A PreView of Things to Come Installment # 2 - Weight Classes and Weight Cutting

A short while ago, I posted the inaugural article in my original series, “A PreView of Things to Come”. The first installment dealt with sponsorships, both on regional and national levels, and my thoughts on how that aspect of MMA will develop over the next few years.

With this second entry, I am going to examine two obviously related topics – weight classes and weight cutting. Since I have never had the (dis)pleasure of cutting weight, I decided to go to the experts for some comments on methods of cutting weight, short and long term effects on the body, and general thoughts on the makeup of the MMA weight class layout. To that end, you will hear from sports medicine professional and MMA enthusiast Dr. Johnny Benjamin, professional fighter Chad “H-Bomb” Hinton, and a friend of mine who was a high school state wrestling champion and national powerlifting champion who wishes to remain anonymous so I will call him “Power”.

The majority of the article will focus on the weight-cutting side of things as opposed to weight classes, but I feel at least a cursory look at the weight class structure of MMA is a good set up to the second half. Additionally, given that my experience in following and reporting on MMA is almost entirely based on promotions in the United States, it is weight classes in U.S.-based organizations that I will discuss.

The UFC, the sport’s premier promotion, offers fighters the choice of fighting in one or more of five weight classes:

Lightweight - over 145 lbs. to 155 lbs.
Welterweight - over 155 lbs. to 170 lbs.
Middleweight - over 170 lbs. to 185 lbs.
Light Heavyweight - over 185 lbs. to 205 lbs.
Heavyweight - over 205 lbs. to 265 lbs.

However, as many people who follow the sport beyond the UFC know, other promotions (including the WEC, owned by the same parent company as the UFC) utilize more weight classes, some on the lower and some on the higher end of the spectrum.

These classes include:

Flyweight – Upper limit of 125 lbs.
Bantamweight – over 125 lbs. to 135 lbs.
Featherweight – over 135 lbs. to 145 lbs.
Super Heavyweight – Anything over 265 lbs.

The weight classes are not generally determined by the promotion but instead by the Athletic Commission of the state in which the promotion is hosting the show. However, the UFC does not stray beyond its five-class set-up except in cases of a catch-weight, which is most often used when a fighter fails to weigh in at the appropriate weight. However, the UFC will host a catch-weight fight as the main event of UFC 99 on June 13th in Cologne, Germany when Rich Franklin and Wanderlei Silva meet at a catch-weight of 195 lbs.

Many pundits have argued for the inclusion of more weight classes, not just of the ones not commonly featured in the UFC, but for a new structure of weight classes altogether, most readily comparable to the scheme used in professional boxing. In fact, a proposed resolution from the Association of Boxing Commissioners would allow a total of fourteen weight classes in MMA starting as low as 105 lbs and rising in ten pound increments until it increased to twenty and then forty between the last three classes. You can find the proposed chart on the MMA Weight Class wikipedia page (linked above).

There are numerous arguments for or against the inclusion of additional classes or for overhauling the system altogether. Ultimately, I think all of these arguments should fail, an idea further evidenced by the fact that the UFC and a number of state athletic Commissions such as Ohio and New Jersey have rejected the 14-weight class scheme.

For one, more weight classes tend to water down the divisions. Now instead of having X number of fighters in an extremely stacked Lightweight division, you’re going to have X number of fighters spread across three or possibly four different divisions that are all around lightweight. Further, more weight classes would allow for fighters to try and jump around the different classes more so that they could gain the most advantage on their opponents. Fellow FightTicker.com blogger Mike Menninger and myself were recently discussing the idea of adding more weight classes and we both agreed that regardless of how many classes there are, the vast majority of the fighters are still going to try and get their weight down to the lowest they possibly can so that they can fight in a division where they might have more strength or weight than a given opponent once they put the weight back on after the cutting process. In fact, while one of the stated reasons for a larger number of weight classes is actually safety, the addition of more weight could put a larger number of fighters at risk for weight cutting related health issues.

Think about it. For a fighter who normally cuts to 170, under the 14-class system, there is no 170 lb class, it’s either 165 lbs or 175 lbs. I don’t think it’s a stretch to say that a lot of guys would probably give 165 a try to see if their bodies could handle it. Just like Mike and I said, the majority of the fighters will do whatever they can to get to the lowest weight at which they could compete.

Consider a guy like Rich Franklin, who seems to have his weight cutting down to an exact science. Instead of stopping at 185 lbs he could just alter his diet a little bit more and make the drop down to 175 lbs. Then you have a guy in the 175 class who would enter the fight probably over 200 lbs. Facing a guy who may have dropped to 175 from 190, Franklin would already have a ten-pound advantage over the guy as well as likely having a generally larger frame than most guys who would fight in that class.

Beyond the issues of fighter safety, the addition of so many new classes would be a logistical nightmare. As I stated before, guys could jump back and forth to classes more easily than under the current system. Additionally, can you imagine having fourteen different champions in the UFC? Granted, the UFC does not utilize all of the weight classes available, but still – thinking about both the UFC and WEC (both owned by Zuffa), between the two organizations, there could be thirteen champs. I say thirteen because I don’t think Dana would ever let in a Super Heavyweight class. The Heavyweight division is already the shallowest division in the organization and adding an additional division for even bigger guys would only make the talent that much harder to find.

The UFC should continue to utilize the five class structure. In addition to fighter safety and logistical concerns, weight cutting is a part of the sport a fighter can train for and prepare for, and the fighters who have cultivated this skill better than others should not be penalized for it.

At the close of a recent article, FightTicker.com blogger Mark Figula recently asked the question, “Does anyone see a reason same day weigh-ins shouldn’t happen?” Figula’s article spawned an interesting discussion between a number of different FightTicker readers. Figula raised some interesting points, but since I view effective and efficient weight cutting as a fighting tool all on its own, making a fighter do same day weigh-ins would be akin, in my mind, to telling a guy like Dustin Hazelett that he is only allowed to do flying armbars, none on the ground. It would not completely hamper Hazelett’s ability to use an armbar as an effective fighting tool, but it would seriously restrict when he could use it, just as same day weigh-ins would restrict how serious fighters could effectively use one of the tools in their arsenals. It wouldn’t completely take it away, but just lessen its effectiveness.

