Leben suspended one year following failed drug test

dave1982

The UFC has suspended Chris Leben for one year due to a failed drug test.

The veteran middleweight tested positive for the prescription painkillers oxycodone and oxymorphone following his UFC 138 main-event loss to Mark Munuz earlier this month.

UFC officials, who oversaw regulation for the overseas event, today announced the suspension.

UFC 138 took place Nov. 5 at LG Arena in Birmingham, England. Munoz vs. Leben was part of a main card that aired via same-day delay on Spike TV. Munoz earned a second-round TKO victory when Leben's corner deemed him unable to continue for the third round.

This is Leben's second suspension following a failed drug test, and it's the second time the UFC was forced to hand down the punishment. Leben also tested positive for the banned steroid Stanozolol following a 2008 loss to Michael Bisping at UFC 89. Like UFC 139, UFC 89 took place in the U.K., where there is no official sanctioning/regulatory body. In such situations, the UFC brings in an outside company to conduct drug testing.

"I would like to make it known that I fully accept this suspension and apologize for embarrassing the UFC, my friends and family, and sport of mixed martial arts," Leben stated. "I'm learning that I'm my own worst enemy sometimes. I can't succeed in the octagon or in life behaving this way. I've got to make some real changes over the next year, and I'm going to focus on getting my life and career back on track. Again, I'm sorry to the UFC and fans that've supported me since my days on 'The Ultimate Fighter.'"

Despite two failed tests, UFC president Dana White made no mention of cutting the fighter from the UFC's roster.

"I like Chris, and I want him to do well, but based on his actions, he's been suspended for one year," White stated. "If he needs professional help, we are going to be there for him. We want to see him succeed not only in the octagon but in his personal life."

Leben (22-8 MMA, 12-7 UFC) first joined the UFC in 2005. He was on a stellar 4-1 run before the recent loss to Munoz (12-2 MMA, 7-2 UFC), who is expected to fight in a No. 1 contender's bout in his next outing.

All other 19 fighters on the UFC 138 card passed their drug tests, according to the UFC.


http://mmajunkie.com/news/26287/ufc-138s-chris-leben-suspended-one-year-following-failed-drug-test-painkillers.mma
Last edited by thunderlips at 2011-11-28 21:42:33

idiot don't think he will ever be back.

El Guapo!

Wow. He really is his own worst enemy.
Hopefully he gets himself help and comes back better than ever after his suspension. Somehow though I think he's just one of those people who go on a self-destruct mission.

dasmoose

Those drugs are opiod type painkillers, I dont think he was being an 'idiot' or a cheater as such I would gues he just has some serious long term injuries and needed the drugs to fight through the pain.

Was genuinely sorry to hear about this, if you hear him talk or know anything about leben's background he's a very sympathetic character, i tend to prefer technical fighters rather than brawlers but i've been a big fan of him because of his personality.

Richy06

Ah Leeeeben!

dave1982

dasmoose wrote: »

Those drugs are opiod type painkillers, I dont think he was being an 'idiot' or a cheater

Leben also tested positive for the banned steroid Stanozolol following a 2008 loss to Michael Bisping at UFC 89

Getting caught twice ?

bjj-fighter

After watching The Smashing Machine, I actually feel bad for Leben.

Ian Whelan

dave1982 wrote: »

idiot don't think he will ever be back.

I think he'll be back alright. Can't see him quitting and can't see the UFC cutting him, he's way too big a draw. If they do cut him will he be able to fight elsewhere? i.e. is the ban just a UFC ban or does it have some national/international effect?

scudzilla

Ian Whelan wrote: »

I think he'll be back alright. Can't see him quitting and can't see the UFC cutting him, he's way too big a draw. If they do cut him will he be able to fight elsewhere? i.e. is the ban just a UFC ban or does it have some national/international effect?

He's probably under a contract with Zuffa, maybe 2/3 fights left, so will be unable to fight for any other organisation.

If he only had 1 fight left on his contract then Zuffa may well have let him go, i think they still could in the coming months

MrStuffins

I like Chris. This is tough and they were just painkillers so, despite the fact he's been caught already, surely he'd win an appeal?

Sid_Justice

Appeal to who? The UFC? He tested positive for a banned opioid analgesic while fighting in the UK. Outside the realm of any sanctioning body. When the UFC fights outside of the USA it brings its own testing teams and regulatory officers. This is purely a UFC ban not a 'state athletic commission ban'. All it would take would be for Dana to snap his fingers and he'd be able to fight again.

Oxycodone and oxymorphone are in the same strong opioid analgesic class as morphine and heroin on the WHO pain ladder. So they're fairly strong drugs you can only get with a prescription. He knew they were a banned substance and obviously got caught out some how.

As dasmoose said, this isn't cheating, and this isn't a sackable offence. There isn't a performance enhancing effect. He tested positive for a pain killer in his system the regulators say you shouldn't have. I think the year ban is harsh, but he's an experienced fighter with dirty record so I see why they did it.

