Interesting you wrote this, b/c I always felt Ken may have had money issues. It sure didn’t feel like he kept on fighting for the love of the sport or competition.
this is where i thought he embelished
In the early days of MMA everyone embellished their records and accomplishments. Part of it was promotions part of it was fighters trying to pump up their mystique.
1 Like
I do think a Ken vs Tito fight would’ve looked different if Ken was closer to prime & at heavyweight. The Ken that beat Kimo, Severn, Brian Johnston. Unfortunately we got way past prime, 20lbs light, injured Ken. Pretty sure Dana & Tito were okay with that.
1 Like
A lot to unpack here…
I don’t think I’m Ken’s biggest fan.
I’m a fan sure. But I don’t have a “fanboy” mentality. I am realistic about people’s strengths and shortcomings – and I have long ago grown out of putting other grown men on pedestals.
If I met Ken I would shake his had and hopefully have some conversation, but I wouldn’t ask for an autograph.
I didn’t ask for Don Fry’s autograph. But I did shake his hand and that led to a few beers.
I’ll come to Ken’s defense when I think people are underrating his abilities, and that might come off as kind of fanboyish lol… But I do the same when people call Fedor overrated, or Joe Montana, etc.
As far as embellishing the wrestling… There really wasn’t much to exaggerate.
He wrestled in HS before he broke his neck, and showed up hungover to an Olympic trial.
Granted, he didn’t mention the hangover in his first book.
When it comes to how good Ken was and stories of him manhandling wrestlers/grapplers – I think what we saw in his career tends to support to those stories.
On paper, Ken shouldn’t have been able to stand in front of Dan Severn and handle him the way he did. Diving for a leg or trying to get Severn’s back… Sure. But Ken stood in front of Severn and basically beat Dan at his own game before the submission. It surprised Blatnick, and sure surprised Severn who said he never tied up with someone he couldn’t move.
Then you have all the Lions Den stories that have been pretty much unanimously confirmed by all parties over the years.
So I think it’s fair to say Ken was “a natural”, who’s ability was physically greater than his wrestling or grappling pedigree might suggest.
I don’t read anything in the books that is out of
line with what we saw in the ring.
But yes, I would agree that the first book is the most “self-promoting”. Ken is painted as a boy scout in that book – and in reality was the opposite. But I don’t think it’s inaccurate beyond that – and I can understand why Ken wouldn’t be confessing all his demons at that point in his career.
As far as the street fights…
Who knows?
A lot of the stories in all 3 books are cooroborated by other people who were there or knew Ken at the time. The legal problems with that guy in Reno are documented, so we know that’s legit. Ken’s brothers have talked about the stuff when they were younger. I didn’t find the bulk of the stories to be unrealistic.
I think I believed the accuracy of the Ken Shamrock stories a little more than I bought all of Chuck Zito’s stories (like outside crescent kicking a knife out of a guy’s hand LOL).
But I wasn’t there for any of it, so I don’t know.
I will say this:
If I made an honest thread about my street fight experiences back in the day and growing up… There would be a lot of people calling bullshit.
That’s just the way it is.
It’s not easy to tell your own “war stories” without it coming off like exaggerated bragging.
I can get into the works in another post.
I’m FRATing a lot today!
Also, he was playing semi-pro ball and decided to pass on a NFL tryout?
1 Like
The tax problems were really bad.
His current wife opened up about it a little.
Basically he would get paid for a fight and they would be giving most of it to the IRS.
Sucks.
Ken always matched up well with wrestlers.
Not unreasonable that Ken would do well at a local Olympic tryout while not making it to the next level.
I can look up the book passages if people are interested.
But again, what we saw him capable of in the ring is consistent with a dude that could hold his own against more experienced wrestlers.
The guy was a fucking monster.
I could be wrong but I don’t think there are open tryouts for the Olympics.
2 Likes
ill go back t the rest But how do u show up at a tourney hung over which means he ate and drank and had ti weigh in .I dont think ur a fan boy at all but how do u drink then weigh in the next day wrestling is same day weigh in and if he lost to the champ why didnt he say his name ? Maybe it was a qualifier because u cant just show up
ken was also on roids against severn
theres not and i thought that the second i read it also how do u drink the night before a weigh in
I don’t remember exactly and am not sure what level of football, but the team wanted him to play fullback only and he thought the risk of screwing up his neck was not worth it and he thought he would only last a year or two with his body taking a lot of punishment in the process
What happened with those guys?