Another suggested change would be having fighters fight at a monitored walking around weight. In this scenario, fighters would be randomly weighed throughout the year and a mathematical formula would be utilized to determine their fighting weight, something like an average of their weights catalogued throughout the year. Again, I think this would unduly burden the commissions and also the athletes. Any state that adopted this method would be required to monitor all of the athletes on their rosters more than they already do. With some states having already initiated year-round drug-testing (a measure I think is much more important), these commissions would have to provide further employees to travel around to various camps and weigh these athletes. What if an athlete fights primarily in Las Vegas but lives elsewhere, as is often the case? If the athlete had to travel to Las Vegas to for one of these additional weigh-ins, who is going to pay for that expense? I’m guessing it’s not going to be the commission. Then the fighters have even more expenses.

The times would have to be random or guys could just cut weight before these off season weigh-ins. However, with out of state athletes, if they’re given time to travel, then hypothetically they could try to quickly cut weight before the weigh-in. This could put fighters at risk because many would likely try a quick cut to have their average weight be lower.

Also, new rules would have to be made to take into consideration athletes who might be injured and cannot train so they may have put on more weight than their normal walking weight. It’s also likely that rules would not be made for fighters who just tend to walk around at a heavier weight. Take a guy like Wanderlei Silva or even Joe Stevenson – both are rumored to walk around much heavier than their fighting weights. I don’t want to penalize a guy (or girl) for walking around at a higher weight during their “off season”. Mandating more regulations like this would only put a bigger burden on the fighters. In spite of the fact that MMA is, at its core, a sport where technique can be used to overpower a heavier opponent, weight can clearly make a difference in MMA.

Everyone who is reading this can probably think of a time when two fighters both made weight in the same class but then stepped in the cage and the two looked nothing alike in relation to size. Just think of Randy Couture vs. Brock Lesnar. Granted, the Heavyweight class has more leeway, but still – the site of the two of them facing off at the weigh in showed two fighters of drastically different sizes and when they stepped into the Octagon the difference was even more pronounced, as it was heavily rumored that Lesnar was cutting from somewhere in the area of 280-300 lbs to make weight at 265.

However, some states have other safeguards in place. Take Ohio, for example. When I arrived at the weigh-ins for the recent ICF: Breakout event, I was told that the pro fighters were going to have to weigh in again the next day prior to the event, and that they could not have gained more than thirteen pounds from the first weigh-in or they would be penalized. However, this is thirteen pounds from their actual first-day weigh-in number, not just thirteen above the class. Take Chad Hinton who won his fight that night with the FightTicker.com KO of the Night over former UFC fighter Jeff Cox – had Hinton weighed in at 154 lbs the first day, he would have been penalized if he had weighed in at more than 167 lbs the second day. (For the record, Hinton made weight both days without a problem.)

Totally unaware of this procedure until I arrived at the weigh-ins the night before the event, I spoke to the rep from the Ohio State Athletic Commission who was there the day of the event and he said that rule had been in place for a while, and that all pro MMA fighters were subject to it across all promotions – so yes, all of the fighters who have fought in the UFC events in Columbus and Cincinnati also had to deal with that rule and weigh in both the day before the fight and the day off.

The rep from Commission also showed me these Ohio Administrative Regulations:

----------

3773-7-03 Weigh In Procedures

(E) When a weigh-in is conducted the day prior to the event, with the exception of the super-heavyweight class, all other contestants must weigh-in at a second weigh-in the next day scheduled by the commission within eight hours of the starting time of the event. The contestant may not be more than thirteen pounds heavier than their recorded weight from the day prior.

(F) No contestant may lose more than three pounds in less than a two-hour period. This rule applies to a second-day weigh-in also. This does not apply to light heavyweight class and above.

----------

Whatever your thoughts on the addition of weight classes or same day weigh-ins, I encourage you to check out Figula’s brief article and the discussion it spawned – lot of great comments from FightTicker.com members.

Weight classes would not be discussed as much as they are were it not for all the news that pops up because of weight cutting. Most recently, Cris “Cyborg” Santos failed to make weight against Hitomi Akano – failed, and failed miserably. Claiming it was due to “female problems”, Santos forfeited part of her purse and the two met at a catchweight with Santos emerging the victor by TKO in the third round. Additionally, we have all seen the stories about fighters failing to make weight, some much more notorious than others – Thiago Alves, Nick Diaz, Paulo Filho, Gina Carano, and Joe Riggs to name a few. Additionally, some who do make weight are criticized after the fact when it is realized that they tested positive for a diuretic (banned substance that aids in water loss) – again, Thiago Alves, and Donald Cerrone, to name a couple. In Cerrone’s appearance on the popular TapouT reality show he claimed that he had used it to help deal with a staph infection, and both Cerrone and Alves have gone on to enjoy successful careers, but especially in the case of Alves, people question his ability to make weight. Missing weight before his fight with Matt Hughes didn’t help his cause in spite of the fact he claimed an ankle injury had seriously cut back on his ability to do cardio before the fight.

However, it was none of these things that really made me want to write this – it was the report that Rory Markham suffered a collapsed lung due to the weight cut before his fight with Dan Hardy at UFC 95. I had heard of a number of different ill effects from weight cutting but never anything that severe.

What does weight cutting involve? Different fighters swear by their methods – everything ranging from lots of cardio to the use of sauna suits to serious reduction in calories in the days leading up to a fight even to excessive spitting.

In doing some generic google searches on "weight cutting" and after trolling some various forums, I came across a number of articles. As a disclaimer, I do not endorse or recommend any of these methods - I am just putting these few out there for informational purposes. Check out the articles here, here, and here.

For some other commentary on the issue, you can find posts here, here, and here.

(Clearly there are hundreds, if not thousands, of other articles and posts out there on the subjects, but I thought these few were representative of the whole.)

