THE ASSOCIATION OF RINGSIDE PHYSICIANS WANTS TO STOP DRASTIC WEIGHT CUTTING
FIGHTLAND BLOG
By Fightland Staff on March 27, 2014
http://ift.tt/QkVOuG
Back in 2010, the Massachusetts State Athletic Commission brought mixed martial arts under state regulation, a gesture that made Boston an attractive destination for future UFC events. But the commission soon had a headache born of good intentions: The commission called for fighters to weigh in twice before an event—once the day before, once the day of—and limited the fighter from gaining more than 6.25 percent of his or her bodyweight in between. (In real pounds, that means light heavyweights couldn’t weigh more than 217.8 pounds on fight day, lightweights couldn’t be heavier than 164.68 pounds, and so on.) The idea assumed that by preventing a fighter from regaining too much weight, they’d be preventing a fighter from cutting too much weight in the first place.
That idea proved to be shortsighted and, ultimately, dumb. Critics said fighters could still drop unhealthy amounts of weight, but now they could only partially replenish themselves before the fight, and essentially be worse off than before. There were logistical burdens to hosting multiple weigh-ins. The policy would have been a disincentive for behemoth fighters from elsewhere to compete in Massachusetts, and homegrown fighters who did everything right would face the reality of facing guys unencumbered by such rules when they went to other jurisdictions. So the Massachusetts commission quickly ditched the idea, and returned to the day-before weigh-in we’ve come to expect.
That regulatory footnote shows just how hard it is to change weigh-in policies that doctors hate and fighters dread, but this week, the Association of Ringside Physicians (ARP) released a statement that offers something resembling a path through the weight-cutting weeds. The cornerstone of the international organization’s recommendation include establishing a lowest allowable weight class based on body composition analysis and hydration levels, annual evaluations tied to the licensing process, establishing a database of this information for athletic commissions to access, and promoting educational initiatives to promote healthy nutrition when fighters are out of camp and discourage drastic weight-cutting techniques. You can read the statement here.http://ift.tt/QkVOuC
We all know that drastic weight cuts are a problem. The ostensible advantage it provides—swinging the advantage toward the fighter coming into the cage bigger and stronger—has been nullified because virtually every MMA athlete does it. Fighters sucking out a few dozen pounds of weight is standard, and it’s not uncommon to hear about swings in walk-around weight that go 50 pounds north of where a fighter competes. Even with a full day to rehydrate before fight time, it’s not enough: According to a 2013 study in the Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research, of the 40 MMA fighters studied, 39% were still significantly dehydrated 22 hours after the official weigh-in.
As the ARP’s statement points out, the massive weight cuts that are commonplace in MMA have serious health repercussions that outlast short-term discomfort. Beyond adverse effects on performance, other health consequences, like kidney failure, are legitimate possibilities. (Remember: one of the culprits blamed at the outset of the testosterone replacement therapy era was wrestlers-turned-fighters dealing with the lingering effects of a lifetime of weight-cutting on their endocrine system.) The brain, the organ most sensitive to the detriments of fighting, can take days to sufficiently rehydrate. Taking blows to the head is probably the last thing to do in between. But there are immediate consequences too—look no further than Leandro Souza, the Brazilian fighter who died from a stroke last September after attempting to cut more than 30 pounds in a week to reach the flyweight limit, using diuretics to do so.
The strongest aspect of the ARP’s recommendation is that it reconciles the practice of weight cutting with the circumstances that provoke it long before the fight is booked. Fighters’ own perceptions of how light they can be and still be healthy enough to compete might not correlate with medical science. And those wild weight swings and sauna sessions are symptoms of an unhealthy culture. Just because you’re physically able to draw out dozens of pounds of fluid and regain them with syringes and banana bags doesn’t mean it’s a good idea, and just because other guys call you a pussy for passing out with two pounds to go doesn’t mean you should listen. The ARP’s push for education and a holistic address of excessive, rapid weight loss is the only way to fundamentally change its role in MMA.
But there’s a larger issue that the statement doesn’t address and that Massachusetts’s well intentioned (though poorly executed) initiative four years ago illustrates: A piecemeal approach to something this pervasive won’t work, and without a national governing body to link the tenuous bonds between state commissions or the fighters themselves, the “standardized weigh-in policies” recommended by the ARP might never come to be. In discussing the ARP’s weight-cutting recommendations, some have pointed to the swift action taken to ban therapeutic-use exemptions for testosterone replacement therapy after the organization took a stand against the practice. Maybe, as with testosterone replacement therapy, it’s a case of a commission like Nevada implementing a weight-cutting policy in line with the one recommended by the ARP and the dominos following elsewhere. Then again, maybe other commissions won’t follow suit, and maybe the fighters who perceive an advantage from weight cutting will simply do their best to fight elsewhere instead.
In that case, the problem will persist. They’ll step on the scale, gaunt and dead-eyed, arms akimbo with the prayer that’s going through his shrunken brain written all over his face, and we’ll all know there’s something wrong with the picture. But with the right set of brushes, the ARP’s recommendations can paint over the ugliest strokes.
