Former TUF and UFC competitor Cody McKenzie handed four year suspension for submitting fake urine sample

By Michael Hiscoe, Managing Editor

Credit: Cody McKenzie - Instagram

Cody McKenzie has always been an odd fellow. He was a character on “The Ultimate Fighter” season that featured Georges St-Pierre and Josh Koscheck as coaches. His early claim to fame was winning most of his fights by guillotine choke, including a 12 second win in the house and then a first round guillotine win in his official UFC debut. In what would be McKenzie’s final UFC bout, his team had to run to the store shortly before the fight because he didn’t have his planned fight shorts with him. He entered his fight with Sam Stout that night wearing a brand new pair of basketball shorts – with the sales tag still attached. McKenzie lost the bout by decision and was never seen in UFC again.

So Cody McKenzie managed to top himself when details of a drug test failure were disclosed as part of a Nevada Athletic Commission hearing on Wednesday. McKenzie was scheduled to fight for the Tuff-N-Uff promotion on Sept. 14. McKenzie refused to submit a urine sample to the commission before the fight but eventually complied once the fight was cancelled.

The sample he provided was determined to have an “abnormally high” temperature. Upon probing from the commission, McKenzie disclosed a bottle containing urine substitute with a hand warmer attached by a rubber band. McKenzie admitted at the time that he had smoked marijuana that day.

McKenzie has been suspended for four years by the commission and fined $944.84 to cover commission costs. McKenzie had also been suspended in Italy for refusing to submit a sample for a fight in Milan.


Read the official complaint from the Nevada State Attorney General below (via MMAJunkie)

“On Sept. 14, 2018, prior to his contest at the Orleans Hotel, he was given a valid request by a commission representative to provide a urine sample before his bout, but the respondent, Mr. McKenzie, refused and declared that he was going to go to his room and would not provide a sample until it was closer to his bout,” the complaint read. “When the respondent did return and provide a sample, the sample itself registered as abnormally high – in temperature, that is. When he was confronted about this, he made several representations including that if, ‘this’ got out, he would lose his job, as well as an admission that he had smoked pot that day.

“When the respondent as asked if he had anything hidden on his person, had at first denied it, but upon further questioning, he ultimately relinquished from his clothing a bottle of urine substitute. This bottle, which he had concealed on his person, in his clothing, was capped with a nozzle that would let its liquid contents be streamed from it. The bottle, itself, contained a warm, yellow-tinted liquid that match the false contents of the sample he provided. Additionally, the bottle had a hand-warmer attached to it by a rubber band. This conduct by the respondent is not only an anti-doping violation, but it also violated other regulations that govern the commission.”

Be the first to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.