A Win for Conventional Wisdom
The Nevada State Athletic Commission banned testosterone replacement therapy (TRT) and the people celebrated. The people who put on the fights, cover the fights and watch the fights all reacted in unison. "Yay! A win for fair play."
It is a win for fair play. As MMA fan/anti-drug advocate Lance Storm liked to say, TRT doesn't level the playing field, it levels the player. The egalitarian ideal is that each sportsman trains and studies and uses his natural talent to compete under the agreed upon rules. People born with a disability must compete with that disability. Being born with low testosterone would be treated no differently than being born with a poor work ethic. Some will succeed, but most will never join the elite.
The Nevada Commission's ruling is also a win for the public perception of MMA. The scolds have been held at bay. The loudest online fans and the most muckraking journalists will have to wait another day to complain.
Some complainers have already charted course. "Fighters don't get tested often enough." "Carbon isotrope ratio (CIR) testing needs to be used." "UFC should perform the tests instead of the state athletic commissions." All are valid complaints. Most are made with pure intentions.
What is missing from this debate is honest talk about health. The health of the sport and the health of fighters.
Fighting is better when both fighters have high testosterone levels. MMA journalists, fans and promoters may be unwilling to say it, but their actions betray their agreement. How many times has fight of the night been awarded when neither man is aggressive? When was the last time a fighter was lauded for showing up with a less impressive physique than in his previous fight? How many standing ovations happen after clean knockouts? Higher testosterone helps all of those things. Energy, aggressiveness and physique are all improved when a man's testosterone levels are higher. There is no dispute there.
There is a dispute over how much harm testosterone replacement therapy causes fighters. Getting punched or kicked by a drug-fueled fighter does more damage. That is known. What is unknown is how much testosterone might help a fighter's reflexes, thus allowing him to avoid a clean punch. Or whether the ability to use testosterone-based drugs to recover from injury might allow a fighter to put himself in a less vulnerable position once the fight begins. Or whether drugs that aid endurance, like EPO, might allow a fighter to avoid the punishment that often comes from being out of gas in the Octagon. It is possible that the net effect of allowing TRT would be a positive for fighter health.
By banning TRT before exhaustive scientific studies can be done, the Nevada State Athletic Commission is pushing the MMA world further away from learning whether it helps or harms the health of fighters. That is a shame. Maybe promoting fair play at the expense of science is worth it. Maybe a rigid code for athletes is best and maybe the sport should risk harming the health of fighters at the altar of that code. The author isn't so certain.
It is a win for fair play. As MMA fan/anti-drug advocate Lance Storm liked to say, TRT doesn't level the playing field, it levels the player. The egalitarian ideal is that each sportsman trains and studies and uses his natural talent to compete under the agreed upon rules. People born with a disability must compete with that disability. Being born with low testosterone would be treated no differently than being born with a poor work ethic. Some will succeed, but most will never join the elite.
The Nevada Commission's ruling is also a win for the public perception of MMA. The scolds have been held at bay. The loudest online fans and the most muckraking journalists will have to wait another day to complain.
Some complainers have already charted course. "Fighters don't get tested often enough." "Carbon isotrope ratio (CIR) testing needs to be used." "UFC should perform the tests instead of the state athletic commissions." All are valid complaints. Most are made with pure intentions.
What is missing from this debate is honest talk about health. The health of the sport and the health of fighters.
Fighting is better when both fighters have high testosterone levels. MMA journalists, fans and promoters may be unwilling to say it, but their actions betray their agreement. How many times has fight of the night been awarded when neither man is aggressive? When was the last time a fighter was lauded for showing up with a less impressive physique than in his previous fight? How many standing ovations happen after clean knockouts? Higher testosterone helps all of those things. Energy, aggressiveness and physique are all improved when a man's testosterone levels are higher. There is no dispute there.
There is a dispute over how much harm testosterone replacement therapy causes fighters. Getting punched or kicked by a drug-fueled fighter does more damage. That is known. What is unknown is how much testosterone might help a fighter's reflexes, thus allowing him to avoid a clean punch. Or whether the ability to use testosterone-based drugs to recover from injury might allow a fighter to put himself in a less vulnerable position once the fight begins. Or whether drugs that aid endurance, like EPO, might allow a fighter to avoid the punishment that often comes from being out of gas in the Octagon. It is possible that the net effect of allowing TRT would be a positive for fighter health.
By banning TRT before exhaustive scientific studies can be done, the Nevada State Athletic Commission is pushing the MMA world further away from learning whether it helps or harms the health of fighters. That is a shame. Maybe promoting fair play at the expense of science is worth it. Maybe a rigid code for athletes is best and maybe the sport should risk harming the health of fighters at the altar of that code. The author isn't so certain.
Comments
Post a Comment