FIGHTLAND BLOG
By Fightland Staff on March 27, 2014
http://ift.tt/QkVOuG
Back in 2010, the Massachusetts State Athletic Commission brought mixed martial arts under state regulation, a gesture that made Boston an attractive destination for future UFC events. But the commission soon had a headache born of good intentions: The commission called for fighters to weigh in twice before an event—once the day before, once the day of—and limited the fighter from gaining more than 6.25 percent of his or her bodyweight in between. (In real pounds, that means light heavyweights couldn’t weigh more than 217.8 pounds on fight day, lightweights couldn’t be heavier than 164.68 pounds, and so on.) The idea assumed that by preventing a fighter from regaining too much weight, they’d be preventing a fighter from cutting too much weight in the first place.
That idea proved to be shortsighted and, ultimately, dumb. Critics said fighters could still drop unhealthy amounts of weight, but now they could only partially replenish themselves before the fight, and essentially be worse off than before. There were logistical burdens to hosting multiple weigh-ins. The policy would have been a disincentive for behemoth fighters from elsewhere to compete in Massachusetts, and homegrown fighters who did everything right would face the reality of facing guys unencumbered by such rules when they went to other jurisdictions. So the Massachusetts commission quickly ditched the idea, and returned to the day-before weigh-in we’ve come to expect.
That regulatory footnote shows just how hard it is to change weigh-in policies that doctors hate and fighters dread, but this week, the Association of Ringside Physicians (ARP) released a statement that offers something resembling a path through the weight-cutting weeds. The cornerstone of the international organization’s recommendation include establishing a lowest allowable weight class based on body composition analysis and hydration levels, annual evaluations tied to the licensing process, establishing a database of this information for athletic commissions to access, and promoting educational initiatives to promote healthy nutrition when fighters are out of camp and discourage drastic weight-cutting techniques. You can read the statement here.http://ift.tt/QkVOuC
We all know that drastic weight cuts are a problem. The ostensible advantage it provides—swinging the advantage toward the fighter coming into the cage bigger and stronger—has been nullified because virtually every MMA athlete does it. Fighters sucking out a few dozen pounds of weight is standard, and it’s not uncommon to hear about swings in walk-around weight that go 50 pounds north of where a fighter competes. Even with a full day to rehydrate before fight time, it’s not enough: According to a 2013 study in the Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research, of the 40 MMA fighters studied, 39% were still significantly dehydrated 22 hours after the official weigh-in.
As the ARP’s statement points out, the massive weight cuts that are commonplace in MMA have serious health repercussions that outlast short-term discomfort. Beyond adverse effects on performance, other health consequences, like kidney failure, are legitimate possibilities. (Remember: one of the culprits blamed at the outset of the testosterone replacement therapy era was wrestlers-turned-fighters dealing with the lingering effects of a lifetime of weight-cutting on their endocrine system.) The brain, the organ most sensitive to the detriments of fighting, can take days to sufficiently rehydrate. Taking blows to the head is probably the last thing to do in between. But there are immediate consequences too—look no further than Leandro Souza, the Brazilian fighter who died from a stroke last September after attempting to cut more than 30 pounds in a week to reach the flyweight limit, using diuretics to do so.
The strongest aspect of the ARP’s recommendation is that it reconciles the practice of weight cutting with the circumstances that provoke it long before the fight is booked. Fighters’ own perceptions of how light they can be and still be healthy enough to compete might not correlate with medical science. And those wild weight swings and sauna sessions are symptoms of an unhealthy culture. Just because you’re physically able to draw out dozens of pounds of fluid and regain them with syringes and banana bags doesn’t mean it’s a good idea, and just because other guys call you a pussy for passing out with two pounds to go doesn’t mean you should listen. The ARP’s push for education and a holistic address of excessive, rapid weight loss is the only way to fundamentally change its role in MMA.
But there’s a larger issue that the statement doesn’t address and that Massachusetts’s well intentioned (though poorly executed) initiative four years ago illustrates: A piecemeal approach to something this pervasive won’t work, and without a national governing body to link the tenuous bonds between state commissions or the fighters themselves, the “standardized weigh-in policies” recommended by the ARP might never come to be. In discussing the ARP’s weight-cutting recommendations, some have pointed to the swift action taken to ban therapeutic-use exemptions for testosterone replacement therapy after the organization took a stand against the practice. Maybe, as with testosterone replacement therapy, it’s a case of a commission like Nevada implementing a weight-cutting policy in line with the one recommended by the ARP and the dominos following elsewhere. Then again, maybe other commissions won’t follow suit, and maybe the fighters who perceive an advantage from weight cutting will simply do their best to fight elsewhere instead.
In that case, the problem will persist. They’ll step on the scale, gaunt and dead-eyed, arms akimbo with the prayer that’s going through his shrunken brain written all over his face, and we’ll all know there’s something wrong with the picture. But with the right set of brushes, the ARP’s recommendations can paint over the ugliest strokes.
Statistics: Posted by bgosh — Apr 2. 2014, 11:52 — Replies 0 — Views 9