Pro fighter Chad Hinton uses methods like specific diet adjustments to achieve his fighting weight of 155 lbs. Normally walking around between 180-185 lbs, Hinton does things like cut out all sodium and sugar, boosting his water intake and restructuring his protein to carb ratio. Hinton also ups his cardio training, in his words, “120% training until I can’t get off the floor.” He stated he’s generally already at his fighting weight on weigh-in day that he’ll just eat and drink very little until time to weigh in.

Hinton leads Team Xtreme, out of Cincy MMA and Fitness, and notes that the guys on his team who have wrestled before have a general idea on weight cutting, but even the guys with no experience are eager to follow the plans to drop weight. In speaking of ill effects suffered from a weight cut, Hinton lists minor problems like nose bleeds and getting a cold or the flu, but also mentioned that he usually boosts his Vitamin C intake in the last four weeks before the fight to avoid getting stick. Hinton also mentioned that it’s definitely possible that some of his in-fight injuries came from a result of the weight cutting as well.

Hinton further noted that most of the weigh-ins he has participated in are somewhere between 24-27 hours before the fight. However, Hinton has also participated in same-day weigh ins and mentioned that it is hard to cut weight and be at 100% by fight time. He specifically mentioned one fight where he weighed in at 11:00 am and fought at noon.

When I inquired about Hinton’s views on weight cutting in general and the idea of walking around weight, Hinton stated that he thought it should be at a fighter’s discretion. He further stated, “In the end they [the fighters] are ultimately responsible for their failure or success. Most of the fighters are adults. If they’re getting pummeled while walking around and competing at 170 lbs at 13% body fat, they should consider doing the work and dropping to 155 lbs at 8% body fat.”

Speaking of the weight classes offered in the various promotions, Hinton opined that he’d like to see the UFC add bantamweights, featherweights and super heavyweights, in spite of the fact the WEC already showcases bantamweights and featherweights. He was not in favor of the 14-weight class structure but also feels that the sport is still in its infancy so things should naturally evolve as opposed to being rushed.

Hinton’s comment about wrestlers on his team already being used to the weight cutting reminded me that one of my best friends – let’s call him Power (trust me, if you knew his powerlifting record, you would call him that, too) – was a high school wrestling champion and national powerlifting champion. I vaguely remembered a few stories he had told me about weight cuts, so I contacted him to get some more details.

Power cut weight for both wrestling and powerlifting. He wrestled at 152 lbs and cut from 172-174 lbs. For powerlifting, he cut to 148.75 lbs from 165-168 lbs.

When asked about his weight cutting methods, Power mentioned that he would run if he was still over near the weigh-ins but that he mostly used the dehydration method, stopping drinking water a day or so before the weigh-in, chew cinnamon gum and spit in a bottle. During wrestling season, he would also practice in multiple layers of clothing. He did acknowledge that his weight cutting methods were generally more extreme than his teammates. To that end, Power acknowledged that he had suffered ill effects due to his weight cutting methods, but not often during the meets themselves. He specifically stated that he would not recommend his methods and mentioned some long-term ill effects he has suffered, specifically that his circulation and digestion “aren’t what they could be”, and that people who weight cut this way are setting themselves up for future renal problems.

After the weigh-ins, Power would first re-hydrate, drinking large amounts of Pedialyte, Gatorade and/or Powerade. When discussing this he made sure to mention that “after a day or so without drinking, you’d be surprised how wonderful it feels”. After re-hydrating, he would generally indulge in junk food: Chex Mix, canned cheese spread, bologna sandwiches, Milk Duds, etc. About this odd mix, he stated, “People who had an ounce of common sense ate more healthily.”

With the wrestling and powerlifting meets he participated in, he noted that there was generally an hour between the weigh-ins and the start time. He also noted that if you didn’t make weight the first time your group was called, you would have to spend more time cutting and got sent to the back of the queue, so those competitors would then have less time to recover. Power estimated that 90-95% of his wrestling teammates cut weight – more than in powerlifting, and also that the wrestlers were generally cutting more weight.

When I asked Power about his general views on weightlifting he had this to say:

“I absolutely support weight cutting as an essential part of any sport that involves weight classes. It is simply another aspect of sacrifice/competition, and it really demonstrates how much you want to be successful; how much you are willing to sacrifice. In addition to this, I actually – believe it or not – miss cutting weight. I get downright nostalgic about it, and I feel that it is an essential part of any sport with a weight class. I absolutely oppose efforts to eliminate weight cutting as I feel they reward people who simply don’t want to put forth that extra bit of effort; they encourage laziness. At the same time, certain efforts to limit weight cutting may be beneficial – I definitely support more education about healthy weight cutting. I think that efforts to eliminate weight cutting are examples of the disintegration of our collective social respect for sacrifice and arête. Sometimes excellence involves redemptive suffering.”

I agree. While I may not encourage people to practice Power’s methods of weight cutting and re-hydration, I think he has a point about sacrifice. The majority of fighters, those who truly take the sport seriously, sacrifice a great deal to get where they are at and that sacrifice should not be lessened by a competitor who did not take things as seriously as they.

Due to that, while I am not in favor of same-day weigh-ins or the idea of fighters competing at their walking weight, I am absolutely in favor of higher penalties for fighters who miss weight. Awarding a larger percentage of their total purse to their opponents and perhaps even license suspension if they miss weight so many times within a specified time frame would both be acceptable penalties. As it stands, the forfeiting of a certain percentage of a fighter’s purse is a decent sanction, but I think it lacks the deterrent factor necessary to make fighters really not want to miss weight. A regulation that would prevent the fighter from fighting at all if they were a certain number of pounds over the allowed weight sounds nice in principle, as it would have a huge deterrent factor, but this would also penalize the fighter who did make weight as they would not have a chance to compete in the fight they had been training for and likely missed out on a chance to compete for more money in the form of a win bonus or even one of the famous “Of the Night” bonuses.

However, in spite of any deterrent factor, money issue, or various weight class structures, the paramount issue is clearly fighter safety and in addition to the fact I have never had to cut weight, I also do not have a medical degree or any medical training besides general first aid and CPR. Clearly not expert in the medical field, I sought one out. FightTicker.com contributor, medical expert and MMA enthusiast Dr. Johnny Benjamin readily agreed to answer a few questions I had.

