In 2021, Sergey Kovalev was popped for synthetic testosterone prescribed by a doctor who misled him.
through the World Anti-Doping Code, but boxing does not have this unified governance structure.” Connolly, a business attorney who has advised and played an active role in a variety of anti-doping organizations, touches on the incredible lack of uniformity in the handling of results overseas and in the U.S. Bottom line: In the U.S., it should be the athletic commission overseeing the fighters that should be the sole arbiter. If a NADO is in charge, then the decision needs to be swiftly adjudicated, unlike what we too often see with jurisdictions like UKAD. Greg Sirb, former president of the Association of Boxing Commissions (ABC), notes, “There is no question uniformity is needed in drug testing. The list of drugs and the cutoffs should be the same, as these can vary from state to state. A unified suspension period should be agreed to – listed as first offense, second offense and so on. Also, refusal to test must be detailed, and mandatory drug treatment [should be required] after the second offense. “All fighters that test positive after a bout should be declared ‘loser’ of that bout by DQ – no more just a no-contest. Taking PEDs is an illegal, purposeful maneuver by the fighter – just like an illegal punch or headbutt would be ruled a DQ for that fighter if the other fighter could not continue.” Fairness is tantamount. Respected U.S. attorney Patrick English has worn many hats – he has acted as an adviser to the ABC, to promoters and, in several instances, to fighters when they have tested positive. “No case is the same,” says English. “Meticulous research and detailed due diligence is necessary. You go through the numbers (quantities) of the substance.” English has seen it all and has experience with cases overseas, where things are sadly handled behind closed doors with no transparency. “You don’t know if a sample has been tampered with. You gather what the kid was taking. You can’t always do that, but most often someone in the team knows what is going on, and sometimes the kids are liars.”
English mentioned the complicated case of former light heavyweight titleholder Sergey Kovalev, who tested positive in late 2020 for synthetic testosterone. Kovalev always insisted on having VADA involved for his bouts. Through careful investigation, it was found that Kovalev had been under the care of a Russian physician in California who not only documented prescribing the drug but stupidly documented telling Kovalev that it was not prohibited. The physician later fled back to Russia. Yes, sometimes things happen and athletes must take responsibility for anything they take. Unified middleweight titleholder Janibek Alimkhanuly tested positive for meldonium in 2025 prior to a Texas bout. Meldonium was developed in the late 1970s in Latvia and is still used to treat cardiac ischemia. It is prohibited, as it can improve athletic endurance. The Texas commission declined to be involved, since a signed contract had not been submitted, although the fight was scheduled and approved. The ABC placed him on a provisional suspension. Alimkhanuly had an active Kazakhstan license. That commission carried out a detailed but expedited process. They gave the fighter a six-month suspension, and although many like Teofimo would disagree with the punishment, at least the Kazakhstan commission acted! Too often in the U.S., adverse results become a “hot potato.” Not every result is the same. Some substances, like testosterone, have thresholds because they also occur naturally in the body, while entirely exogenous substances like ostarine per WADA have no threshold and are always considered abnormal when present. Fighters should be educated as to what is prohibited and any cutoff times for specific substance use. “Analytical method sensitivity of anti-doping laboratories has increased dramatically over the past decade or two, allowing detection of prohibited substances at trace levels that were previously undetectable,” says Connolly. “This introduces the concern that environmental contamination, rather than intentional or negligent administration
of the prohibited substance, could be the cause of a trace-level positive result that offers no performance or recovery advantage. As WADA does not use thresholds for many of these substances now detectable at parts-per-billion or -trillion levels, any trace results must be reported by the labs. The California State Athletic Commission (CSAC) has taken a proactive approach by establishing low- level thresholds, enabling a more nuanced adjudication of positive results.” As a result, ostarine, clomiphene, hydrochlorothiazide, epitrenbolone, zilpaterol and zeranol, although reported by WADA-accredited laboratories as adverse, are now reported by CSAC as “atypical.” Since then, other U.S. commissions, including Nevada and New York, have also adopted CSAC’s recommendation. An atypical result is a report from a WADA-accredited laboratory that further investigation, potentially including collection of additional samples, is warranted. Not everyone agrees with this deviation from WADA’s reporting, and it is impossible to know whether these tiny amounts relate to when the athlete was tested, when a prohibited substance was stopped, or even intentional microdosing. For some substances, they can take months and months to leak out of an athlete’s system. Lastly, who should receive the results? VADA conducts third-party testing for commissions, promotions and athletes. We release results to those parties, plus the Association of Boxing Commissions, the opponent and his/her team and BoxRec. “Results should be mandated to be sent to the fighter, his home commission, the commission where the proposed or actual bout happened and the ABC,” says Sirb. We all agree that athlete results shouldn’t be debated publicly. That remains an unfortunate side effect in the world of social media. The bottom line when it comes to PED testing and adverse results management is that much needs to be resolved and changes are needed, but it should never include foregoing testing.
