Page 1 of 1

Hauser on Hearn

Posted: 14 Nov 2019, 04:53
by ALI
Article from www.BS.com

---

Matchroom Boxing USA plans to promote - and DAZN plans to stream - a super-middleweight fight between Danny Jacobs and Julio Cesar Chavez Jr on December 20. Few boxing insiders think the bout will be competitive. Jacobs is a prohibitive favorite. But DAZN wants Chavez on the network because it believes his presence will drive subscription buys in the Hispanic American community. Matchroom managing director Eddie Hearn wants the dollars that will come with promoting the fight. Chavez wants the payday. And Jacobs wants to get back in the win column while making as much money as possible after losing to Canelo Alvarez this past May.

Initially, Jacobs-Chavez was slated for the MGM Grand Garden Arena in Las Vegas. Then, on October 24, pursuant to a request by the Nevada State Athletic Commission, a Voluntary Anti-Doping Agency (VADA) collection officer went to the Wild Card Gym in Hollywood where Chavez was training to collect a urine sample from the fighter to be tested for illegal performance enhancing drugs.

According to information transmitted by VADA to the NSAC, Chavez arrived at the gym shortly before 2:00 PM. At that time, the VADA collection officer introduced himself and Chavez refused to provide the sample. He repeated his refusal several times as the afternoon progressed. VADA president Dr. Margaret Goodman was contacted by Matchroom Boxing CEO Frank Smith and Shaun Palmer (counsel for Matchroom), who asked that the VADA collection officer remain on site while they sought to convince Chavez to provide the sample. At 4:35 PM, after Chavez had left the gym and it was clear that he would not return to provide the sample, the VADA collection officer left.

On October 30, at the behest of executive director Bob Bennett, the Nevada State Athletic Commission placed Chavez on temporary suspension pending the result of a November 20 commission meeting. An attorney representing Chavez reached out informally to the Nevada Attorney General's office (which has jurisdiction over the NSAC) for relief. But the AG's office stood by Bennett.

Thereafter, Hearn found a more compliant state athletic commission. Francisco Meneses (executive director of the Arizona Boxing and MMA Commission) said that the fight could proceed in Arizona and that drug testing would be conducted by Drug Free Sport US (an organization that lacks the credibility of VADA).

After Arizona was announced as the site for the fight, Hearn told spam.com, "Chavez hadn't signed for the fight, hadn't signed up for VADA, and Nevada through VADA turned up to test him. And he said, 'Well, I haven't signed for the fight yet.' So he didn't test and they chose to not license him. So I went to the ABC, went to the other boxing commissions, who said, 'We'll license him, no problem. He just has to sign up for testing, which he's done in full. And on we go."

But Hearn's explanation is flawed.


First, under Nevada law, the Nevada State Athletic Commission has jurisdiction to test a fighter for performance enhancing drugs once a promoter requests a date for a fight from the commission. And Matchroom had previously requested December 20 as the date for Jacobs-Chavez.

Moreover, the Muhammad Ali Boxing Reform Act provides that each boxing commission shall establish procedures to ensure that no boxer is permitted to box within its jurisdiction while under suspension from any other boxing commission as a consequence of a failed drug test. And the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) code expressly treats evading, refusing, or failing to submit to a drug test as a violation with penalties that are the same as the penalties for a failed drug test.

The Ali Act was designed to prevent forum shopping of the kind that is happening now in conjunction with Jacobs-Chavez.

Before Matchroom settled on Arizona as the site for Jacobs-Chavez, it reached out informally to the California State Athletic Commission to determine whether Chavez might be licensed in California. But Chavez has had a troubled relationship with the CSAC. He was supposed to fight on the Deontay Wilder vs. Tyson Fury undercard in Los Angeles last December but missed multiple appointments with CSAC medical personnel. Thereafter, he was pulled from the Wilder-Fury undercard.

The response of CSAC executive director Andy Foster to Matchroom's inquiry regarding Jacobs-Chavez was such that Hearn decided to look elsewhere for a site.

jacobs-chavez (1)

Hearn's claim that he "went to the ABC [Association of Boxing Commissions], went to the other boxing commissions, who said, 'We'll license him, no problem. He just has to sign up for testing," is particularly problematic.

Hearn did speak with Mike Mazzulli (a former ABC president who is still a member of the ABC executive board). But Mazzulli no longer speaks with the authority of the ABC. And even if he did, he wouldn't have the authority to waive a violation of the Ali Act.