FightTicker: First, what are your views on weight cutting? Do you view it as an acceptable (or necessary evil) part of sports like MMA, or do you think competitors should be monitored throughout the year so they must compete at something more like their walking-around weight?

Dr. Johnny Benjamin: Weight cutting continues to be a reality in MMA. For obvious reasons, if on fight night one is significantly larger than their opponent they have manipulated the rules to create an advantage.

FT: One of the most popular methods of weight-cutting involves massive dehydration, through excessive cardio workouts, the use of a sauna or sauna suit and various other means – what are some of the dangers associated with these processes?

Dr. Benjamin: Massive and rapid dehydration places a significant burden on the kidneys. There have been numerous cases of athletes going into kidney failure from this very practice.

FT: What are some potential problems that could arise from improper RE-hydration?

Dr. Benjamin: Rapidly dehydrating then rehydrating the body is a potential recipe for disaster, especially in kids. Serious kidney injury and electrolyte imbalances leading to cardiac arrythmias (serious abnormal heart beats) have lead to sudden deaths in otherwise fit young athletes.

FT: Based on your extensive medical knowledge, is there one method of weight-cutting that you feel is safer than others?

Dr. Benjamin: Every fighter says “I done this millions of times” and “I know my body” just before they pass out praying that someone finds them and calls 911. Rapid weight cutting is dangerous period…just because you’ve done it before and gotten away with it does not guarantee that you will be so luck next time.

FT: A number of MMA critics have opined that there should be more weight classes in MMA, lessening the divide between the different classes (like in boxing). First, what are your thoughts on this in general? Second, what kind of difference (if any) do you think this will make?

Dr. Benjamin: MMA doesn’t need more weight classes. It just needs to adequately monitor the ones that exist. If fighters were required to step on an official scale 30 and 15 days prior to fight date and be no more than 5% and 2% respectively overweight, then you would have adequate enforcement that protected the safety of the athletes and integrity of the system.

FT: After his loss to Dan Hardy at UFC 95 in London, Rory Markham claimed that he had suffered a collapsed lung prior to the fight – a condition his camp blamed, at least in part, to a very hard weight cut. Is suffering a collapsed lung from cutting weight possible? Is it probable?

Dr. Benjamin: Without proper hydration the body loses tissue pressure called turgor and extreme potentially life-threatening organ system failures can occur.

Weight cutting is similar to riding a motorcycle. Ask anyone who’s been riding for years and they can give you a story about a crash or a near miss that they will never forget. Ask any elite level wrestler and if they are honest they have had a similar experience with weight cutting.

----------

So there you have it – Installment 2 in the books. Since we have a number of fighters and active competitors on the site, I would love to hear from you guys on your thoughts - what methods do you use to cut weight? Have you ever suffered any ill effects?

Until then - Thanks for coming along for the ride – again.

-PreView

(Originally posted on FightTicker.com)


Keep Reading...

Thoughts on the GSP-Penn Aftermath and Exclusive Comments from NSAC's Keith Kizer

(This is an article I wrote today for FightTicker, after speaking with the Nevada State Athletic Commission's Executive Director, Keith Kizer. I re-posted the full article here because what's developing right now is one of the more important issues to impact MMA.)

For anyone who has visited virtually any MMA site out there since Saturday’s UFC 94 event, they’ve undoubtedly been assaulted with an astounding number of articles on the recent controversy between allegations of Georges St. Pierre’s cornermen “greasing” him between rounds. Some people are complaining that the issue, dubbed “Grease-Gate” in many circles, has already taken up too much time and internet space while others make the argument for the more far-reaching effects of such a violation.

These articles have everything from still-shots from the fight video, actual video clips of the scenes between rounds, reports from fans at the fight, members of the athletic commission, comments and responses from both camps, and most recently a letter from B.J. Penn’s lawyer requesting that an official investigation regarding the allegations commence. You can find that letter on FightTicker here.

I’m one of those who feel that even if it did happen, it likely did not have a major effect on the outcome of the fight. GSP’s performance over Penn was a dominant one. However, I’m also one of those who feels that whether or not it affected the outcome of the fight, the possible violation does need to be addressed in an official capacity.

Check after the jump for my thoughts on the whole situation as well as excerpts from a conversation I had with Keith Kizer, Executive Director of the Nevada State Athletic Commission.

The letter from Penn’s attorney subsequently launched a large number of new posts on multiple sites stating that Penn requested an investigation. The pertinent text of the letter read “While this letter is not a formal complaint to the Nevada Athletic Commission, it shall serve as a formal request to the Commission to that it engage in a comprehensive investigation and review of the activities involving and relating to Georges St. Pierre (“GSP”) prior to and during the bout.”

I initially wondered – what’s the difference between a formal complaint and an investigation? Then, if a finding is made that Vaseline was applied in an illegal way, what would be the punishment? Seeking answers, I thought I’d go to the source most likely to have those answers – the Nevada State Athletic Commission. I was curious about some of the stats from the fights (i.e. paid attendance) that hadn’t yet been released, so I figured I could kill two birds with one stone.

My phone call was directed to Keith Kizer’s (NSAC Executive Director) voicemail, and at that point I have to admit, I thought my call might get brushed off – I was skeptical that Kizer himself would take the time to give me a call back. However, Kizer not only called me back, but spoke at length about the GSP situation and was an extremely nice guy all around.

Here are some excerpts from our conversation:

----------

FT: Can you explain to me the difference between requesting an investigation and actually filing a complaint?

KK: I’m not sure there’s really any difference of significance. Every fighter has the ability to write to us and I guess “complain” is the proper legal term, about any events that occur. We, in conjunction with the Attorney General’s office, review the letter or the complaint and see if there’s anything the Commission needs to do.


FT: What kind of time frame do you expect that something like this will take to be resolved?