labs. These are all good things, but still inadequate. When I was chairman of the Nevada State Athletic Commission’s Medical Advisory Board, we added brain MRI/ MRA testing. The main complaint from a promoter was, “What if a fighter has an abnormal scan?” Our answer: “Isn’t that the point?” To be fair, we never imagined the issues facing the results, including which findings should result in license suspension or refusal. The same thing has also impeded PED testing. You can understand the paranoia regarding adverse results – fights canceled, attorney challenges, lost paydays for fighters and their teams, and lost tax money for the hosting jurisdiction. But like MRI scans, it’s the commission’s responsibility to make certain the fights are fair and safe. Should the opponent of a fighter who tests positive have a say? Or be able to present an impact statement? Former world champion Teofimo Lopez believes in significant punishment: “Testing positive for any PED use should result in an upwards of five figures in fining fees with an additional suspension of eight to 18 months, depending on the severity of usage of the substance and benefits provided for the athlete,” he said. “Unlike most sports, boxing has a fragmented regulatory system with various commissions, sanctioning bodies, governments or national anti-doping organizations (NADOs) responsible for adjudicating doping cases,” notes Ryan Connolly, VADA’s legal counsel. “This results in different jurisdictions handling positive tests differently. Athletes may face an entirely different results management process, tribunal procedure and sanctions framework for the same positive test as an athlete in a different jurisdiction would encounter. The Olympic movement has effectively streamlined anti-doping regulation
THE FIGHT DOCTOR THE COMPLICATED WORLD OF ADVERSE PED RESULTS By Dr. Margaret Goodman
E very time there is an adverse performance-enhancing drug test in professional boxing, a social media outcry follows. First, the named athlete is accused of cheating. Next, pontificating abounds as to the punishment – including some proposing a lifetime ban. Then, some wonder why more isn’t being done to stop PED use and improve testing. Some wonder why the public wasn’t told sooner. Finally, accusations are made that somehow the lab or the testers are corrupt! Until recently, most U.S. commissions were only conducting PED testing for stimulants, narcotics and THC on fight night. That’s still the case for some jurisdictions. But in truth, only a few routinely conduct any drug testing at all. Once former champion Floyd Mayweather insisted on out-of-
competition testing by the United States Anti-Doping Agency in 2010 and the Voluntary Anti-Doping Association (VADA) came on the scene in late 2011, things changed. (Full disclosure: I am the founder and president of VADA.) Now, World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA)- accredited laboratories and certified doping collection officers (as opposed to commission inspectors) are utilized by more jurisdictions. Of course, fighters enrolled in national anti-doping organizations like United Kingdom Anti-Doping (UKAD) are subject to year-round testing, but that level of testing remains infrequent for boxers. In the U.S., commissions like Nevada and California have installed out-of-comp testing for some athletes, and a growing number of jurisdictions are sending their fight-night testing collections to WADA-accredited
92 RINGMAGAZINE.COM
RINGMAGAZINE.COM 93
Made with FlippingBook - Online magazine maker