- Joined
- Jul 30, 2019
- Messages
- 15,498
- Reaction score
- 27,343
Hello, fellow sherdoggers.
I haven't been a member on this forum until about a month ago, yet i've already stumbled across a lot of people on here, who are either in favor of a less strict policy against the usage of performance enhancing drugs, or who'd want to ban all testing for bespoke PEDs inside the UFC.
In this post, i'd like to explain why less strict testing or no testing at all, would in my opinion harm our beloved sport.
First of all, i'm going to list some of the arguments that people who are pro PEDs inside the UFC mention a lot and say a word or two about each argument, before i'm going to list the arguments against a legalization of performance enhancing drugs inside the UFC in the end.
#1 "Performance enhancing drugs allow the fighters to recover faster"
This is one of the most frequent points that is made whenever people discuss this issue and it certainly is true that some of the banned substances decrease the time which is needed for the injuries to heal.
There are however different levels to this argument and depending on the factors under which PEDs are allowed to use to increase recovery, the implications are different.
Let's start with the following (and most extreme) case: the permission to use every PED available, as long and as much as the fighter wants to.
This would allow the athletes to increase the intensity/duration/frequency of their workouts and lead to the following outcomes in favor of a less strict policy/no testing for PEDs at all.
a) enhanced athleticism; both strength- and cardio-wise
b) fighters fighting more often (not compulsorily, but very likely) due to the increased recovery on PEDs.
c) possible increase in pure skill (due to the ability to train longer/more frequent) albeit that increase should not be as significant as the increase in physical ability, since a purely technique-focused training session doesn't need to be physically demanding on the body at all.
#2 "Athletes on PEDs are more fun to watch!"
This is obviously a very subjective argument, but an argument that a lot of people support nonetheless.
#3 "Allowing PEDs would level the playing field!"
One of the most popular arguments for the permission of PED-usage, is that it would level the playing field, and thus make the competition more fair, since everybody is allowed to take whatever he/she wants to maximize his/her effectiveness and frequency of training and as a result maximize performance inside the octagon.
Response to #1 "Performance enhancing drugs allow the fighters to recover faster"
While it's true that the permitted use of performance enhancing drugs would increase the level of athleticism and possibly the level of skill of the fighters that use them while also making it possible for fighters to fight more often, there are obviously big downsides to the mentioned permission for PEDs:
Response to #2 "Athletes on PEDs are more fun to watch!"
The most subjective argument out of the three i've mentioned, is because of that big, in subjectivity rooted component a hard one to tackle, but i'm going to do it nevertheless, albeit my following arguments might contain a lot of subjectivity as well.
Response to #3 "Allowing PEDs would level the playing field!"
Let's talk about the third argument. Levelling the playing field by a permission for the athletes to freely use PEDs, is a rather compelling argument - but only at first glance, because the allowing of performance enhancing drugs would give rise to new problems:
Fighters on PEDs are better athletes, but allowing those fighters to become even more explosive and powerful athletes, a more prevalent usage of a significant amount of performance enhancing drugs will result in the following things:
To come to a coherent conclusion;
Even the fairest and most controlled scenario in which performance enhancing drugs are allowed to a certain extent, is still not enabling a more level playing field in comparison to a scenario where all PEDs are banned.
As soon as an amount of performance enhancing drugs is taken that makes an athlete significantly better though, it put's the athlete's health and potentially life at risks, that are easily avoidable with an absence of performance enhancing substances in mixed martial arts, or to be exact: the UFC in this example.
For all those reasons mentioned, i think the only right thing to do is to keep the sport as clean as possible and keep the use of performance enhancing drugs banned, with maybe the exception of medical use to treat severe injuries.
What do you think? Should perfomance enhancing drugs be allowed inside the UFC? and if yes, to what extent?
I haven't been a member on this forum until about a month ago, yet i've already stumbled across a lot of people on here, who are either in favor of a less strict policy against the usage of performance enhancing drugs, or who'd want to ban all testing for bespoke PEDs inside the UFC.
In this post, i'd like to explain why less strict testing or no testing at all, would in my opinion harm our beloved sport.
First of all, i'm going to list some of the arguments that people who are pro PEDs inside the UFC mention a lot and say a word or two about each argument, before i'm going to list the arguments against a legalization of performance enhancing drugs inside the UFC in the end.
Arguments for the legalization of performance enhancing drugs
#1 "Performance enhancing drugs allow the fighters to recover faster"
This is one of the most frequent points that is made whenever people discuss this issue and it certainly is true that some of the banned substances decrease the time which is needed for the injuries to heal.
There are however different levels to this argument and depending on the factors under which PEDs are allowed to use to increase recovery, the implications are different.
Let's start with the following (and most extreme) case: the permission to use every PED available, as long and as much as the fighter wants to.
This would allow the athletes to increase the intensity/duration/frequency of their workouts and lead to the following outcomes in favor of a less strict policy/no testing for PEDs at all.
a) enhanced athleticism; both strength- and cardio-wise
b) fighters fighting more often (not compulsorily, but very likely) due to the increased recovery on PEDs.
c) possible increase in pure skill (due to the ability to train longer/more frequent) albeit that increase should not be as significant as the increase in physical ability, since a purely technique-focused training session doesn't need to be physically demanding on the body at all.
#2 "Athletes on PEDs are more fun to watch!"
This is obviously a very subjective argument, but an argument that a lot of people support nonetheless.
#3 "Allowing PEDs would level the playing field!"
One of the most popular arguments for the permission of PED-usage, is that it would level the playing field, and thus make the competition more fair, since everybody is allowed to take whatever he/she wants to maximize his/her effectiveness and frequency of training and as a result maximize performance inside the octagon.
