USADA responded to the article published by Thomas Hauser which criticized the organization regarding its overall administration of its anti-doping efforts and specifically related to Floyd Mayweather. The organization that also administers the UFC’s anti-doping program provides a thorough, line-by-line dissection of Hauser’s long-form piece which seeks to clarify and discredit the validity of the article.
USADA’s rebuttal includes a 25 page chart which goes sentence-by-sentence and paragraph-by-paragraph through Hauser’s article. Of note, it identifies Hauser’s association with HBO, which was included in Hauser’s byline from the original piece. Mayweather, as we know, was under contract with rival Showtime at the time that the article was originally published (which was during fight week of Mayweather-Berto). Thus, there’s the inference that he has an interest in writing something bad about Mayweather. It also notes the use of Victor Conte in Hauser’s article. USADA identifies Conte with the BALCO scandal and thus discredits him as a source for the article. Throughout the USADA Corrections as the chart is described, it attacks Hauser’s article in any part which attempts to make assertions based upon facts citing areas as “misleading” and “not accurate.” It also calls out Hauser when it feels that he is lacking a source or where it believes it does not provide a full citation.
Hauser provides a rebuttal to the lengthy USADA response at boxingscene.com calling it “long on verbiage and short on documented facts.” He indicated that he would respond to the response in another longer form article but addressed USADA’s efforts to discredit his work which included a portion of Jeff Novitzky’s interview with Joe Rogan discussing the UFC’s upcoming ban on IV’s. Notably, in the interview with Rogan, Novitzky stated that the primary reason there will be an IV ban is that it could mask possible performance enhancing drugs. Hauser also brings up the issue that if the USADA doping control officer that was present when Mayweather was given an IV to rehydrate after the May 1 weigh-in, why didn’t the USADA officer suggest Mayweather drink “several glasses of water.” USADA paints a bleaker picture of Mayweather’s condition on that day, but one has to wonder if his condition would be similar to that of UFC fighters after a weigh-in. Yet, USADA will be banning IVs in the UFC starting October 1.
Perhaps the bigger query is Hauser’s assertion that USADA “has yet to explain the medical justification and supporting data that led it to grant a retroactive therapeutic use exemption nineteen days after the fact for a procedure that’s on the World Anti-Doping Agency’s “Prohibited Substances and Methods List.”
Payout Perspective:
The “statement of facts” proof chart provided by USADA appears credible on its face and addresses each and every potential issue that the organization may have with Hauser’s article. It’s a very organized way to address contrary viewpoints. The UFC should take note. One thing that the response seemingly lacks is reconciling Hauser’s query about providing Mayweather with an IV. Moreover, this practice of providing Mayweather with an IV to rehydrate seems to be contrary to USADA’s stance on IVs as is it seeking to ban the use of IVs to rehydrate in the UFC starting October 1st. The obvious rebuttal is that IVs will be allowed in “emergency circumstances.” But therein lies the slippery slope with the ban on IVs. Athletes may be so dehydrated to the point an IV is needed. We shall continue with monitoring the Hauser-USADA battle as it remains relevant to the world of the UFC when it comes to issues of drug testing.
My kingdom for a decent regulatory body.