So after reading McCorkle's thread about King Mo's lackluster performance, I saw a couple posts that basically said Mo and Shields aren't there to entertain, they're there to win. IMO, this is the biggest crock of shit any fighter or fan could say. These events are life and death, they don't cure diseases, they're not fighting wars to defend our country. They around to entertain us and keep us distracted from the stress of every day life. ANY fighter that plays it safe to guarantee a victory is cheating all of us out of our time and money, and eventually the casual fan (the one that pays the bills) is going to tune out.
I pay to see KO's, submissions, and complete ass-whoopins. I don't mind if a fight goes to decision if it's a competitive, back-and-forth battle. This is a sport, and sports are here to entertain. But lately, it hasn't come anywhere near accomplishing that.
Somebody out there has to have a defense argument. Please...enlighten me.
I think you just have to look at it from different perspectives...
If you're a promoter or a fan, you want the most exciting fights possible. You want guys to go in there and take risks, swing for the fences, go for crazy submissions, etc. Just go for the kill!
But what if you are a fighter and this is your career? It's no secret that a string of losses will get you cut and back on the unemployment line.
A fighter knows that wins, even if they're boring, provide much more job security than exciting losses.
What if GSP was fighting Dan Hardy this weekend and if he lost, that meant that you lost your job?
Would you want him to stand and trade with Hardy or play it safe and get the win?
Now you know how they feel.
Since I'm not absolutely retarded, I like to watch people employ strategies that lead to winning.
Jbraswell - Since I'm not absolutely retarded, I like to watch people employ strategies that lead to winning.
I guess I could have said it that way too.
Simple. MMA is a sport. The athlete has one job (unless stipulated otherwise in their contract) and that is to win. It does not say they must win by KO, submission or decision, or by some entertaining fashion, they simply must win. And if they win, they get a larger purse. Sure there are incentives, bonuses for finishing, but at the end of the day every athlete wants to win the belt and become champion.
Again. MMA is a sport. This is not entertainment. There is a purpose and it is not to entertain the audience, it is to win.
Take football. Teams will kneel on the ball to run out the clock. Would it be more entertaining if they went for it? Sure it would, but the safe play is to run out the clock. They want to win.
Take basketball. Players will intentionally foul the other team so they can't hit a three pointer. Sometimes dragging the game out for much longer than it needs to, as the other team will retaliate by fouling them back. This slows the pace down and essentially becomes a boring free throw competition. Not very entertaining.
Take baseball, pitchers will intentionally walk a homerun hitter. Wouldn't it be more exciting if they pitched him a fastball down the middle and went for the strikeout?
Take hockey, a team gets a lead and they start playing pure defence. Shouldn't they keep trying to score?
Sport is about strategy, and as a true fan, you love the strategy. It separates the good from the great. It's like a chess match. Maybe it isn't always the most exciting thing in the world, but then there's those rare moments of beauty like when Joe Carter hit the home run to win the world series, or when Eli Manning drove up the field to win the Superbowl that you say to yourself 'I can't believe I just saw that, that was amazing.' and it justifies the time you've 'wasted' watching the sport.
Beyond that, in this particular sport, these guys are putting their health on the line, and I can't fault them for playing it safe. One KO loss too many could end your career.
You want to be entertained, go watch some sports entertainment, MMA aint for everyone.
The best fighters realize they are there to entertain. From John L. Sullivan to Mohammed Ali to Mike Tyson.
While it is true that being an entertaining athlete will draw the casual majority, an athlete that wins through skill and strategy draws the pillars of a sport. One who is both become legends.
"Are you not entertained? Are you not entertained? Is this not why you are here? " -Maximus in Gladiator after swiftly and skillfully dispatching his opponent without playing around.
I don't think you can call somebody a fake fan or whatever just because they don't enjoy watching a wrestler grind out a decision. GSP's recent fight with Dan Hardy had to be one of the most boring fights I've ever watched. The reason why it was so boring was because the outcome was never in doubt and GSP was content to just play it safe and make sure he got the win. I know some of you are going to go he showed great technique and whatever, but if that's what I wanted to watch, I could just go replay his old fights or watch an MMA instructional. When I watch a fight, I either want it to be competitive or I want the guy dominating to finish his opponent.
NarlyPersianDude -I think every MMA fan with half a brain knows GSP was trying to finish him. He was just doing it poorly. If you want to know why Fedor is so beloved, one of the big reasons is that he is constantly looking to end the fight from the start. He's like a Killer Whale looking to snag the seal off the ice all the time. In the UFC right now, guys look for finishes sometimes but, most of the time, they are like Anderson Silva and are happy to win a decision. Even when Fedor has fought to decisions, they were entertaining fights because he was throwing punches and going for submissions with the intent to end it.