In that regard, the thoughts of Brian Dunn (the current ABC president) are instructive. On November 12, Dunn told Boxing Scene, "I did not speak to Eddie Hearn. I did speak with Bob Bennett and Francisco Meneses [executive director of the Boxing & MMA Commission at the Arizona Department of Gaming]. And I'm not happy about this. I don't like the commission shopping aspect of it. I don't think it's legal under the Ali Act for the fight to go forward in Arizona if Chavez is on suspension in Nevada for refusing to take a test. I just don't think it's a good idea for Arizona to proceed with this fight under these circumstances."

There is one sliver of hope for Matchroom and Chavez. As earlier noted, the NSAC placed Chavez on temporary suspension pending the result of a November 20 commission meeting. At that meeting, the five commissioners are expected to review the temporary suspension and set it down for a hearing on December 18.

The key question is whether, in the interim, the NSAC commissioners will classify Chavez's suspension as an administrative suspension or a suspension for refusing to submit to a sample collection. If they opt for the latter, the Arizona commission would be in violation of federal law if it allowed Jacobs-Chavez to be contested.

Here, one might note that, in the past, Chavez has had an adversarial relationship with the NSAC. In 2009, he tested positive for Furosemide (a banned diuretic) following a decision victory over Troy Roland and the result of the fight was changed to no decision. He also tested positive for marijuana following a decision loss to Sergio Martinez in Nevada in 2012 after which he was fined and suspended.

As for Arizona, one source who has spoken with Francisco Meneses says that Meneses assured him he would not let Jacobs-Chavez proceed in Arizona if the Nevada State Athletic Commission classifies and upholds Chavez's suspension as being for refusing to take a drug test. "But from Francisco's point of view," the source explains, "that's okay." At that point, Arizona will still have a Danny Jacobs fight. It's just that it will be against Gabriel Rosado instead of Chavez Jr.

Rosado is Jacobs's back-up opponent in the event that Chavez doesn't make it to ring center for the opening bell on December 20. Gabriel has had twelve fights over the past seven years and won three of them. He has never fought at a weight above 160 pounds. If Jacobs-Chavez turns into Jacobs-Rosado, it will be a classic case of bait-and-switch.

Re: Hauser on Hearn

Posted: 14 Nov 2019, 05:04
by ALI
What do you make of this? Has Hauser called Hearn's bluff and exposed him in some way as behaving corruptly, or is Hauser blowing hot air over much ado about nothing of major consequence?

Boxing is how it is. Nobody really wants drug cheats in the sport, but at the end of the day, many fighters are known to be at it, and it cant be all that easy for a promoter when they have situations like this. Hearn has a job to do for Chavez, sure he refused the drug test, but he had not signed for the fight yet and may not have known about the Neveda rule. Should Hearn walk away from him over that? Awkward situation and a tough call for him i would guess. He has opted to shop it around other commissions and now has one willing to stage it, but doubt he was expecting Hauser to blow it up in the media and shine a light on it like this.

Is Hearn/Dazn in the right or wrong here. What do you make of this?

Re: Hauser on Hearn

Posted: 14 Nov 2019, 14:47
by coneye
Start with Chavez knows the rules ,, he's been caught before , he knew what he's doing ,, Secondly Hearn loves to go on U tube and tell the world he's the best , and smartest promoter out there ,, and i for one don't believe that the best and smarest promoter out there does'nt know the rules ,,, So Yeh ,, he's been shopping , once again turning a blind eye when it suits him .

He is what he is , a PROMOTER , FULL OF PISS AND WIND ,, HE'S A RICH DADDYS BOY WHO GETS RICHER AND RICHER OF THE BOXERS WHO TAKE THE PAIN , HE COULD'NT GIVE A FOOK ABOUT THERE HEALTH , WETHER THERES CHEATING GOING ON , DRUG ABUSE WHATEVER , ONLY THING HE'S CONCERNED ABOUT IS BUMS ON SEATS , PPV and showing a profit

Re: Hauser on Hearn

Posted: 14 Nov 2019, 15:40
by ewenhay
Hearn is going to come a cropper sometime playing off all these drug testing bodies.

It's suspicious to say the very least

Re: Hauser on Hearn

Posted: 14 Nov 2019, 16:22
by Black Sam Bellamy
Is Chavez still a draw ? Hearn seems to be the only person still facinated by the aura of the Chavez surname. Surely even the Mexicans have got him worked out now ?

Re: Hauser on Hearn

Posted: 14 Nov 2019, 17:43
by tobyh5
Hauser once again exposing Hearn being happy to promote someone who has not adhered to drug testing expectations.

