Fedor Emelianenko was once considered to be the best fighter to have ever lived. Now, having lost twice in a row, his aura of invincibility has shattered and many are doubting the Russian sambo expert.Fortunately for Emelianenko, he has been given one …
Fedor Emelianenko was once considered to be the best fighter to have ever lived. Now, having lost twice in a row, his aura of invincibility has shattered and many are doubting the Russian sambo expert.
Fortunately for Emelianenko, he has been given one last chance to redeem himself (and perhaps retire with a win) in the form of a fight with current Strikeforce light heavyweight champion—as well as former UFC and Pride champion—Dan Henderson at Strikeforce: Fedor vs. Henderson on July 30th, 2011.
Had this fight been announced in the heydays of Pride, it would have been a dream match for MMA fans all over the world.
However, both fighters are now past their primes and in the twilight hours of their careers (specifically Emelianenko) and the fight doesn’t represent a “superfight” so much as is represents a “last hurrah” for two legends.
Still, the fight is happening and is being hyped up by many a fan as something that will be epic and memorable—a classic in the making.
But is it really? Does the fight actually make any sense?
The answer is twofold.
It doesn’t make sense when you consider that Dan Henderson is currently coming off of a victory in which he captured the Strikeforce light heavyweight championship from Rafael “Feijao” Cavalcante.
Emelianenko, on the other hand, has lost two straight. Only in Strikeforce does losing two fights in a row earn you a fight with the title holder from another weight class, even under Zuffa ownership!
Despite this obvious flaw in matchmaking, the fight does actually make sense in other ways.
First, it makes financial sense. Zuffa is intending to get every last penny out of Emelianenko that it can. What a better way to do it than put him up against another big name in Dan Henderson?
Second, should Emelianenko lose it will assure Zuffa’s victory over posterity. What this means is that if Emelianenko loses to Henderson (which is very likely; don’t forget that it was predicted on Bleacher Report MMA that Emelianenko would lose to Antonio “Bigfoot” Silva), Zuffa and Dana White will undoubtedly boast that Emelianenko couldn’t even beat “UFC reject” Dan Henderson.
When one examines the fight very closely, the pros outweigh the cons, and the fight ultimately does make sense. If Fedor wins, great! Zuffa made money off of him and may be able to put him in another big fight. If Fedor loses, even better! Zuffa made money off of him and can now forever cast Fedor Emelianenko into the annals of MMA history as a false god worshiped only by misguided Pride fans.
This past Saturday the finale for the 13th season of The Ultimate Fighter (TUF) reality show concluded. Although the season went out with more of a whimper rather than a bang, many in the MMA community are making it seem far worse than that.Much critic…
This past Saturday the finale for the 13th season of The Ultimate Fighter (TUF) reality show concluded. Although the season went out with more of a whimper rather than a bang, many in the MMA community are making it seem far worse than that.
Much criticism has been directed towards the way MMA is judged and the way wrestlers fight (or avoid the fight in the eyes of the critics). This criticism is making it seem like the sky is falling in MMA.
Even former UFC champion and former King of Pancrase Bas Rutten got involved, saying on his twitter that the fight “was not as exciting as [he] thought it would be, Guida vs Pettis, Guida plyd [sic] safe, takedown, holding, Pettis really good from his back”.
So, is the “sky falling” in MMA? Is the entertainment value of the sport, specifically of the UFC’s events, declining?
The short answer is “No” but in reality the issue is more complicated than just one word (for a lengthier assessment of the issue read fellow Bleacher Report writer Jonathan Shrager’s take on the subject).
The truth of the matter, in large part, is the simple fact that the sport is gaining more popularity and therefore more fans of which there is a very vocal minority that expects every fight to be Forest Griffin vs. Stephan Bonnar (the fight that “put MMA on the map” as it were).
To put it more succinctly: It isn’t a problem of fight quality but a problem of unrealistic expectations.
