jobs so that they can get paid so that they can pay their mortgages.
I understand your point, I do.
But there is clearly a reason certain substances and banned and others are not. Do you think they take an alphabetical list of substances and say hmmm let's ban everything that starts with the letters A, S T, Y, X, V, G, B, U, and O? There is a reason substance are banned. I for one think it's a good thing.
People rely on pills, powders and medication far too much now, what the hell did people do before all of these things?
No, drugs are suppose to increase your HEALTH. Bring you back to the state you were in pre-illness.
Taking a pill to cure a headache doesn't enhance your performance, it takes you back to the you, you were before the headache. You don't develop strength from Tylenol.
Taking anything containing testosterone, which gives someone an edge on strength, ability to build muscle etc, is an unfair advantage and would give the person an unfair advantage over someone who is solely relying on their body's natural product of it? At least that's the way I see things ...
Bulls hit. There is such thing as a healthy level of testosterone. If a person has less than needed (see James Toney), they are in an unhealthy state without it.
Okaaay....So what about fighters that refuse to do random testing?
Lesson learned: Refuse random testing and keep your rating in Ring Magazine.
The only way something like this would work is if all fighters go through the same testing.
They can't enforce this on people who refuse testing. Testing is not a mandatory thing in boxing YET (hoping one day it will be). Therefore they can't enforce it on people who refuse testing. Im assuming you're talking about people who refuse to do random testing of course.
On the other hand, like I asked, what if the person dodges the commission's testing like Chavez Jr did and the other guys? THEN that SHOULD BE punishable IMO.
All drugs are supposed to "enhance performance". If your Doctor gives you a drug that DECREASES YOUR PERFORMANCE, you should sue him.
No, drugs are suppose to increase your HEALTH. Bring you back to the state you were in pre-illness.
Taking a pill to cure a headache doesn't enhance your performance, it takes you back to the you, you were before the headache. You don't develop strength from Tylenol.
Taking anything containing testosterone, which gives someone an edge on strength, ability to build muscle etc, is an unfair advantage and would give the person an unfair advantage over someone who is solely relying on their body's natural product of it? At least that's the way I see things ...
This is some of the most retarded nonsense I've ever read.
EVERYTHING athletes take is meant to be "performance enhancing"!!!
Multivitamins, iron, calcium supplements, BCAAs-- they are ALLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL meant to "enhance performance"!!!!!!
Melatonin, to help you sleep, so that you can train better the next day-- PERFORMANCE ENHANCING.
Excedrin, to make your headache go away, so that you can function at the gym-- PERFORMANCE ENHANCING.
Whey Protein, to help you recover, so that you can train better the next day-- PERFORMANCE ENHANCING.
Everything is performance enhancing!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
WTF is going on??? It's like we live in a bizarro world of retards!!!
You make a good point but what's the solution?
Just legalize it all and and call it good?
What's ok and what's not?
Okaaay....So what about fighters that refuse to do random testing?
Lesson learned: Refuse random testing and keep your rating in Ring Magazine.
The only way something like this would work is if all fighters go through the same testing.
All drugs are supposed to "enhance performance". If your Doctor gives you a drug that DECREASES YOUR PERFORMANCE, you should sue him.
You can play dumb all you want bro.
This is some of the most retarded nonsense I've ever read.
EVERYTHING athletes take is meant to be "performance enhancing"!!!
Multivitamins, iron, calcium supplements, BCAAs-- they are ALLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL meant to "enhance performance"!!!!!!
Melatonin, to help you sleep, so that you can train better the next day-- PERFORMANCE ENHANCING.
Excedrin, to make your headache go away, so that you can function at the gym-- PERFORMANCE ENHANCING.
Whey Protein, to help you recover, so that you can train better the next day-- PERFORMANCE ENHANCING.
Everything is performance enhancing!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
WTF is going on??? It's like we live in a bizarro world of retards!!!
I think we all know which type of performance enhancing drugs they are talking about. Chavez Jr and yourself should know pretty well.
What about fighters who refuse testing? I don't think they should stop there....i think they should just outright do not include fighters who refuse testing.
By testing you mean random testing? Only a handful of fighters do that. They'd have to remove most people from their rankings.
what about jcc jr testing positive for banned substances.
LOL good question.............
Actually, your question should be more like: What if a fighter dodges a pre/post fight test? Like you know who. As a matter of fact Im gonna go over there and bring this up.
What about fighters who refuse testing? I don't think they should stop there....i think they should just outright do not include fighters who refuse testing.