Nick Diaz tested positive for marijuana metabolites following his loss to Carlos Condit in their UFC 143 bout at the Mandalay Bay Events Center in Las Vegas. It appears that the Nevada State Athletic Commission did not find that any other fighter, fighting in UFC 143, tested positive for any other illegal drugs.
This appears to be Nick Diaz’s second violation of marijuana use following a matchup. The first such incident came in 2007, at Strikeforce, when Nick Diaz tested positive following a submission victory over Takanori Gomi. Following the discovery of illegal usage, the first time at Strikeforce, Diaz’s win was changed to a no-contest and the fighter was suspended for six months. For the results of the test following his loss against Carlos Condit the fighter has already had a complaint filed against him by the Nevada State Athletic Commission.
Should fighters have such strict penalties implemented against them after testing positive for marijuana use? Being an MMA fighter for such a large organization as the UFC is a job like none other, but it is a job none the less. If a fighter knows that they will be tested for drugs following a performance it is then that fighters responsibility to abide by those rules. However, for a drug that has no proven athletic enhancing abilities, in fact quite the opposite could be argued, should fighters be subject to losing their victory and suspended for such a long duration? Fighters facing fines or criminal prosecution for breaking the laws and regulations, implaced by the NSAC, should have some accountability, but are we saying that a fighter who tests positive for marijuana has an edge over his opponent who doesn’t? Are the penalties in place by the NSAC sufficient when it comes to drug testing, or should there be some revision done by the commission?