MrStuffins

Sid_Justice wrote: »

Appeal to who? The UFC? He tested positive for a banned opioid analgesic while fighting in the UK. Outside the realm of any sanctioning body. When the UFC fights outside of the USA it brings its own testing teams and regulatory officers. This is purely a UFC ban not a 'state athletic commission ban'. All it would take would be for Dana to snap his fingers and he'd be able to fight again.

True, presumed this was a commission ban and not the UFC. Should've paid attention to what I was reading :pac:

As dasmoose said, this isn't cheating, and this isn't a sackable offence. There isn't a performance enhancing effect. He tested positive for a pain killer in his system the regulators say you shouldn't have. I think the year ban is harsh, but he's an experienced fighter with dirty record so I see why they did it.

Agree with this. A year is harsh. 6 months would've made sense. A punishment but only a slightly longer than normal period of inactivity.

Chuck Stone

Met him in Birmingham airport the day after 138. Seemed like a real friendly bloke. No problem getting a photo and all. Head made of concrete that guy.

MrStuffins

Chuck Stone wrote: »

Met him in Birmingham airport the day after 138. Seemed like a real friendly bloke. No problem getting a photo and all. Head made of concrete that guy.

Even though he started out like a d*ck, he seems to be one of the coolest guys in MMA these days.

Chuck Stone

MrStuffins wrote: »

Even though he started out like a d*ck, he seems to be one of the coolest guys in MMA these days.

Yeah. I actually think the year off might do him good. Get his shit together and all that.

He seemed like he was in a lot of pain when we met him but still fierce friendly.

JoeyJJ

No wonder he was walking through punches in his last few wins, these probably take the edge off the sting of those punches.

Mellor

Sid_Justice wrote: »

As dasmoose said, this isn't cheating, and this isn't a sackable offence. There isn't a performance enhancing effect. He tested positive for a pain killer in his system the regulators say you shouldn't have.

You don't think that taking strong painkillers can enhance proformance????

dave1982

I assumed it was num the pain from a injury during training/pre fight.I can't see it making you stronger faster?

Sid_Justice

Mellor wrote: »

You don't think that taking strong painkillers can enhance proformance????

no. I don't. just my opinion. open to correction.

firstly they were found in his system. He may not have actually taken them prior to the fight or in a time frame were they'd have any analgesic effect during the fight. Even if he did, I would propose the CNS depression would out weigh the gain from dulling pain.

What do you think? Do you think being able to kick without pain counts as performance enhancing?

dave1982

I would tbh, if a fighter has a back injury and can't shoot for a take down without them.

Mellor

dave1982 wrote: »

I assumed it was num the pain from a injury during training/pre fight.I can't see it making you stronger faster?

Of course it doesn't make you stronger or faster, but it still improves proformance through other means.
PED is something that improves proformance, is strong painkillers allow you to fight beyond your normal pain threshold, then its a PED.

Sid_Justice wrote: »

no. I don't. just my opinion. open to correction.

firstly they were found in his system. He may not have actually taken them prior to the fight or in a time frame were they'd have any analgesic effect during the fight. Even if he did, I would propose the CNS depression would out weigh the gain from dulling pain.

What do you think? Do you think being able to kick without pain counts as performance enhancing?

They are pretty uniformly considered PEDs by all sporting bodies, importantly WADA.
Painkillers are only banned during competition. There is nothign agaisnt the ruels to using them between fights. So I'd assume that they were in effect during the fight. Unlike anabolic drugs which are banned all the time, for obvious reasons.

I could maybe see you point in relation to some sports where is might be more of a hinderance. A swimmer who tested positive said she was an oversight, one that wouldn't actually help her (she was still banned). But in fight sports, I don't that can be said. An elevated pain threshold is a clear advantage imo.

Sid_Justice

It was my impression that narcotics (opioid pain killers etc.) were banned more to benefit the athlete rather than to prevent cheating. They are drugs that an athlete can become dependent on or addicted to.

fight beyond your normal pain threshold

i think this is important. I don't think anyone is taking painkiller so they can check more leg kicks (similar to the show jumper), it's probably to suppress a recent injury, like back pain. So normally the athlete doesn't have a problem with their wrestling but if they pull a muscle, they can't wrestle properly. If it was another sport they'd take a week off but in this type of game you can't reschedule fights. So they take painkillers (opioid) and corticosteroids to reduce inflammation.

so i can see the reasoning that a athlete may take painkillers just to get them back to some where near normal functioning.

remember almost everything under the sun is banned by these regulatory bodies so i do have a bit of sympathy for people that test positive for things like this. it's not fair to tar them with the same brush as anabolic steroid users (but i guess there are certain legitimate reasons for using them also).

Mellor

Sid_Justice wrote: »

It was my impression that narcotics (opioid pain killers etc.) were banned more to benefit the athlete rather than to prevent cheating. They are drugs that an athlete can become dependent on or addicted to.