Do you think GSP was not trying to finish, he was. What exactly would you have instruced GSP to have done to make teh fight more pleasing for you.
NarlyPersianDude - Again, your not a true fan. Cause you dont appreciate the sport. You dont get that GSP is a master of taking down top fighters. You dont appreciate that. You dont get that its up to Dan Hardy to get his british self up. You dont apprecaite that. You obviously did not see the constant amount of pressure GSP was laying on him, and did not grasp how much GSP was trying to sub the guy. I mean your only showing me you dont get the sport. If you did, you would be amazed it the success Hardy had of surviving in that sport, instead of bitching.
Do you think GSP was not trying to finish, he was. What exactly would you have instruced GSP to have done to make teh fight more pleasing for you. Should he had gone toe to toe with Dan Hardy, thus not using his best weapon, would you tell a run oriented football team with a young quarterback to continually throw downfield in a playoff game, despite that being the most dumbass way to fuck up the game, that their defense and strong running game built. If you told a football fan that, they would tell you your not a fan of football, go play flag football or watch arena football. Its my singular opinion. But your not a real mma if you feel that way.
Pretty stupid reasoning really. Just because you're a fan of MMA doesn't mean you have to be a fan of every aspect of MMA. In your eyes, there's probably no such thing as a boring fight.
GSP attempted a couple submissions, but for the most part he was content to ride it out and control Hardy. He never really opened up to try and create openings to finish the fight. The fight was never in doubt and thus it was boring, not sure what is so hard to understand about that. It's like watching a game when you already know who won, not very interesting at all.
GSP can fight however he wants, but tell me how interesting MMA would be if everybody fought not to lose and nobody was being aggressive and trying to finish the fight? Would you be a fan of someone that was able to execute a strategy of running around the cage, never getting hit and landing a couple shots to win their fights? By your logic, you're not a true MMA fan if you don't appreciate someone that can run away and avoid damage in a fight.
Yes it's a sport. But if you as a fan or you as a fighter want your sport to involve bigtime shows, the best athletes, and decent money, better start getting your head around the entertainment aspect.
Cheers
Colin
FatsMcGee - Simple. MMA is a sport. The athlete has one job (unless stipulated otherwise in their contract) and that is to win. It does not say they must win by KO, submission or decision, or by some entertaining fashion, they simply must win. And if they win, they get a larger purse. Sure there are incentives, bonuses for finishing, but at the end of the day every athlete wants to win the belt and become champion.
Again. MMA is a sport. This is not entertainment. There is a purpose and it is not to entertain the audience, it is to win..
That might be true for amateur sports, but not when you go professional in a spectator sport. At the end of the day your pay check is financed by keeping the audience happy.
In the team sports you mentioned winning is an important part of that, because people identify with the team and prefer a boring win to an exciting loss. In MMA the spectators identify with the fight itself and aren't as concerned with the result. Few fighters are popular enough to keep an arena happy simply by winning.
The fact that, in the US, there's higher incentive pay and career wise to win than to be spectacular is emerging as a problem.
Sport is about strategy, and as a true fan, you love the strategy. It separates the good from the great. It's like a chess match.
That's true for hardcore fans, but then you risk going back to the pay checks of the dark ages. How much does the highest paid chess player make?
My view is if a promotion (and fighters) want me to keep plopping down $50.00 every couple weeks for fights, then I want to see them try to finish the fights. I'm not an ignorant viewer of the game, nor do I want to watch shitty kickboxing fights, but I do want to see the fighters pushing the pace to an end. I don't even mind a decision as long as the fighters were going for something.
FatsMcGee - Simple. MMA is a sport. The athlete has one job (unless stipulated otherwise in their contract) and that is to win. It does not say they must win by KO, submission or decision, or by some entertaining fashion, they simply must win. And if they win, they get a larger purse. Sure there are incentives, bonuses for finishing, but at the end of the day every athlete wants to win the belt and become champion.
Again. MMA is a sport. This is not entertainment. There is a purpose and it is not to entertain the audience, it is to win.
Take football. Teams will kneel on the ball to run out the clock. Would it be more entertaining if they went for it? Sure it would, but the safe play is to run out the clock. They want to win.
Take basketball. Players will intentionally foul the other team so they can't hit a three pointer. Sometimes dragging the game out for much longer than it needs to, as the other team will retaliate by fouling them back. This slows the pace down and essentially becomes a boring free throw competition. Not very entertaining.
Take baseball, pitchers will intentionally walk a homerun hitter. Wouldn't it be more exciting if they pitched him a fastball down the middle and went for the strikeout?
Take hockey, a team gets a lead and they start playing pure defence. Shouldn't they keep trying to score?
