Chavez vs Rubio Controversy: WBC Blames Texas Commission For Lack of Drug Testing

by Scott Christ on Feb 6, 2012 5:13 PM EST in Boxing News Analysis

Jeff Gross - Getty Images

Julio Cesar Chavez Jr, the WBC, and the Texas athletic commission are all under the microscope following Saturday's laundry list of questionable actions. (Photo by Jeff Gross/Getty Images)

The World Boxing Council (WBC) is blaming the Texas commission for failing to administer post-fight drug tests following Julio Cesar Chavez Jr's Saturday win over Marco Antonio Rubio, and have told Rubio's team to take their protest and complaints to Texas, not to the WBC.

"We are not responsible for that review. If a drug test was not performed, that is something that always corresponds to the local commissions - which in this case was the responsibility of the Texas commission and not the World Boxing Council. The WBC can not get involved in the internal affairs of the commissions. It is up to Texas to respond to those claims."

Rubio's promoter says the fighter told him in the ninth round it was like he was fighting a heavyweight, but frankly it wasn't far off from that -- Chavez weighed 181 pounds on the HBO unofficial scales prior to the fight, and that was about what he was at in the ring. He was a big guy, 10 pounds heavier than Rubio's HBO weigh-in on the night. He's probably the biggest guy Rubio's ever fought in terms of weight on the night, and Chavez was using that weight to muscle and bully Rubio.

As for the WBC, Rubio's team says that the WBC told them they "forgot" to do the drug testing. Now they're pleading innocence or ignorance, or maybe a bit of both.

But the reality is this whole thing just plain reeks, and the WBC has their hand stuck in the cookie jar here, and now they're trying to hide the jar behind their back. It's not just the drug testing. They also refused to replace referee Guadalupe Garcia even though Rubio's team complained that they weren't following their own rules on having a neutral referee for a world title fight.

Even worse than that, they allowed open scoring during the fight. That's a WBC thing, but it does not apply to commissions under the unified rules of the Association of Boxing Commissions, which includes Texas. Open scoring is not in place in the United States, but it happened anyway. Harold Lederman of HBO theorized that the Texas commission had been railroaded by the WBC in that case, and maybe so.

Look, there are a LOT of WBC title fights held in the United States. For example, Floyd Mayweather vs Victor Ortiz last September was a WBC title fight in Nevada. There was no open scoring. For a Chavez fight, it happened. Why? And when you add that in with all of the other issues -- Chavez's DWI arrest, the referee, the lack of drug testing -- you can surely understand why people are wondering just what in the hell was going on on Saturday night.

0 recs | 11 comments

Comments

Ducks the mandatory, has a DWI close to the fight, open scoring even when the commission said they wouldn’t do it in America, and then doesn’t have a drug test even though he has a history with diuretics.

The WBC and principles are like oil and water, they don’t mix.

Waldo Rastel - February 6, 2012 reply

Looks like Ruben Garcia isn’t the only guy with ADD on the Texas commission. And when it comes to following rules, I think we got standard fare from the Why Bother Council. It’s enough to make you think Congress is running the show.

ShrinkRap - February 6, 2012 reply

Is the WBC correct that the Local Commissions are Responsible for Drug Testing?

Has this been something done by the local commissions in the past?

rantcatrat - February 6, 2012 reply

Yeah, however this doesn’t not mean that the WBC cannot do anything about it. Take the belt away, give the sanctioning fees back to everyone, force JCC Jr to take a quick mandatory against Martinez, vacate the belt.

Waldo Rastel - February 6, 2012 reply

I confess that when I first heard abut the PED allegations, I thought “oh, boy, this is becoming an epidemic of mudslinging.”

However, the way you outline the situation, this whole thing is becoming, to be unnecessarily delicate about it, curiouser and curiouser.

DrRck - February 6, 2012 reply

Same boat. I figured it was just BS nothingness. Turns out not so much.

Scott Christ - February 6, 2012 reply

The official WBC Rules

Here you go.

4.36 Procedures for Administration of Antidoping Tests. Each local commission will determine
the mechanics for implementation of antidoping tests, but the following measures are
required:

(a) The antidoping tests shall be taken from the urine of the contending boxers
immediately after the bout, at the dressing room or place designated by the doctor.
The WBC may authorize the samples to be taken before the bouts only in places
where a law or a rule so requires.

(b) The urine of each boxer shall be placed in two (2) separate bottles perfectly clean and
sterilized, marked "A" and "B" or "1" and "2", before the boxer and his
representative, the doctor or official in charge and/or any neutral doctor that may be
chosen by the WBC. All bottles shall then be sealed.

© All sealed bottles shall be signed by the boxer or his representative and the doctor,
local commissioner, or WBC Supervisor.

(d) The first bottle, "A" or "1", will be used for a first test, to be performed
independently by the laboratory specifically appointed by the local boxing
commission or the WBC. If the test results, which shall be presented within a week
after the contest, are negative, the result shall be reported as such and filed, and the
second bottle, "B" or "2", destroyed.

(e) If the first bottle, "A" or "1" is found positive, the WBC shall be immediately
informed by the local commission or directly by the laboratory. The WBC will
immediately contact the affected boxer, or his representative, to inform them of their
right to select a representative to witness a second test. The positive result of bottle
"A" or "1" shall be kept in strict confidence among the laboratory, the local
commission, the WBC headquarters, the WBC Supervisor of the contest, and the
accused boxer and his representatives.

(f) The responsibility for second test, if the first is found positive, will be that of the
WBC. At the WBC’s direction, bottles "B" and "2" shall be sent to the laboratory
officially and expressly appointed or agreed to by the WBC, where the boxer may
have a representative present to observe the second testing. The local boxing
commission and the WBC may agree on the laboratory to perform the second test.

(g) If bottle "B" or "2" is found positive, confirming the first test, the WBC shall appoint
a WBC investigating committee, whose report shall be presented to the WBC Board
of Governors. The WBC shall schedule and conduct a hearing in accordance with
these Rules and Regulations, prior to making a final determination.

The WBC may in its discretion accept antidoping testing by local commissions that is
substantially in accordance with these Rules and Regulations, and may recognize
suspensions or other penalties for antidoping violations imposed by local commissions.
However, the WBC reserves the right to conduct its own testing or investigations, hold
hearings, and issue its own decisions regarding the culpability of any boxer for antidoping
violations.

Waldo Rastel - February 6, 2012 reply

“We totally forgot…..to do that thing that we are not responsible for!”
-WBC

erod - February 6, 2012 reply

Required only means required when we don’t love the favored fighter!

Waldo Rastel - February 6, 2012 reply

for the undercard they had a PR referee n vazques is frm PR how was that allowed?

el javi - February 6, 2012 via Android app reply

WBO sanctioned that one.

Scott Christ - February 6, 2012 reply

Bad Left Hook