I don’t remember Ken specifically saying he lost to the champ.
The story from Beyond The Lion’s Den says Ken forgot about the trials and had been out drinking.
Sounds dumb but I’ve done similar things. Substance abuse leads to stupid things.
Ken said he wasn’t used to the freestyle rules and won a match by pin before losing.
Said one of the coaches told him had he trained for the event he might have made it.
Maybe the story has even embellished to make Ken look better.
I don’t know.
Ken did name names in the third book, but for a different circumstance.
Duane Koslowaki competed at the Worlds in 86 and Olympics in 88.
Duane went to PWFG to have a match with Shamrock. Sami Soranaka had Duane and Ken shoot for real to see who would get put over.
Ken took Duane down and subbed him quickly. Duane complained that he wasn’t ready for that, so they did it again with the same result.
There is another documented example of Ken more than holding his own against a big world class wrestler.
So again,Ken matching up with wrestlers who had much greater pedigrees than himself, is not unrealistic or unbelievable.
We have seen him do it with our own eyes, and that backs up the stories.
If the Olympic trial story is embellished, it’s embellished.
Is Rickson’s record accurate?
My Point is, the stories in the books are not out of line with the physical realities we have seen in the ring.
I don’t think these types of books are written without romanticizing certain things.
But Ken holding his own against wrestlers… Well that’s kind of a proven reality.
You don’t know the story?
I only ask because it’s kind of famous, and a lot to type.
If you really don’t know it, I’ll be happy to summarize.
One significant difference between Royce and Rickson is the gi.
Things go a while, guys start getting sweaty, Ken might be tougher to arm bar then you think.
Who do you recall ever arm barring Ken?
Most of his losses are by TKO late in his career.
We pretty much know all the Pancrase losses were works.
Royce choked him, and maybe Rickson could too.
But Rickson wasn’t some automatic arm bar machine, anymore than Mike Tyson KO’d everyone in the first exchange.
Things take time – and even against much lessar fighters than Ken – Rickson had to work at it.
Sure, Ken had some lackluster fights.
But people are exaggerating his lack of success in the first part of his career.
He really only had 1 true loss in the 90s, and that was to Royce.
His other “failures” were either boring “draws” where he dominated positionally, that were only draws due to lack of judges – and one silly decision “loss” to Severn in a fight neither guy has reason to brag about.
Hell, I can make the argument that Ken never really got his ass kicked, until the first Tito fight.
That’s a lot of fights and a lot of very good and dangerous fighters.
I can elaborate on that if you want… But I think it’s pretty obvious when you think about it.
Ken’s record I’m the 90s is almost criminally underrated.
He was evidently the top fighter in the world for a time, and not many people can say that.
He didn’t win a UFC tournament,but he only really lost in one of them. But he did win the first King Of Pancrase tournament, which was arguably more stacked with talent than the early UFCs, aside from the top couple UFC fighters.
And he both beat and dominated other UFC tournament winners – proving he was superior head-to-head.
I’m not saying Rickson couldn’t win.
I can see ways for both guys to win.
But the idea that “Ken would find a way to lose”, isn’t entirely accurate – especially in the 90s.
You might say “Ken would find a way not to win”, and that might be fair. Not winning and losing aren’t necessarily the same thing, as we saw with Ken a couple times – in the era before judges.
Granted, styles make fights.
So you could certainly argue that Royce is the only guy to really finish Ken in the 90s, and Rickson is better, so…
But again, there are other factors – such as the gi vs no-gi.
Also, how do you think Ken would approach a fight with Rickson with everyone telling him he was so much better than Royce?
And I’m still not convinced Rickson would have necessarily been better than Royce in an NHB environment.
Better GJJ, sure.
But just being bigger and stronger doesn’t necessarily equate to being a better NHB fighter.
Generally speaking, the guy with more experience and more ways to win, should probably be favored.
I think history supports that.
But, sadly, we will never know.
I’ll get more into the “works” and other stuff (like Frank vs Ken) tomorrow.
Been FRATing a lot today.
Been a long time since I was on a Ken thread, or a Rickson thread for than matter.
I do enjoy the old school discussions – even the disagreements.
1 Like
par terre should be abolished
1 Like
Wtf are you talking about?