There is little probability of the UFC becoming “boring” and losing it’s popularity, the purported surge of “lay and pray” fighters notwithstanding. Concerning fights like Guida-Pettis, people will eventually learn to appreciate the skill involved in what Guida did and in dominant wrestling in general.
However, there is one issue regarding the Pettis-Guida fight that does have some merit.
If somebody takes you down and just holds you, they should count that takedown AGAINST him. Now, this was of course not the case with Guida, so you can give him the takedown, but on the ground, all the attacks (pretty much) came from Pettis, I am just saying, that should count for something as well.
People say, “Yeah, but submission escapes should count for something as well”, yes, but NEVER more then the submission attacks.
Like I said in an earlier tweet, if somebody attacks on the feet, and the other one just defends, and only “once a while” throws something back. Then , even when the person who attacks doesn’t land a strike, HE is the aggressor, and in a striking match, HE will win the fight if it goes to a decision.
In a ground fight, the guy who goes for submissions should be awarded more then the guy who defends them and only “once a while” tries one of his own, exactly the same as standing.
There is truth to Rutten’s stance on the matter but one must remember his past.
He fought a wrestler, Kevin Randleman, at UFC 20 and was on his back for nearly the entire fight…yet he was awarded the fight and the UFC heavyweight championship in a controversial split-decision. Rutten trained only in striking and submissions, he had no wrestling in his arsenal. Thus, when analyzing Rutten’s opinions on the matter, it is important to note that there is a considerable amount of bias.
Nevertheless, his points are well made. If the fighter on top doesn’t really try to finish or do anything at all and the fighter on bottom does but fails, shouldn’t the fighter who threatened and tried to finish be awarded?
Whatever the answer may be, the question will likely always be ignored by the athletic commissions and the UFC; there is only “outrage” over the issue every couple of events.
In addition, why risk “rocking the boat” when the issue may solve itself? It is possible that when new judges emerge they will understand the sport better and realize that being on top in guard doesn’t necessarily mean winning.
Is the entertainment value of the UFC declining? No, the expectations are rising. Is MMA in crisis? No although it may benefit the sport to rethink the rules (maybe knees to the head of a grounded opponent may help the problem?) or the judging.
Yet another season of The Ultimate Figher (or TUF as it is commonly abbreviated) is in the books; Tony Ferguson proved too much for Ramsey Nijem and was thus awarded the title of “the ultimate fighter” for the 13th season.It is worth noting that winnin…
Yet another season of The Ultimate Figher (or TUF as it is commonly abbreviated) is in the books; Tony Ferguson proved too much for Ramsey Nijem and was thus awarded the title of “the ultimate fighter” for the 13th season.
It is worth noting that winning TUF has become such an unimportant accomplishment that there is no longer any pomp and circumstance about the awarding of the glass TUF plaque. It was unceremoniously handed to Ferguson by commentator Joe Rogan.
The decline of TUF has been a topic that has been covered ad nauseam by the MMA media and will not be further discussed here. Besides, there was a fight that had far more importance than the fight between Ferguson and Nijem.
What was that fight? Clay Guida vs. Anthony Pettis.
The fight between Guida and Pettis was important for two reasons.
First, it determined who would be a future contender at lightweight and who was more likely to get a title shot next.
Second, it showed the superiority of the fighters in the UFC over their WEC counterparts.
Both of these aspects of the fight’s consequences are important in their own way.
It is important that Clay Guida become a future contender because he is more well known than Anthony Pettis—despite Pettis’ landing of the “showtime kick” against Ben Henderson—and is a more charismatic figure.
Simply put, Guida has had more time with the UFC’s vaunted hype machine and is therefore more well known. This will generate more pay-per-view buys in any title or No. 1 contender bout, certainly more than Pettis would have.
The second reason for Guida’s victory being the most positive part of the event is, admittedly, an issue of ego for the UFC. Had Pettis beaten Guida, it would have been proven that a fighter outside of the UFC was better than one inside the UFC (even though both fighters were under the Zuffa umbrella).
This would have damaged the UFC product and many UFC critics and keyboard warriors would use this to their advantage.