KK: The next step is to give the St. Pierre camp a chance to respond to the letter from the Penn camp. That’s only fair, of course, so we’re going to send a copy of the letter to the St. Pierre camp and ask them to respond to that letter within a certain timeframe, probably 20 days, they can send it in earlier if they want to. My guess is that the next step is that there would be some sort of public hearing if the Commission sees it as a necessity on the matter, for a review on the fight. That would probably happen sometime in March if that occurs.


FT: I’ve noticed that in the wake of this, a number of GSP’s past opponents are voicing similar complaints on the internet, and some fighters are voicing complaints about other Greg Jackson fighters – have you received any other similar complaints in your office?

KK: No, I’ve never received anything before or after this fight from anyone else. This is news to me. I don’t know where all these comments are coming out of, or if they’re really coming from the fighters or not, but I’ve never been informed of any complaints against Mr. Jackson or any of his fighters before. Definitely nothing against Mr. St. Pierre, he’s been a very model licensee, as has Mr. Penn and we appreciate both of their involvements in the sport.


FT: I’ve heard the standard timeframe to file a complaint is something like 10 days after a fight – is that correct?

KK: I don’t know if it’s really that, as long as we deal with it within a reasonable time. Obviously we [the Commission] were at the fight, we saw what occurred, but obviously there is more to look at. In addition to that, I did get a copy of the camera shots in between rounds covering the Georges St. Pierre corner, so I’ve taken a look at that. That will also be looked at by the Commissioners as well. At the very least, it highlights the need for the cornerman to make sure they’re not putting something on the body of their athlete that could affect the fight – that’s the big concern here. I think everybody would agree with that.


FT: If the Commission makes a finding that GSP was greased, on the extreme end of the potential scale for punishment, would the fight be changed to a no-contest?

KK: Well, there are very limited grounds to overturn a decision. I don’t know of anyone saying that this would fall, even worst-case scenario, within those grounds. I know the BJ Penn camp has certainly not asked for that, but if they did, we’d review that.


FT: In a situation like this, what are some common punishments that the cornermen or the fighter could face?

KK: I don’t know. I’ve never dealt with this situation before. I can tell you, generally speaking, a licensee – if the Commission thought it was a serious enough offense, the Commission could hand down a disciplinary penalty which could include anything from a warning to a fine to a suspension, but whether or not this falls within that – there’s been no decision yet whether it falls within that level of disciplinary action.

----------

I know there are many out there who are very quickly tiring of the media attention this issue is getting, and anyone reading MMA sites would be foolish to not acknowledge that this issue has saturated the MMA media. However, I think the larger concern here is the long-term effect this allegation and the subsequent investigation will have on both the Jackson camp and MMA as a whole.

2008 was, for the most part, a great year for Jackson. A number of his fighters flourished and picked up some UFC titles along the way. However, with the allegations from this fight, and all of the subsequent allegations that came from numerous other fighters (albeit ones unsupported by any evidence other than comments from the fighters themselves), Jackson’s success as well as the success of his fighters has already been called into question. Perhaps not on a level that would do any real damage other than in perhaps the GSP situation, but I know people out there are questioning his strategies for winning.

Think about the worst-case scenario for Jackson – he’s suspended. For whatever length of time that would be, his fighters would be without their head coach and strategist. In the numerous roundtables FightTicker has had involving one of Jackson’s fighters, an issue that is always raised is Jackson’s gameplan, and the effect it would have on his fighter’s opponent. Jackson is one of the most recognizable coaches in the fight game today and his sudden absence would not go unnoticed. Additionally, were Jackson to be suspended, I have no doubt that for the first few fights some of his guys had, Mike Goldberg and/or Joe Rogan would be sure to note Jackson’s absence in his fighter’s corner, and then those people who may have picked up MMA along the way, or who weren’t too familiar with the situation would then likely go looking for more details on it, and any internet search is destined to turn up hundreds if not thousands of articles on the situation. With that, the issue will continue to linger and that is where the problem for MMA as a whole comes in.

I don’t think this will rise to the level of scandals in other sports, like Pete Rose’s betting issues, the steroid issues baseball has faced, Michael Vick’s involvement in dog-fighting and the Patriots with “Spy-Gate”. At least, I hope this won’t rise to that level. Even with the onslaught of articles and more mainstream media coverage, I don’t think it will. However, in spite of that, what MMA fans have to realize is that our sport is still in the infant stages compared to those sports. MMA does not yet have the mainstream recognition and acceptance that those sports do – just look at the fact that MMA is not yet legally sanctioned in all states but I don’t think any state outlaws football, baseball or basketball.

MMA has fought hard to get past the “human cockfighting” days and the last thing MMA fighters need right now is to go from that to being called “cheaters.” I’m not the governing body that will decide whether GSP and/or his cornermen cheated, and even if a determination is made that somebody was in the wrong, I don’t think any true MMA fan would blame the sport – they would correctly blame the individual. However, it’s not the MMA fans that I’m worried about. It’s all of the MMA detractors like Bob Reilly, the Assemblyman in New York, that’s come to the forefront of MMA news because of his ignorance in opposition to the legislation of the sport in New York.

Even on a smaller scale, it could cause problems for those involved in the MMA industry and perhaps put the fighters in danger. Cornermen and fighters will likely be exposed to a higher level of scrutiny now, and their actions watched more closely. If GSP or his people are at all sanctioned due to their actions, other fighters could see that as a way to cast doubt on a later opponent just by saying after a loss, “The other guy was greased.”

Additionally, at an extreme, what if the use of Vaseline was even more restricted or banned altogether. For the record, I don’t see that happening, but think of the possibilities. Vaseline is used for a reason; it makes the skin slippery and less likely to tear when hit. I think anyone who has seen both a boxing match and an MMA match knows that MMA fighters use significantly less Vaseline, but what is the amount was even more limited? We’d likely see more cuts, which would lead to longer medical suspensions or perhaps early fight stoppages. What if Vaseline was eliminated altogether? We’d see a frantic search for a new substance that would likely have at least as many cons. And what would the promotions do in the meantime? Just not put on fights? Not likely.