Sport is about strategy, and as a true fan, you love the strategy. It separates the good from the great. It's like a chess match. Maybe it isn't always the most exciting thing in the world, but then there's those rare moments of beauty like when Joe Carter hit the home run to win the world series, or when Eli Manning drove up the field to win the Superbowl that you say to yourself 'I can't believe I just saw that, that was amazing.' and it justifies the time you've 'wasted' watching the sport.
Beyond that, in this particular sport, these guys are putting their health on the line, and I can't fault them for playing it safe. One KO loss too many could end your career.
You want to be entertained, go watch some sports entertainment, MMA aint for everyone.
Very well said.
FatsMcGee - Simple. MMA is a sport. The athlete has one job (unless stipulated otherwise in their contract) and that is to win. It does not say they must win by KO, submission or decision, or by some entertaining fashion, they simply must win. And if they win, they get a larger purse. Sure there are incentives, bonuses for finishing, but at the end of the day every athlete wants to win the belt and become champion.good post.
Again. MMA is a sport. This is not entertainment. There is a purpose and it is not to entertain the audience, it is to win.
Take football. Teams will kneel on the ball to run out the clock. Would it be more entertaining if they went for it? Sure it would, but the safe play is to run out the clock. They want to win.
Take basketball. Players will intentionally foul the other team so they can't hit a three pointer. Sometimes dragging the game out for much longer than it needs to, as the other team will retaliate by fouling them back. This slows the pace down and essentially becomes a boring free throw competition. Not very entertaining.
Take baseball, pitchers will intentionally walk a homerun hitter. Wouldn't it be more exciting if they pitched him a fastball down the middle and went for the strikeout?
Take hockey, a team gets a lead and they start playing pure defence. Shouldn't they keep trying to score?
Sport is about strategy, and as a true fan, you love the strategy. It separates the good from the great. It's like a chess match. Maybe it isn't always the most exciting thing in the world, but then there's those rare moments of beauty like when Joe Carter hit the home run to win the world series, or when Eli Manning drove up the field to win the Superbowl that you say to yourself 'I can't believe I just saw that, that was amazing.' and it justifies the time you've 'wasted' watching the sport.
Beyond that, in this particular sport, these guys are putting their health on the line, and I can't fault them for playing it safe. One KO loss too many could end your career.
You want to be entertained, go watch some sports entertainment, MMA aint for everyone.
If it's not entertainment, then we should get rid of rounds and the stand-up rule immediately.
Its the same issue which eventually turned professional wrestling into pure entertainment ... more people want see big action in a fight than technique.
If MMA is a sport, then like the NFL, MLB, NBA, NHL and every other pro-sport, the athlete's goal should be to win, the organization's goal should be to make the rules so that winning is exciting.
But if MMA is entertainment then the actor's goal (ie the MMA 'fighter') is to entertain. That means making it exciting, winning or losing big, showing a lot of personality, creating drama.
So far MMA has always been a sport; you fight to win within the rules. Organizations can change the rules to make it more exciting (just as the NHL tried to make more action by adding penalties for holding and the like), but the fighter always tries to win within whatever rules are there. If fights are boring, blame the rules, not the fighter.
If it goes the other way, if the UFC and other organizations start rewarding athletes for being entertaining rather than fighting, it'll end up being like the WWE, because you can create a lot more spectacular action if its choreographed than in real sport. You only have to watch the WWE, or action movies to see that. The most entertaining fighters aren't often going to be the best fighters.
A sport is not about entertainment, it's about athletes excelling at what they do and testing themselves. There is also a business and entertainment aspect attached to the sport, but that is not the sport itself--that's simply not what a sport is. The UFC is a business that's selling entertainment, but they are dealing with a sport, and the sport itself by definition is not a business or entertainment. They can make rules that make the sport more entertaining for the fans, but that entertainment is a byproduct, not the goal of the sport itself.
There's also the question of what you think is actually better for the sport itself. There's more to a sport than its difficulty, it's also about what is actually being achieved. Triathlons and MMA fights might be equally hard but they are different achievements. So we can ask ourselves what should an MMA bout try to achieve as an athletic competition?
For example, I like rings more than cages because I think that the techniques used in a cage (Holding the opponent against it in the clinch or on the ground, or "wall walking" to stand up) are not as interesting as the techniques used in a ring (using restarts and also the freer range of motion when against the ropes). I also like the quick restarts in the ring when fighters stall in the clinch in the corner, as well as when they stall on the ground, because it encourages more activity and allows more techniques to be displayed.
I have these preferences because they are conductive to what I think the sport of MMA should accomplish, not because I think the purpose of MMA is to entertain me. At the same time, there's nothing wrong with thinking that MMA should be about "going for the finish", or whatever, if you think that's what the sport should accomplish.
It's all about the rules.