However, this wasn’t the case. Instead, the former WEC lightweight champion couldn’t beat a man who many considered at one time to be a permanent gatekeeper in Clay Guida.
What will wee see Guida do next? Fight the winner of Jim Miller vs. Ben Henderson? Maybe fight for the lightweight crown?
Either way, Guida doing either of these things will generate more attention and dollars than Pettis would have. This was the single most important thing to come from an otherwise severely underwhelming event.
To MMA fans, it must seem as though Hell as frozen over.Not only has Zuffa—the company that owns the UFC—purchased the UFC’s longtime competitor Strikeforce, but Strikeforce welterweight champion Nick Diaz is being brought to very top of th…
To MMA fans, it must seem as though Hell as frozen over.
Not only has Zuffa—the company that owns the UFC—purchased the UFC’s longtime competitor Strikeforce, but Strikeforce welterweight champion Nick Diaz is being brought to very top of the mountain; he is set to face reigning UFC welterweight champion Georges St-Pierre at UFC 137.
This fight has already sparked a vast amount of interest and will likely be one of the most anticipated matches of the entire year. People are tired of seeing St-Pierre play it safe en route to decisions and they feel that Diaz is the man to finally make the Canadian truly fight.
But will this fight really live up to the no-doubt epic level of hype it will receive? Read on and find out!
The dust after UFC 130 could not settle due to the harsh winds of controversy. Quinton “Rampage” Jackson—former UFC and Pride champion as well as the night’s main event winner—was at the source of the issue.In a post-fight interview with MM…
The dust after UFC 130 could not settle due to the harsh winds of controversy. Quinton “Rampage” Jackson—former UFC and Pride champion as well as the night’s main event winner—was at the source of the issue.
In a post-fight interview with MMAHeat.com’s Karyn Bryant, Rampage acted in a way many would deem inappropriate, saying he wanted to “motorboat” Bryant while doing the motions and getting close enough to her to make it uncomfortable (although it is worthy to note that Bryant wasn’t bothered).
Rampage, having done questionable things to female reporters in the past (see here and here), is no stranger to such actions.
Needless to say, Rampage’s antics have created controversy amongst the MMA community…controversy about how there is no controversy!
Rampage’s behavior was criticized by Cagewriter.com’s Maggie Hendricks who concluded that Rampage’s act was “old and tired” and that by giving him publicity the MMA media was making a mistake.
Her thoughts on Rampage’s behavior made it to the infamous Underground forums where they were lambasted by rabid keyboard warriors and even UFC commentator and comedian Joe Rogan who said:
“I think Rampage occasionally gets out of line, and I think some of what he does in interviews in unfortunate. I also think that’s a part of his charm. He’s not a fucking dentist, he’s a cage fighter, and he’s one with a very unique personality. I don’t think he should be given a free pass for some of the questionable things he does, but I do think that this woman in question is all kinds of cunty.”
Joe Rogan too has gone “off the handle” at times in the past. Rogan’s words have turned legions of MMA fans against Hendricks and in doing so have caused even more controversy.
Cage Potato’s Ben Goldstein was not at all amused by Rampage’s actions nor by Rogan’s commentary on the situation. He expressed his angst at the lack of attention the whole incident was getting. He rightly summed up the reaction of the MMA community when he wrote:
“[T]he majority of sports fans don’t give a rat’s ass. It’s just not part of their conversation. Nine out of 10 UFC fans will side with Quinton Jackson and Joe Rogan every time, because Rampage and Joe are awesome, and motorboating is hilarious, and who the fuck is Maggie Hendricks anyway?”
In his last paragraph, Goldstein provided a warning: That the employees (be it athletes or commentators) of other sports organizations couldn’t act in such a manner and that a time will come when those belonging to the UFC can’t either so Rogan and Rampage better get their acts together soon.
Goldstein’s ideas can be reiterated in one sentence: If the UFC wants to be considered a first-rate sports organization, its employees should act like they’re part of one.
