CSAC Policy, Strikeforce Contract Bring Costly Price for Drugs, Doping
April 10, 2009
The California State Athletic Commission recently instituted new policies in regards to their handling of positive drug tests and how decisions in contests that yielded positive tests would be adjudicated:
Rule 368: Change of Decision
This rule change states that a positive drug test will permit the Commission to change a victory to a “no decision.” This rule change will apply to drugs of abuse on a case by case basis.
While this change in policy has just been enacted, some in the industry have been aware of its gestation and have already adjusted their contracts accordingly. Strikeforce is a California based promotion and, as a stakeholder in the California MMA scene, seemed to have prior knowldege that these changes were in the air. When taking on the contracts from EliteXC, there were several addendum that were placed on the ProElite contracts by Strikeforce, among them a clause that stated that fights changed from a “winner” to a “no decision/contest” would forfeit winner bonuses and bumps in pay based on these wins (such clauses weren’t in before and allowed these initial wins to stand and increase salaries):
C. Fighter has to be declared the “winner” of any Fight/Bout by the
applicable Athletic Commission governing the Fight/Bout and the Event
in order to advance to the next Fighter purse and win bonus amount if not
the prior Fighter purse and win bonus amount is applicable. In order for
Fighter to obtain any win bonus Fighter must be declared the winner of
any such Fight/Bout by the applicable Athletic Commission governing the
Fight/Bout and the Event. In the event any Fight/Bout in which Fighter
appears pursuant to the terms hereunder is declared by the Athletic
Commission governing the Fight/Bout and the Event as a “no contest”,
such “no contest” declaration is not considered a win and no win bonus
would be paid to Fighter and Fighter would not advance to the next level
of Fighter purse or win bonus amount.
It would seem intuitive that a positive drug test would mean a forfeiture of any win bonuses, but the structure of contracts in MMA at this point don’t necessarily represent that reality. Such was the case with Karo Parysian’s win over Dong Hyun Kim. NSAC overturned the win, but the standard Zuffa contract lacked any mechanism to deny Parysian the win bonus he had already been paid. NSAC took the issue into their realm, instituting a fine to penalize the fighter, with the fines ending up in NSAC coffers. Amending the contracts allows either the promotion to save money paying out a win bonus to a drug cheat, or if the win bonus has to be paid out, give it to the fighter who fought the fight clean, not enriching the coffers of NSAC or CSAC. If NSAC (or CSAC for that matter) getting the fine money would mean a better drug testing procedure that would be a good idea, but with NSAC’s lackadaisical approach to out of competition testing, more money wouldn’t necessarily mean a better drug testing program.
While those that had EliteXC contracts are hit by the new ruling, those with original deals with Strikeforce are under a whole other penalty structure when it comes to testing positive for drugs. According to the standard Strikeforce contract:
Fighter agrees that Fighter will be tested for doping (including but not limited to steroids, human growth drugs or any form of prohibited performance enhancing substances) or illegal substances (hereinafter individually and collectively referred to as “DIS”) within three (3) days before and after Fighter’s fight in the Event if required by EXPLOSION or the State Athletic Commission or the governing body. Further, Fighter agrees as follows:
(a) If Fighter tests positive for DIS before Fighter’s fight in the Event, Fighter shall be automatically disqualified from fighting in that Event and Fighter shall pay to EXPLOSION a penalty assessment equal to the amount that Fighter was to be paid for the Appearance and Rights fee for such Event.
(b) If Fighter tests positive for DIS after Fighter’s fight in the Event, EXPLOSION may dispossess Fighter of the Appearance Fee as well as any prize money and/or title awarded to Fighter, and a penalty assessment equal to the amount that Fighter was to be paid for the Appearance and Rights fee for such Event. Fighter agrees that any determination of DIS as determined by the State Athletic Commission or the governing body regulating the Event and its agents shall be binding and shall not be subject to appeal by Fighter, other than any appeal afforded under the law. Fighter further covenants not to bring any legal or administrative action pertaining to any determination regarding Fighter’s positive test for DIS. Fighter expressly hereby waives any right to institute any legal or administrative action pertaining to the decisions that Fighter tested positive for DIS.
If Fighter breaches this provision Fighter shall be deemed in material breach of this Agreement and in such case without limiting its remedies hereunder, or at law or equity, EXPLOSION at anytime during the term hereof at its election and in its sole and unlimited discretion may reduce and eliminate the number of fights that Fighter has agreed to fight pursuant to the terms hereof and as set forth on Exhibit A and Fighter shall not be compensated for any such fights that have been reduced and eliminated.
While I’m not a lawyer, my summary reading of these clauses yields the idea that a positive drug means a few things: no win money, no show money, a fine payable to Strikeforce equal to the show money, and possible nullification of the contract. All this is also not subject to appeal by the fighter. The policy seems a bit tougher than Just Say NO but stopping just short of the Turkish prison in Midnight Express. Judging from his comments the past few days, Nick Diaz looks to be fortunate to be under one of the amended EXC contracts, otherwise David Gardner might not be the only one saying Hello Japan.
