Issue 065

August 2010

In the not-so-distant past, mixed martial arts was a brutal spectacle that relied on minimal rules and maximal violence to shock and awe audiences across the land. Thankfully, government regulators and the sport’s promoters realized the need for change, and regulations were established to protect the game’s fighters from doing any sort of extensive damage to themselves or each other. 

But lately some regulators have gone too far in their attempts to protect fighters from themselves, and, while the efforts are based solely on good intentions, the results fall short of the intended goal. A handful of athletic commissions in the US have elected to break from the Unified Rules of Mixed Martial Arts in favor of adding a few more stringent guidelines, specifically where the rules relate to pre-event weigh-ins. 

States such as Ohio and North Carolina require fighters to weigh-in one day before the competition, and then again the morning of their fight (a ‘double weigh-in’) with the competitors directed to gain no more than 13lb between the two trips to the scales. 

Since the laughable idea that a 13lb weight swing would affect a bantamweight in the same manner as a heavyweight is easily dismissed, the state of Massachusetts recently attempted to rectify that problem by instituting a multiplier to use when comparing weights. According to the Massachusetts commission, fighters are only allowed to gain 6.25% of their body weight the evening before their fight. Why 6.25%? That’s a matter for another day, as the number appears far more random than researched. 

Though the Massachusetts commission should be commended for at least trying to improve a system its members deemed unsuitable, the rule makers made a mistake by disregarding a great deal of helpful information provided by one of the most experienced MMA regulators in the world: the New Jersey State Athletic Control Board’s Nick Lembo.

Lembo and NJSACB ringside physician Dr Sherry Wulkan provided the Massachusetts commission with well-thought-out arguments against the use of a double weigh-in procedure. Chiefly among those arguments was the effect that dehydration has on the body, and how the double weigh-in procedure likely keeps athletes sapped of vital moisture for a longer period of time than the traditional weigh-in method. 

Additionally, the NJSACB’s research indicated the shorter period of time a double weigh-in allows for a fighter to properly rehydrate likely causes a significant negative impact to a fighter’s stamina and energy level, while also increasing the likelihood for brain injuries, contusions and subdural and epidural hematomas. In short, the commission’s decision could lead to more issues related to weight cutting, not less.

Compounding the issue is the fact that Massachusetts added in language that allows fighters to waive these policies entirely if both parties agree – just let that sink in. 

How could a rule theoretically created to protect fighters’ well-being then be subject to dismissal? Surely Jon Jones would be happy to sign-off on 12-to-6 elbows the next time he steps in the cage. Perhaps Paul Daley would be willing to allow punches after the bell, especially if you’re not able to deliver a proper blow during the regulation time limit. 

The science of weight cutting is not necessarily practiced safely around the world – for every Anthony Johnson that plans on shotgunning IV bags moments after stepping on the scales, there are fighters such as Frankie Edgar, who claimed a championship in the world’s top promotion in a weight class in which he’s been told that he’s too small to compete. 

MMA is an evolving sport, and changes will need to be made along the way. If rapid weight cutting is a real concern for the regulators of the sport then perhaps the method in place with the World Boxing Council (and also suggested to Massachusetts by the NJSACB) might prove worthy of a serious look. In the WBC’s model, fighters are weighed 30 days, seven days and one day before the traditional weigh-in, and guidelines are in place at each interval to assure that weight is being dropped gradually along the way. 

But, in the meantime, uniformity should be the goal of all athletic commissions regulating mixed martial arts. Annual meetings are held with the commissions in the US and Canada, and all rules and regulations are up for review at that time. That is when the concerns of the commissions should be addressed, and a majority decision can be instituted at that time. 

Rogue commissions should not be allowed to vary from the status quo indiscriminately, and Wulkan’s statement to the Massachusetts commission describes precisely why. “It is confusing for most competitors to follow different regulations when fighting in different states, and differing requirements send the message that policies are arbitrary and meaningless – in effect, that we don’t know what we’re doing. If we cannot agree on policy, then it’s hard to sell policy and change to the constituents needing to follow that policy.”

By John Morgan, former Fighters Only World MMA Awards ‘Journalist of the Year’.