Again, I understand a lot of that is possible but not probable, but I use it to illustrate the lengths to which a governing body could go to deal with the problem, and the negative effects it would have on all of us.

Regardless of Penn’s motives for requesting the investigation, I think he’s doing the right thing for all of the fighters and the sport as a whole. Swift action by NSAC will show that they are serious in their commitment to the sport, and it should help silence some of MMA’s critics who feel the sport is still widely unregulated, even though we all know that’s not true.

In spite of the fact that I, too, am getting tired of seeing a lack of real news being reported on during this time, I do think this is an important issue of which all MMA fans should at least take notice and on which all MMA fans should be informed.

-PreView

Keep Reading...

Insider Commentary on the New York MMA Situation

As some of you may or may not know, a fight has been brewing in New York for some time now. New York is one of the few states left in the U.S. that has not sanctioned MMA competitions. Sure, mma fighters can still train all they want, but there are no sanctioned events in that state; i.e. no UFC, no XFC, no ICF.

Over the last few years, the UFC, in its push to take over the world, has put a lot of money into backing legislation in various states seeking to sanction professional MMA matches. New York is one of the states at the top of that list, for obvious reasons. For those of you that like watching MMA, imagine a UFC Pay-Per-View happening at Madison Square Garden - that would undoubtedly be an amazing, record-breaking event. But, until legislation passes, that won't happen.

An MMA website I frequent just interviewed a New York Assemblyman on the committee that's overseeing the legislation. Check after the jump for an excerpt from the interview as well as a link to the full text.

MMAWeekly.com has posted an interview with New York Assemblyman Bob Reilly, one of those who opposes MMA legislation in New York. The New York State Assembly’s Tourism, Arts, and Sports Development Committee could vote on the bill in question as early as next week.

From MMAWeekly.com:

MMAWeekly.com: Can you tell me about your feelings on the current bill and about mixed martial arts in general?

Reilly: My feeling about the bill is that it’s a flawed piece of legislation. And my feeling about mixed martial arts is that there are many problems with it. It really is a glorification of brutality and violence. Many people believe that violence in the media, or any portrayal of violence, or violence itself as I think happens in mixed martial arts, in fact, makes people immune to violence and in fact promotes violence.

In New York State, we pass a lot of laws to stop violence, especially among young people in schools, but domestic violence (as well). I think that this basically is a glorification of violence, but it certainly promotes violence. In itself, I think it’s a very brutal sport that creates, obviously, physical harm to the participants, and I don’t think there’s any other sport who’s purpose is to harm your opponent. But we know that in mixed martial arts, that, in fact, is one of the purposes.

I think economically, it’s a very poor thing for New York State, that just the economics of it would not be beneficial to our state. It just draws money out of the state. I compare it to gambling and what happens in gambling. If you take Atlantic City for example, you have casinos that are going broke, surrounded by slums. If you look at Las Vegas, basically, the same thing is happening, where 20 months in a row gambling revenue has decreased, and Las Vegas and the growth there has created many slum areas in Las Vegas.

------
While well-spoken throughout the interview, I think Reilly only truly serves to reveal himself as one of those people many of our readers are all-too-familiar with - the uninformed.

He does bring up some interesting points, namely that some of the financial projections could be misleading in terms of the amount of money that is speculated that would actually go to New York. However, I think as many of you will realize from the brief excerpt I posted, he really doesn't know what he's talking about when it comes to MMA.

I do not believe that MMA promotes violence. I think it's the opposite -- that MMA actually works to oppose violence. I know I'm likely preaching to the choir here, but in my opinion, MMA is about promoting excellence in athletics through informed combat in a controlled environment. Sure, there are guys that do things that don't promote this ideal (anybody heard of Junie Browning's antics on TUF?), but there are plenty of fighters out there, day in and day out, that are true ambassadors for the sport (think Rich Franklin), that represent the actual reality of MMA -- guys who are well-spoken, thoughtful, and yeah tough and intense competitors.

I also think it was kind of a low blow to use the Kimbo vs. James Thompson fight in the way he did, to try and point out a colleague's misunderstanding of the rules. Not only is it obvious he had no real idea how the fight went down, but he's talking about a fight that happened in a now-defunct promotion. Maybe it would be more appropriate if EliteXC were leading the charge for the legislation, but it's not EliteXC, it's the UFC -- the world's leading MMA promotion.

(By the way, I still have my doubts about the doctor that cleared Thompson to fight. Even if Thompson had been cleared by the doctor at a UFC event, I don't think the UFC brass would have let him fight in that condition.)

I don't know what it would take to change Reilly's mind, and frankly, I don't know that anything could. But it's uninformed people like Reilly that hold the sport back for all of us, and hold their constituents back from maybe making some good money from the business the promotions would bring in, and definitely enjoying a good show.

-PreView

(For the full interview, check out MMAWeekly.)

Keep Reading...

FightTicker Radio Show # 3 is Now Archived

I just wanted to let you all know that in case you missed it, FightTicker Radio Show # 3, on which I was a guest, has been archived and is available for listening or downloading. Check after the jump for links on how to get to it.

I had a great time. It was my first foray into the world of being a radio show guest, and it was a lot of fun. The four of us discussed UFC 92, the upcoming UFC 93, and at the end, got briefly into Quinton "Rampage" Jackson's recent guilty plea stemming from a July incident in which he was charged with fleeing and evading a police officer, multiple counts of hit-and-run, and so on. For more on the Rampage situation, you can check out a recent post on FightTicker here.

As for today's radio show, it is now archived and available for listening, or download (free), and you can find that here along with the previous two episodes. If you haven't yet had the time to listen to any of the episodes, you should take some time to check them out. They've covered a lot of great current events and had some great guests.

Be on the lookout for future episodes of the show - I'll be posting updates as more shows are scheduled.

-PreView

Keep Reading...

A Reason for a Lawsuit if I Ever Saw One

Wow. Just wow. I don't know that I've ever felt sorrier for somebody than I do the guy in this story.

Man Sues After Genital Amputation

There's a link to the article and my brief thoughts on this after the jump.