I wouldn't of thought that was the reason. Seeing as they are permitted when not in competition.
I've no idea what the limit is or how long before fighting you should stop to test clean.

I think this is important. I don't think anyone is taking painkiller so they can check more leg kicks (similar to the show jumper), it's probably to suppress a recent injury, like back pain. So normally the athlete doesn't have a problem with their wrestling but if they pull a muscle, they can't wrestle properly. If it was another sport they'd take a week off but in this type of game you can't reschedule fights. So they take painkillers (opioid) and corticosteroids to reduce inflammation.

I imagine most people start taking them due to injury. So they can fight without it holding them back. But thats clearly within the definition of a PED. I'm not saying it enhances performance to super-human levels, or beyond their overall potential. But it enhances it it further than their ability in their current state.

remember almost everything under the sun is banned by these regulatory bodies so i do have a bit of sympathy for people that test positive for things like this. it's not fair to tar them with the same brush as anabolic steroid users (but i guess there are certain legitimate reasons for using them also).

By legitimate reason for using steroids I'm guessing you mean TRT or something.

I agree a year is harsh for simply painkillers. But thats the rules, he knows the rules. Plus he tested positive before for a more serious breach.

dasmoose

Mellor, I don't disagree with you that it's cheating under the rules, but you have to look at the reasoning for the rules.

Steroids aren't banned because they give people an advantage - by that logic you should ban supplements and protein shakes. They're banned because they're dangerous. Someone taking steroids is endangering his own health and if they were permitted, it would force athletes who aren't willing to take that risk to use steroids to compete.

In this case I think it's extremely likely that leben just needed the painkillers to get through the pain. I've never taken any opiods myself so I have no idea how they feel but i'd imagine it doesn't particularly help your technique.

And ok yes, under the rules it's cheating. But frankly if it was your job to fight, and you had trained hard for it and felt that it would be letting the fans down and damaging your career to pull out - not to mention that maybe you needed the money to pay my bills - you'd probably take some painkillers too.

I'm not even saying leben should get off scott free, I just don't really like the waves of people (not necessarily on this board) who are ready to crucify a fighter and label him a cheater when maybe he was just forced into a tight corner and saw that as the only solution.

Ush1

dasmoose wrote: »

Mellor, I don't disagree with you that it's cheating under the rules, but you have to look at the reasoning for the rules.

Steroids aren't banned because they give people an advantage - by that logic you should ban supplements and protein shakes. They're banned because they're dangerous. Someone taking steroids is endangering his own health and if they were permitted, it would force athletes who aren't willing to take that risk to use steroids to compete.

In this case I think it's extremely likely that leben just needed the painkillers to get through the pain. I've never taken any opiods myself so I have no idea how they feel but i'd imagine it doesn't particularly help your technique.

And ok yes, under the rules it's cheating. But frankly if it was your job to fight, and you had trained hard for it and felt that it would be letting the fans down and damaging your career to pull out - not to mention that maybe you needed the money to pay my bills - you'd probably take some painkillers too.

I'm not even saying leben should get off scott free, I just don't really like the waves of people (not necessarily on this board) who are ready to crucify a fighter and label him a cheater when maybe he was just forced into a tight corner and saw that as the only solution.

Not feeling pain is dangerous, it's there for a good evolutionary reason.

Nick Diazs win over Gomi was a no contest and they reckon the reason Nick was hanging on was from marijuana in his system numbing the pain. May or may not be the truth but you can see their point how it was helping him and at the same time dangerous to him.

Mellor

dasmoose wrote: »

Steroids aren't banned because they give people an advantage - by that logic you should ban supplements and protein shakes.

Steroids clearly give you an advantage.
There increase protein synthesis beyond whats capable naturally by the body. Allowing for increased recovery, increased training, and increase muscle and strength building.

How is that in anyway like protein shakes? Which is naturally occuring in food. A protein shake is just food, no different to chicken or other foods in nutritional terms. You shouldn't believe every a marketing department tells you.

Some other supplements are banned during competition btw. Mostly stimulents.

They're banned because they're dangerous. Someone taking steroids is endangering his own health and if they were permitted, it would force athletes who aren't willing to take that risk to use steroids to compete.

The safety of steroids may or may not be questionable, its its not the issue. Al drugs can be dangerous without doctors supervision and proper treatment.
Most pro bodybuilders are on steroids.

In this case I think it's extremely likely that leben just needed the painkillers to get through the pain. I've never taken any opiods myself so I have no idea how they feel but i'd imagine it doesn't particularly help your technique.

That depends on the level you take surely.
The junkie on the street strung out on heroin is taking far greater amounts the guy buying neurofen plus over the counter for his back. Both are opiates.

And ok yes, under the rules it's cheating. But frankly if it was your job to fight, and you had trained hard for it and felt that it would be letting the fans down and damaging your career to pull out - not to mention that maybe you needed the money to pay my bills - you'd probably take some painkillers too.

Well given that I'd know there was a 100% chance of getting tested then no I prob wouldn't. I'd look for some way for legally medicating for the fight.