Arguments against the legalization of performance enhancing drugs
In the first part of this post, i have listed three of the main arguments that are used when people argue in a favor of said performance enhancing drugs, in the second part i'm going to respond to each of those arguments and add some more points on why i think the permission to use PEDs would be a bad idea.
Response to #1 "Performance enhancing drugs allow the fighters to recover faster"
While it's true that the permitted use of performance enhancing drugs would increase the level of athleticism and possibly the level of skill of the fighters that use them while also making it possible for fighters to fight more often, there are obviously big downsides to the mentioned permission for PEDs:
- While some (banned) substances significantly increase the recovery of muscle, ligaments, bone and tissue, there's not a single substance that enables a faster recovery from brain traumata as a result from repeated blows to the head. If fighters fight more often, the amount of damage to the brain will increase, leading to shorter careers for the fighters and fighters suffering from normally evitable consequences of that shorter but way more taxing career. Therefore the effectiveness of PEDs as an aid to enable fighters to fight more often, does not make sense outside of the case where a fighter is not able to fight for a very long period of time due to a long lasting injury (e.g.: compound fractures, torn ligaments, etc.).
- The fact that fighters would be mainly more athletic in general as a result of a better recovery doesn't really add much to the fight game in terms of ability and competitiveness, since the advantages athletes would gain with the use of PEDs would cancel each other almost completely out. A fighter on PEDs obviously has a great advantage against a fighter who's clean, but a guy like Anderson Silva for example, would without any PEDs arguably still have the same hand-eye coordination and spatial awareness that made him a fan favourite regardless.
Response to #2 "Athletes on PEDs are more fun to watch!"
The most subjective argument out of the three i've mentioned, is because of that big, in subjectivity rooted component a hard one to tackle, but i'm going to do it nevertheless, albeit my following arguments might contain a lot of subjectivity as well.
- From what i've experienced, the fascination for fighters who're "roided to the gills" - to use a common phrase amongst fans of this sport - comes from almost exclusively two sources; one is the fascination for the more prevalent dispersion of power, or to be more exact, it's outcome: a higher rate of knockdowns and knockouts. (I have no basis for the assumption that a knockdown or knockout between two fighters who're on PEDs is more likely than it is between two clean fighters, other than the fact that PEDs increase explosivity/power - if someone elaborates here and brings in some statistics, it's greatly appreciated!). The other factor of fascination seems to stem from an increased captivation for the physical appearance (and the supposed physical abilities) of a fighter who looks like most people would imagine someone on PEDs to look: Huge amounts of muscle coupled with a (relatively) low percentage of body-fat. Depending on the sort of PED a fighter is on, the fighter might fight more reckless and aggressive as well. While the things i've mentioned might make a fight more entertaining to a lot of people, it doesn't make a fight necessarily more entertaining to me and i think that the negatives of a permission to use PEDs inside the UFC greatly outweighs the positives (for reasons mentioned and reasons about to follow).
Response to #3 "Allowing PEDs would level the playing field!"
Let's talk about the third argument. Levelling the playing field by a permission for the athletes to freely use PEDs, is a rather compelling argument - but only at first glance, because the allowing of performance enhancing drugs would give rise to new problems:
- While it would seem that the free usage of PEDs for everyone would make the sport fairer, it'd only really do so, if all athletes had access to the exact same substances - this is however nearly impossible to realize, since all places have a different density in sources for PEDs and the quality, price and compatibility of those will vary greatly as well, giving significant advantages to some athletes, while other athletes would be at a significant disadvantage.
- If the UFC - as a reaction to the inequality of PED-accessability and quality - would allow fighters to only use certain brands and kinds of PEDs, some fighters would still try to find a way to use more potent substances and/or use substances that are not listed, with the intention of gaining an (unfair) advantage over their opposition. The problem here is the following: almost all PEDs damage the body, if you take too much of them, so if the UFC wouldn't set a limit for the amount of PEDs a fighter is allowed to take, fighters are lured into taking more than their body can absborb without taking damage. If the UFC does set a limit for the amount of PEDs a fighter is allowed to use, some fighters will opt for additional substances that don't appear on the tests (and gain an unfair advantage + potentially risk their health).
Additional points against the legalization of PEDs and conclusion
Following the aforementioned points, the only fair use of PEDs would be in the scenario, where only certain substances are allowed - that scenario however, is by default just as prone to cheating, as the scenario where no kinds of PEDs are allowed, since in both scenarios substances exist, that are able to give an athlete an advantage beyond what is allowed.
Fighters on PEDs are better athletes, but allowing those fighters to become even more explosive and powerful athletes, a more prevalent usage of a significant amount of performance enhancing drugs will result in the following things:
- Higher risk of brain damage, due to increased power in strikes
- Higher risk of heart-failure, due to the usage of substances like EPO
- Higher risk of strokes
- Liver damage
- Higher risk of leukemia
To come to a coherent conclusion;
Even the fairest and most controlled scenario in which performance enhancing drugs are allowed to a certain extent, is still not enabling a more level playing field in comparison to a scenario where all PEDs are banned.
As soon as an amount of performance enhancing drugs is taken that makes an athlete significantly better though, it put's the athlete's health and potentially life at risks, that are easily avoidable with an absence of performance enhancing substances in mixed martial arts, or to be exact: the UFC in this example.
For all those reasons mentioned, i think the only right thing to do is to keep the sport as clean as possible and keep the use of performance enhancing drugs banned, with maybe the exception of medical use to treat severe injuries.
What do you think? Should perfomance enhancing drugs be allowed inside the UFC? and if yes, to what extent?