Re: Hauser on Hearn

Posted: 14 Nov 2019, 20:20
by Nightmare Roy
Doesn’t surprise me one bit, Hearn doesn’t care about anything but money, lost count of the times I’ve heard him slag of drug cheats but uturns as soon as it’s one of his stable or he signs them. What does surprise me is that DAZN are willing to pay Chavez $6m! Some one needs to have a word with them, they come across like a granny who ends up paying her life savings to some joker who knocks on her door saying she needs a new roof.

Re: Hauser on Hearn

Posted: 14 Nov 2019, 20:54
by tiny_acres
Nightmare Roy wrote: 14 Nov 2019, 20:20 Doesn’t surprise me one bit, Hearn doesn’t care about anything but money, lost count of the times I’ve heard him slag of drug cheats but uturns as soon as it’s one of his stable or he signs them. What does surprise me is that DAZN are willing to pay Chavez $6m! Some one needs to have a word with them, they come across like a granny who ends up paying her life savings to some joker who knocks on her door saying she needs a new roof.
Nailed it!!!!!

Re: Hauser on Hearn

Posted: 15 Nov 2019, 03:05
by jamesmcdonnell
Black Sam Bellamy wrote: 14 Nov 2019, 16:22 Is Chavez still a draw ? Hearn seems to be the only person still facinated by the aura of the Chavez surname. Surely even the Mexicans have got him worked out now ?
I can't see him having any real draw for mexicanos. He's a busted flush, Canelo is the man now.

Re: Hauser on Hearn

Posted: 15 Nov 2019, 03:38
by handsofstone
I've always thought a lot of the flak Eddie gets is unwarranted but I don't like the way he's went about this, seems sneaky and he deserves the poo that comes his way

Re: Hauser on Hearn

Posted: 15 Nov 2019, 14:50
by dalcumly
If a recognised drug testing organisation turns up at a gym looking for a sample - what's the problem.? I think we know what the problem is.
Do some boxers not already sign up to ' out of competition drug testing ' which means you can be tested anytime.
It doesn't really matter what the situation is , a professional promoter should be looking to avoid any allegation that he is in anyway protecting/ assisting a potential drug cheat.

Re: Hauser on Hearn

Posted: 15 Nov 2019, 15:08
by ALI
dalcumly wrote: 15 Nov 2019, 14:50 If a recognised drug testing organisation turns up at a gym looking for a sample - what's the problem.? I think we know what the problem is.
Do some boxers not already sign up to ' out of competition drug testing ' which means you can be tested anytime.
It doesn't really matter what the situation is , a professional promoter should be looking to avoid any allegation that he is in anyway protecting/ assisting a potential drug cheat.
I appreciate he has been caught for some sort of illegal PED in the past, and refusing this test looks bad for sure.

On the other hand Chavez was done for weed in the past also. Maybe he just smoked a bit of ganja or snorted a few lines the night before, and was not expecting to get random tested as he had not signed to fight yet?

If i was ever a pro boxer, no way would i want a situation where i could be random tested at any point in my career, regardless if i am in camp or not. Recreational drugs are not PED's, and i have no issue with any sportperson enjoying their weekend. Testing IMO should be from the date a fighter signs a fight contract.

Sure it looks bad, but lets be honest, Hearn does not know if Chavez is guilty of anything here. He is his promoter and is contracted to promote him and get him fights. He has a business to run at the end of the day. It would be a tough call to turn around and just drop Chavez after an event like this. Nothing is proven here, Chavez probably knew nothing of the Nevada rule on testing can start anytime after a promoter requests fight date.

I'm giving them the benefit of doubt.

Re: Hauser on Hearn

Posted: 15 Nov 2019, 16:11
by ewenhay
ALI wrote: 15 Nov 2019, 15:08
dalcumly wrote: 15 Nov 2019, 14:50 If a recognised drug testing organisation turns up at a gym looking for a sample - what's the problem.? I think we know what the problem is.
Do some boxers not already sign up to ' out of competition drug testing ' which means you can be tested anytime.
It doesn't really matter what the situation is , a professional promoter should be looking to avoid any allegation that he is in anyway protecting/ assisting a potential drug cheat.
I appreciate he has been caught for some sort of illegal PED in the past, and refusing this test looks bad for sure.

On the other hand Chavez was done for weed in the past also. Maybe he just smoked a bit of ganja or snorted a few lines the night before, and was not expecting to get random tested as he had not signed to fight yet?

If i was ever a pro boxer, no way would i want a situation where i could be random tested at any point in my career, regardless if i am in camp or not. Recreational drugs are not PED's, and i have no issue with any sportperson enjoying their weekend. Testing IMO should be from the date a fighter signs a fight contract.