While no one can or would say that Rampage violating a reporter is commendable (and this article is in no way trying to endorse his actions or dismiss them), this particular situation highlights an issue of great importance that if often ignored in MMA, the issue of the UFC’s image.
UFC President Dana White is heavily criticized by pundit and keyboard warrior alike for his brash personality and propensity for foul language (“Count the F-bombs” could be a drinking game when listening to White’s interviews). Like-minded people criticize Rogan for similar reasons.
The argument is that the UFC can’t ascend to the highest pinnacle of sports along with the NFL and other such sports organizations unless people like White and Rogan are kept quiet and replaced with more conservative figures that will “play the game” and act like a proper CEO or commentator.
However, this notion may not be true. The truth may actually be that the UFC can’t ascend to the highest pinnacle of sports WITHOUT people like Dana White and Joe Rogan and the attitude and style they represent the company with.
The fact of the matter is this: The primary demographic for the UFC is males ages 18-34.
The lower half of that demographic is extremely receptive to the UFC in large part because the President of the UFC dresses like them (Dana White can often be seen sporting shirts that wouldn’t be out of place in a college campus or a frat party) and talks like them.
Having Joe Rogan as commentator is also part of this appeal. He is a popular comedian for that age group and is also a well known marijuana advocate (which increases his stock with parts of the demographic considerably), not to mention his stint on Fear Factor.
Part of the reason that the UFC is so popular is that White and Rogan help to give it an edge that the NFL, nor the NBA, nor any major sports organizations have. The fans relate to the UFC because they see people more like themselves at the press conference and behind the commentator booth, not like their parents or grandparents.
This has lead to success in the past and is leading to success now. But can it lead to success in the future? Is Goldstein right when he says that the UFC will have to change its ways to be taken seriously?
The answer is a complicated one and may not be settled for a generation.
First, the UFC is swiftly becoming—if it hasn’t already—a truly international sports organization and will therefore not be as subject to the whims of prude American society as it extends its reach over the globe.
Second, it is possible that the current generation of younger (lets say 18-24) UFC fans will become parents that don’t mind behavior the likes of which can be seen by White and Rogan. If this is the case, the UFC’s demographic will expand to the older parents as well as their children, since their parent’s will have no qualms with the UFC unlike many of the older people do today.
If this is the case, the UFC will have almost all of society captivated. They will have the parents since they used to be fans. They will have the kids since the kids will be raised on the sport. And they will have the teens since the sport of fighting naturally appeals to testosterone laden youths.
Third, it is possible that the opposite happens and the fans of today become parents that are put off by the UFC’s antics. If this happens, the UFC has two options. They can either maintain their image and stay with their traditional demographic. The other option is streamline their image and in doing so capture the current fans attention as they become true adults.
If this happens, the sport can still become popular since the NFL is popular with all male demographics and it doesn’t have the “edge” the UFC has.
So, “at the end of the day, what is the answer” you ask? The short term future of the sport depends on the UFC’s current image that appeals so strongly to the zeitgeist of the modern (American) male. It has fueled the companies growth and will continue to do so in the coming years. But in the long term, the answer remains to be seen and will not be known until the bulk of the current UFC fans start having babies.
When one mentions the UFC, images of greats like Georges St-Pierre and Anderson Silva immediately come to mind.And why shouldn’t they?The men are legends, as are other well-known figures in MMA like Matt Hughes, Chuck Liddell and Tito Ortiz.However, ma…
When one mentions the UFC, images of greats like Georges St-Pierre and Anderson Silva immediately come to mind.
And why shouldn’t they?
The men are legends, as are other well-known figures in MMA like Matt Hughes, Chuck Liddell and Tito Ortiz.
However, many people forget that there was a generation of MMA before the current incarnation of the UFC—meaning before it was owned by Zuffa—and there were many fighters that were part of it.
While they may not hold a candle to the well-rounded fighters of today, here are the pre-Zuffa era’s best.
Fedor Emelianenko was once considered to be the best fighter to have ever lived. Now, having lost twice in a row, his aura of invincibility has shattered and many are doubting the Russian sambo expert.