From Kentucky.com :

A Kentucky man who claims his penis was removed without his consent during what was supposed to be a circumcision has sued the doctor who performed the surgery.

Phillip Seaton, 61, and his wife are seeking unspecified compensation from Dr. John M. Patterson and the medical practice that performed the circumcision for “loss of service, love and affection.” The Seatons also are seeking unspecified punitive damages from Patterson and the medical practice, Commonwealth Urology.

A woman who answered the phone at Commonwealth Urology would not take a message for the doctor Thursday. But the Seaton’s attorney said the doctor’s post-surgical notes show the doctor thought he detected cancer and removed the penis. Attorney Kevin George said a later test did detect cancer.

How exactly do you go from circumcision to complete genital removal? I see that the doctor's post-surgical notes show the doctor "thought" he detected cancer, but is it really the best idea to cut a guy's junk off if you "think" you detect cancer?

The Plaintiff's attorney alleges that this was not an emergency situation, so the doctors could have hypothetically stopped, woken the guy up, and asked him what he wanted to do.

I don't know a man alive that would've said, "Sure, Doc, go ahead and cut it off." Seriously, it's not even anything sexual, it's just that I don't know of a guy who would say that he'd rather live sans junk than die earlier because of cancer. Not to mention, what about chemotherapy? What about other sorts of treatment?

I don't know what the doctor was thinking that day....well, frankly, I think it's clear he wasn't thinking.

My thoughts and prayers go out to Phillip Seaton in what must be the worst situation he's ever had to deal with.

-PreView

Keep Reading...

Good Luck!

Two to three days of this week are often two to three of the most dreaded days of the year for thousands of people around the country. This week, thousands of people around the nation will be taking the Bar Exam. Here in KY, the state and national essay sections fall on Tuesday, and the MBE (multiple choice) falls on Wednesday.

It's a horrible time that nobody but the most sadistic of sadists enjoy. Having experienced this, Puddin and I both know first-hand that it sucks - and I therefore want to wish my friends who are preparing to suffer through this hell GOOD LUCK. It will all be over in a couple days...well, until waiting for the results begins...and then it sucks all over again.

However, not wanting to leave you on a negative note, I'll attempt to entertain you with a story from my own Bar experience - one that, if you're lucky, won't happen to you. The story comes after the jump.



The Bar Examiners are nazis...so much so, that they restrict what items you can take into the exam room, and in what manner you may take them in. All personal possessions must be carried in a giant zip-lock bag that is inspected when participants walk in the room. There are limits on what one can take into the exam. The limits vary by state, but in Kentucky (and I'm fairly sure in most other states) cell phones cannot be brought into the exam room at all, and the proctors who watch people come in are supposed to check this sort of thing.

I feel compelled to state that I understand these are all precautions to prevent people from cheating and having an unfair advantage over other test-takers, but I do feel some of the restrictions are ridiculous (i.e. in Kentucky, when Puddin and I took the exam, you couldn't even take in a bottle of water....I guess because they were afraid somebody would sneak in lighter fluid and attempt to set everyone on on fire). However, in my opinion, if you're going to mandate these ridiculous restrictions, you must enforce them. And it was a lack of enforcement that caused me to fall prey to the person I like to refer to as "That stupid whore who was sitting right behind me whose fu**ing cell phone started ringing in the middle of the exam".

Let's set the scene - it was the last half of the last day of the exam, and I, like many of my fellow test-takers, am on edge. I'm tired, hungry, stressed out, and can (barely) see the light at the end of the tunnel, but I know I've got at least another 90 minutes before post-test freedom celebrations can begin. I'm doing my best to concentrate as hard as I can, trying to read the questions carefully and not get so distracted that I forget to answer the last 100 questions or so....then it happened.

Apparently the person who was on bag duty when this particular girl walked by wasn't paying enough attention because lo and behold, I heard a sound during the exam that I thought I'd never hear....a cellphone ringing. And it wasn't just a normal phone ring sound, it was a special ringtone. The sheer rage I experienced at that moment prevents me from remembering exactly what song the whore had chosen as her ringtone, but I do have the vague recollection that it was something to the effect of the polyphonic version of "Mambo No. 5".

I was stunned - I couldn't believe it. The person sitting across the table from me looked at me and we exchanged looks of disbelief....then I turned around to see if I could pinpoint this obvious rulebreaker so that I might kill him/her. I saw the perp, a girl, and at this point, she had multiple people looking at her, because they all knew what was going on. Now, she decides to play it off like it's not her cellphone that's ringing, so it just keeps ringing and ringing. Seriously. The person who was calling had to have hung up and immediately called back at least once.

Talking during the Bar Exam is a huge no-no for obvious reasons, but at this point I felt compelled to (not so) quietly whisper to her, "Are you going to turn that fu**ing thing off?" Then she whispers something back I don't hear - and this point, one of the proctors walking around notices the two of us talking, and can apparently see my rage because when she makes it over our way asks me if there's something wrong, to which I reply, "That girl has a cellphone and it just started ringing." The woman clearly does not believe me, as she assumed (as I did) that the bag checkers would not have let something like this happened. But then something like a voicemail or text message notification went off and the woman knew something was wrong.

She then asked the girl if she had a cellphone and if so, was it ringing, and the girl just kind of sat there...and finally answered, "Well, I guess so." You guess so? You guess so? Are you kidding me? You weren't sure that was your cellphone that was just ringing your idiotic ringtone in the middle of a quiet room that you then chose to ignore? Now, I was expecting a harsh response from this woman. Violations of the "bag policy" were rumored to have expulsion type consequences, and I was ready to see this girl go....but no, the woman just said, "Well, I'm going to have to take it from you, but you can get it back at the end of the exam."

Man alive - that's some crazy punishment - I was happy to know that violations of Bar Exam testing policies were met with such fervor and punitive measures as had been threatened. I don't know that my head has ever been as close to exploding as it was at that moment.

