'%20x='0'%20y='0'%20height='100%25'%20width='100%25'%20%0A%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20xlink%3Ahref=''%3E%3C/image%3E%3C/svg%3E)
In what’s undoubtedly one of the most stunning UFC moments of 2018 – if not of all time – it was announced last night that UFC 232, scheduled for 12/29/18, will be moved from Las Vegas to Los Angeles. The reason for the change? Jon Jones, of course.
Jones, who is set to face Alexander Gustafsson for the vacant UFC Light-Heavyweight title in the main event of the show, has apparently been flagged for an ‘abnormal’ drug test in which trace metabolites of turinabol – the PED that he was caught using after his 2017 fight with Daniel Cormier – were found in his system.
Despite the UFC and USADA denying that this was a positive test – they claim the traces were probably leftovers from the initial positive test in July 2017 – it would’ve required an investigation from the Nevada State Athletic Commission that would’ve ruled Jones out of a fight on 12/29. So should the UFC really have simply moved the show to California, where Jones can get a licence?
I’m leaning towards no; the UFC should instead have pulled the fight from the card and probably suspended Jones, too, and here are 5 reasons why.
#1 It’s a huge black eye on the sport
Despite the UFC claiming they are committed to cleaning up the sport of MMA due to so many historical positive tests for PEDs, and their partnership with the US Anti-Doping Agency (USADA) since 2015, the fact that Jones is being allowed to fight in a few days brings into question the promotion’s true motive when it comes to this subject.
Sure, USADA can claim that Jones obtained no performance-enhancing effects from the trace amounts of turinabol that he’s tested positive for this time, but if this were one of the undercard fighters booked on UFC 232 – say Brian Kelleher or Curtis Millender – would this reaction have remained the same? Or would that fighter have been removed until the situation could be cleared up fully?
The fact is that – in the eyes of the fans, at least – this feels like Jones receiving special treatment from the UFC and USADA where no quarter has been granted in the past. With the UFC already being accused of giving some fighters special treatment when it comes to PEDs – that’s the basis of Mark Hunt’s lawsuit against the promotion – it’s worrying to see them willing to move a big show across states for the want of a single fighter.
However you look at it – and even if Jones is as clean as he claims – this is a huge black eye on a sport which is desperately trying to find a cleaner image.
#2 UFC 232 doesn’t even need Jon Jones
Even if UFC 232 was being looked at as a “one-fight card” as some UFC pay-per-views have been previously, moving the show to another state would still look shady. But in that case, it’d be slightly more understandable, as cancelling a card causes a lot of chaos and a big loss of money, as we saw when 2012’s UFC 151 and 2014’s UFC 176 had to be scrapped due to the loss of their main events.
In this case, though, UFC 232 isn’t a “one-fight card” by any stretch of the imagination. Not only is it pretty deep in terms of talent, but in the form of Cris Cyborg vs. Amanda Nunes, it also has a perfectly acceptable main event should Jones/Gustafsson not take place.
Cyborg is even a proven pay-per-view draw for the UFC – an extremely late fight against the unknown Yana Kunitskaya drew 260,000 buys in March and her fight with Holly Holm last December did 380,000 buys – a figure higher than Jones drew against Gustafsson in their first meeting in 2013.
It’s doubtful that Cyborg/Nunes would draw as well as Jones/Gustafsson today, but it certainly wouldn’t be a pay-per-view disaster. And what’s more, the image that the promotion would give off by removing Jones for the card would be more of a positive than the extra few thousand buys that his presence will pull in.
The show wouldn’t have needed to have been cancelled and the UFC’s PR wouldn’t be taking the hit that it’s taking today.
#3 It’s unfair to the fighters and the Vegas fans
Perhaps the biggest issue surrounding the move of UFC 232 from Las Vegas to Los Angeles is the ripple effect that it has on both the other fighters on the card and on the fans who planned to attend. Sure, it looks like any fans who bought tickets for the show in Vegas will be offered a full refund – and could then attempt to buy new tickets for the LA show – but is that really fair, particularly as the show takes place in the middle of the Christmas period?
And what of the other fighters on the show? Apparently, some of them only found out about the switch when the news emerged on the internet – which undercard fighter Megan Anderson has claimed on Twitter. Fellow undercard fighter Siyar Bahadurzada has claimed that this is understandable due to the nature of news and technology, but even so, this is a bad look for the UFC.
Others like Corey Anderson, Brian Kelleher and Michael Chiesa have all aired their frustrations with the move. Not only this, California has a higher tax rate than Nevada – meaning the fighters will actually earn less money from the show. So should the UFC really be going to such lengths to protect one fighter – Jon Jones – who seemingly cannot keep himself out of trouble? The answer is no.
By suspending Jones and letting the show go on, the promotion would’ve sent a real anti-PED message. By doing what they’ve done, on the other hand, the message feels simpler; unless you’re a big star who draws money for the promotion, we don’t really care. And given the talks of the Ali Act and fighter unions, that isn’t a good message for the UFC to be sending right now.
#4 Other fighters have been treated differently
One of the biggest issues surrounding the UFC’s deal with USADA has been the fact that so many fighters have found themselves in hot water for positive tests for either substances which don’t necessarily enhance performances, or trace amounts of banned substances that have come from apparently “contaminated supplements”. Regardless of the kind of failed test, however, USADA have generally been tough on the fighters, and until recently, any failed test was announced immediately before any investigation could begin.
That policy has changed recently, but it still feels like some fighters have been treated much differently to how Jones has been dealt with here. Lyoto Machida, for instance, was hit with an 18-month ban for the use of a substance called 7-keto-DHEA, which apparently doesn’t even enhance a fighter’s performance. And Junior Dos Santos, Antonio Rogerio Nogueira and Pedro Munhoz all spent time on the shelf before being exonerated after a USADA investigation.
So why isn’t Jones spending time on the shelf while this issue is investigated? Well, USADA and the UFC have suggested that this trace metabolite is a leftover from the previous positive test – well over a year ago – with Jeff Novitsky stating that the levels were merely “picograms”. Former UFC Middleweight Tom Lawlor, however, has stated that he received a 2-year ban for having 17 picograms of the banned substance ostarine in his system.
Essentially, the double-standards from the UFC surrounding Jones is incredibly questionable. It would’ve been far better to simply suspend him and wait for a proper investigation to take place, rather than move an entire show.
#5 Jones can’t keep himself out of trouble
In all honesty, at this stage, it has to be questioned whether Jones should even be allowed to fight in the first place. This controversy is just the latest in an absolute laundry list of issues surrounding the former champion, and given that it’s his third suspicious or positive test since the USADA era began in 2015 – and he’s also chosen to avoid VADA testing for this upcoming fight – then for me his whole career must be called into question.
Jones is clearly one of the best fighters in the history of MMA, but given all of his other issues – the 2015 hit-and-run incident and his positive test for cocaine the same year; the 2014 accusation of posting homophobic insults on Instagram; the fact that he spent time in rehab for recreational drugs in 2017 – you have to wonder if the UFC should still be promoting a fighter who behaves in this way.
The UFC is full of great role models like Daniel Cormier, Georges St-Pierre, Max Holloway and Robert Whittaker, but their protection of a character like Jones in this instance sends out a poor message indeed.
The promotion has already been criticised in 2018 for their handling of the Conor McGregor bus attack in April, and suspending Jones in this instance would’ve sent out a much stronger message than seemingly protecting him instead.