Sure it looks bad, but lets be honest, Hearn does not know if Chavez is guilty of anything here. He is his promoter and is contracted to promote him and get him fights. He has a business to run at the end of the day. It would be a tough call to turn around and just drop Chavez after an event like this. Nothing is proven here, Chavez probably knew nothing of the Nevada rule on testing can start anytime after a promoter requests fight date.

I'm giving them the benefit of doubt.
I'd suggest that avoiding a drug test might mean that he had something to hide, recreational or otherwise

Re: Hauser on Hearn

Posted: 15 Nov 2019, 16:19
by handsofstone
I'd imagine recreational which doesn't bother me as much but still who knows

Re: Hauser on Hearn

Posted: 15 Nov 2019, 17:56
by ALI
ewenhay wrote: 15 Nov 2019, 16:11
ALI wrote: 15 Nov 2019, 15:08

I appreciate he has been caught for some sort of illegal PED in the past, and refusing this test looks bad for sure.

On the other hand Chavez was done for weed in the past also. Maybe he just smoked a bit of ganja or snorted a few lines the night before, and was not expecting to get random tested as he had not signed to fight yet?

If i was ever a pro boxer, no way would i want a situation where i could be random tested at any point in my career, regardless if i am in camp or not. Recreational drugs are not PED's, and i have no issue with any sportperson enjoying their weekend. Testing IMO should be from the date a fighter signs a fight contract.

Sure it looks bad, but lets be honest, Hearn does not know if Chavez is guilty of anything here. He is his promoter and is contracted to promote him and get him fights. He has a business to run at the end of the day. It would be a tough call to turn around and just drop Chavez after an event like this. Nothing is proven here, Chavez probably knew nothing of the Nevada rule on testing can start anytime after a promoter requests fight date.

I'm giving them the benefit of doubt.
I'd suggest that avoiding a drug test might mean that he had something to hide, recreational or otherwise
I agree, if he was confident he was clean he would have taken the test, surely, but its not to say he was on PED's, it could be as little as him toking on a spliff that morning, or anytime in the weeks prior as weed stays in the system. It could easily be the reason for his refusal to test knowing that it would be picked up.

Re: Hauser on Hearn

Posted: 15 Nov 2019, 17:57
by ewenhay
ALI wrote: 15 Nov 2019, 17:56
ewenhay wrote: 15 Nov 2019, 16:11

I'd suggest that avoiding a drug test might mean that he had something to hide, recreational or otherwise
I agree, if he was confident he was clean he would have taken the test, surely, but its not to say he was on PED's, it could be as little as him toking on a spliff that morning, or anytime in the weeks prior as weed stays in the system. It could easily be the reason for his refusal to test knowing that it would be picked up.
I think the issue really is Hearns fluid stance on drug testing depending on his vested interest in the fighter concerned

Re: Hauser on Hearn

Posted: 15 Nov 2019, 17:57
by margaret thatcher
Why the hell is Hearn so into Chavez anyway , he is a total lame and not even Mexicans like him I don't think. Plus he's already lost enough that him losing isn't even satisfying to watch anymore. Was he actually getting paid 6m for this??

Re: Hauser on Hearn

Posted: 15 Nov 2019, 18:09
by ALI
margaret thatcher wrote: 15 Nov 2019, 17:57 Why the hell is Hearn so into Chavez anyway , he is a total lame and not even Mexicans like him I don't think. Plus he's already lost enough that him losing isn't even satisfying to watch anymore. Was he actually getting paid 6m for this??
They must be expecting him to draw some reasonable ratings in certain demographics, i would think.

Re: Hauser on Hearn

Posted: 15 Nov 2019, 18:10
by coneye
He could well of just been smoking a bit of weed , having a line or two of an hookers arse the night before ,,, But then again he could be in the midle or the tail end of a cycle , who knows ,,who cares ,, FACTS ARE he refused the test ,, he got banned , and its up to the promoters to help the relevant authorities to clean it up because .

PROMOTERS are the only people who can clean up boxing ,, how and why , its easy , at the moment the rewards are so high its worth the risk , why do they do it , to get the edge on the competition , and if caught so what , take a 6 month ban who cares , they have six month breaks anyway ,,

But if ALL and i mean ALL promoters refused to use ANYONE caught then given a couple of years and a few enforced bans , and watch it stop , the reward will not be worth the risk ,

But Heh thats just common sence and wish ful thinking ... Why simplle ,, its not the promoters son or father ,risking there health, getting in the ring against someone with a unfair advantage