Then the proctor asked me if everything was okay. I didn't respond verbally, because I couldn't think of anything to say to someone who had quickly become the number 2 person on my "I'd love to punch you in the face" list. So, dumbfounded, I just looked at her with this perplexed, "Are you f'in kidding me" look on my face until she finally turned around and walked away. She clearly earned her money that day - taking away someone's cellphone....whew...that's a story for the grandkids. I hope she didn't have to go into therapy after that for her clear use of excessive force.

And then, after some deep breaths and visions of violence, I went back to the test.

So there it is, kids - PreView's Bar Exam nightmare - granted, looking back on it, it is kind of funny, but I know at the time I was just ready to kill somebody. So, having experienced that, I can only wish for you (1) bag checkers who are more on the ball, (2) fellow test-takers who have a little bit more respect for their colleagues....and oh yeah, (3) some general good luck so that you can kick the shit out of that damn test :)

-PreView


Keep Reading...

"If guns kill people, do pens misspell words?"

I realized a few things today.

First – I haven’t posted in quite a while…blame this on a trip to Alabama, an excessive amount of trials at work for which I have had to stay late, or my general laziness.

Second – Even though the second word in the blog title’s subheading is “law,” I have yet to address any topics of law besides putting a link to kentuckylawblog in the links section…I know, an astounding use of my three years of law school education and the analytical skills that came with it.

So, in an effort to place at least one law article on the blog, I’ve decided to write about something near and dear to my bleeding liberal heart – guns.


Yes, I’m a liberal, and yes, I like guns. In fact, I love guns. I think everybody should own guns. And yes, I’m a liberal. I’m a pro-choicing, democrat voting, alternative lifestyle accepting liberal. In fact, the only two liberal ideals I really don’t adhere to relate to the environment and guns. However, since the Supreme Court of the United States threw down a decision on guns today, not the environment, I’ll focus on guns. Before I get too far into it, though, I want to make it clear that while I love guns, I’m not now, nor ever have been, a member of the NRA or similar organizations. I don’t hunt, and contrary to what some of my friends may think that I think – I do not believe that guns solve all problems.

Now, here is a link to the Yahoo article on the decision, and I’ll leave you to your own devices to read it – it is informative. Instead of reiterating the whole thing, I have instead chosen just to jot down some thoughts of my own.

First, the title of the article was taken from a picture some of the supporters outside the Supreme Court were holding. “If guns kill people, do pens misspell words?” I thought that was genius. It reminded me of one of my favorite scenes from an episode of The West Wing where Martin Sheen’s character was having a discussion with his VP about gun control. The VP was more of gun type, and there conversation relayed the thought that people are always quick to use any shooting as an excuse to talk about gun control, but that (in the show) a man had murdered his wife and four children, but nobody in the media was complaining about that- why? Here’s the whole quote”

“You know, last month in Idaho, a man killed six members of his family, including his pregnant wife. And you know why the liberal intelligentsia didn't go crazy? Because he did it with an axe. You think we need axe control?”

I love that damn show. But moving on….

I often think that quote is a fair assessment of how the media portrays things. Now, I do not believe there is a giant media conspiracy to try and eliminate all gun use, but the position I have always taken is this – if someone wants to kill someone else, they’re going to find a way, gun or no gun. As cliché as it may be, guns don’t kill people…people kill people. Now, do guns give people a way to kill other people? Yes, but so do knives, alcohol, drugs, cars, fast food, poison, baking devices (ovens), icepicks, bricks, vases, gambling, and so on, and so on, and so on.

So why are guns the super villain in this comic book we call life? Because they can kill, they’re loud and flashy, and many people (i.e. rappers) glamorize gun violence. I mean, seriously, how much street cred would 50 Cent have if, instead of being shot 9 times, he rapped about being hit nine times with a designer vase? While a number of white people may be able to relate more to this, I don’t think most rap music would have sold as well if it was about alternate methods of killing.

But back more to the point – what was the point to the lawsuit in D.C.? A security guard, who lived in D.C. city limits, sued when his application to keep a handgun at his home was denied (Because no gun permits for non-police officers were allowed within the city limits, so no concealed weapons, and no keeping guns in your house in general.) The Court struck down the ban, stating that the constitution gave Americans the right to own guns and that a total prohibition, like the D.C. ban, was not compatible with such a right.

Critics of the decision are worried that the striking down of the ban will lead to other gun laws being struck down, such as those which prohibit felons from buying/possessing firearms, those which provide for an instant background check, or those which restrict machine gun sales.

In spite of my love of guns, I don’t feel that anyone needs to own a machine gun. However, I do believe that people should be allowed to own one if they want. Contrary to popular belief, it is legal to purchase machine guns, and even shoot them, but owners must pay hefty federal and state licensing fees and are only supposed to shoot them at designated places and times (i.e. the famed “Machine Gun Shoot” in Knob Creek, KY that happens a couple times a year).

I’m also in favor of felons not being able to purchase or possess guns. That’s one of the rights you give up when you commit a felony. Additionally, I’m totally in favor of background checks – in favor, I’m in favor of more stringent background check requirements, especially in light of what happened at Virginia Tech.

In other gun related issues, I am in favor of concealed weapons licenses, but I’m in favor of more stringent requirements to obtain one of those as well. Currently, applicants for a concealed weapons license in the state of Kentucky must attend an eight-hour course, pass a written test (multiple choice) and pass a shooting test (11 out of 20 shots on a man-sized target from the knees up, from 21 feet away). More stringent requirements need to be put in place, because any idiot can pass that test. Seriously. I have no doubt that a blind guy pointed in the right direction could hit 11 out of 20 shots on such a target. I do have my concealed weapons license, and when I took my class, we had a person take (and pass) the class who had never shot a gun before. Seriously. That kind of stuff should not happen.

I could rant and rave about guns forever. Most of you who know me know that. However, I won’t. Suffice it to say, I’m interested to see where the legislation goes from here in light of this decision. And even though the decision was made by the Supreme Court, I’m sure this new era of gun control will be a major issue in the upcoming election, and I can only hope the Democrats will behave sensibly…although even if they don’t, I’ll probably vote that way anyway.

Peace, Love, and Guns.

-PreView

Keep Reading...