Did you guys know that Jose Aldo had a biographical film about his life coming out? Well, I didn’t, and I pretty much know everything about MMA these days (excluding fight dates, title holders, and 80% of the rosters on Fight Pass cards).
Well, he does, and it’s called “Mais forte que o mundo – A história de Jose Aldo” or Stronger Than the World – The Jose Aldo Story (sounds like someone’s been ripping off Chad Dundas, no?). Chronicling Aldo’s rise from the slums of Brazil to his championship runs in the WEC and UFC, Stronger Than the World takes an interesting approach to Aldo’s story by a) casting someone that looks nothing like him and b) delving into Jose Aldo: gifted lover. Also, they throw a Showtime Kick in there, because apparently Aldo did that and we’re all just remembering it wrong.
Did you guys know that Jose Aldo had a biographical film about his life coming out? Well, I didn’t, and I pretty much know everything about MMA these days (excluding fight dates, title holders, and 80% of the rosters on Fight Pass cards).
Well, he does, and it’s called “Mais forte que o mundo – A história de Jose Aldo” or Stronger Than the World – The Jose Aldo Story (sounds like someone’s been ripping off Chad Dundas, no?). Chronicling Aldo’s rise from the slums of Brazil to his championship runs in the WEC and UFC, Stronger Than the World takes an interesting approach to Aldo’s story by a) casting someone that looks nothing like him and b) delving into Jose Aldo: gifted lover. Also, they throw a Showtime Kick in there, because apparently Aldo did that and we’re all just remembering it wrong.
Trailer after the jump.
Honestly, this whole trailer could have just been a reenactment of Jose buying his first suit and we would’ve been sold, but this’ll do just fine. Could’ve used a little more slo-mo, though. (<—-sarcasm. It felt 4 hours long.)
Jose Aldo: Never Back Down is set for a 2016 release, but will probably pull out a few months before and come out sometime in 2017.
With Ronda Rousey’s shocking loss still in the rearview mirror and the biggest featherweight fight of all time on the horizon, it seems that the MMA world has all but forgotten about CM Punk.
It has been almost a year to the date since Punk (aka Phil Brooks) was signed by the UFC to fill the void left behind by Brock Lesnar, and all seemed to be going smoothly with his preparation until he pulled the most MMA thing of them all and got himself injured. But now, it looks like a definitive timetable has been set for Punk’s return, as well as the opponent he will be making his MMA debut against. Sort of.
With Ronda Rousey’s shocking loss still in the rearview mirror and the biggest featherweight fight of all time on the horizon, it seems that the MMA world has all but forgotten about CM Punk.
It has been almost a year to the date since Punk (aka Phil Brooks) was signed by the UFC to fill the void left behind by Brock Lesnar, and all seemed to be going smoothly with his preparation until he pulled the most MMA thing of them all and got himself injured. But now, it looks like a definitive timetable has been set for Punk’s return, as well as the opponent he will be making his MMA debut against. Sort of.
In an interview with Off the Record (via BloodyElbow), White confirmed that Punk/Brooks (Bunk? Pooks?) “will fight next year, 100 percent,” which by the laws of the MMA Gods, can only mean that a horrific career-ending injury is headed his way…though I suppose you wouldn’t be able to call it “career-ending” given that, you know, Punk has never actually fought before. Regardless, let it be known that 2016 will officially go down in the history books as “The Year of the Bunk.”
As to Punk’s opponent, well, he will more than likely be found on “Looking for a Fight,” the web series White has been filming alongside Nick the Tooth and Matt Serra over the past few months.
“I just started a new show, the pilot is on YouTube, it’s called Dana White: Looking for a Fight, and I’m actually out looking for opponents for CM Punk right now,” said White.
If you recall, it was the first episode of the show (which we’ve embedded below) wherein Aryan youth, freak of nature, and 80′s movie bully Sage Northcutt was discovered after dispatching Gage Duhon at Legacy Fighting Championship 42.
Personally, I’m just happy that the UFC isn’t basing a whole season of The Ultimate Fighter around Punk’s debut opponent and I just gave them the idea, didn’t I?
Shock. Disbelief. Speechlessness. You can insert your own emotion here to sum up your feelings about Holly Holm’s upset win over Ronda Rousey at UFC 193 on Saturday night. But please refrain from invoking another emotion: Despair.
Shock. Disbelief. Speechlessness. You can insert your own emotion here to sum up your feelings about Holly Holm’s upset win over Ronda Rousey at UFC 193 on Saturday night. But please refrain from invoking another emotion: Despair.
It’s going to be popular to assume that Rousey showing she is, in fact, beatable is a bad thing for the UFC or for women’s mixed martial arts in general. You might even go so far as to be like my friend here, who I’m assuming spoke with his tongue planted firmly in cheek:
But please relax, MMA fans. I’m here to tell you why Holm defeating Rousey is actually a terrific thing for both the UFC and women’s MMA in general. Even though he looked crestfallen during the postfight press conference, UFC President Dana White should also be the happiest guy around with how UFC 193 unfolded.
Let’s say Rousey performed her usual routine and demolished Holm in a minute or less. Prior to last night’s bout, Rousey said she wanted to “disappear for a while” after her title defense. Judging by how she looked and acted during the weigh-ins, that might have been a good idea. You have to wonder if the spotlight and all the media attention was starting to get to Rousey a little bit.
Anyway, if Rousey dominated Holm at UFC 193, there would be no challengers left. Miesha Tate isn’t getting another title shot, apparently. The memory of Cat Zingano’s 14-second loss to Rousey is still fresh in many people’s minds, so she’s out. It looks increasingly unlikely (especially after Saturday night’s card) that a fight between Rousey and Cristiane “Cyborg” Justino isn’t going to happen. If Rousey defeated Holm, the women’s bantamweight division would basically be held hostage by Rousey’s continued success.
But now, we have a plethora of fresh matchups that are possible. Which begins with the immediate rematch that will happen between Holm and Rousey. While it’s not exactly fresh, Rousey/Holm 2 gives the UFC another big fight to promote in the new year that people will want to see. In fact, it would be the perfect main event for the UFC’s 200th card, which will more than likely take place in Madison Square Garden.
When you think about some of the memorable moments that have taken place in the world’s most famous arena, having two women face off in the main event of the first UFC card at MSG will represent another significant achievement for women’s MMA and women’s sports in general.
Plus, the rematch between Holm and Rousey sells itself. People are comparing Holm’s upset to other notable upsets, such as Buster Douglas defeating Mike Tyson. Since the UFC and White have never met hyperbole they didn’t love, all they need to do is invoke a few other famous upsets in video packages for Holm/Rousey 2, sit back and watch the dough pour in. White will practically have to do no work at all.
The outcome of Holm/Rousey 2 is almost irrelevant, as well. If Rousey gets her title back, she can resume her perch as the greatest women’s MMA fighter of all time and continue to enjoy all the Hollywood offers that will no doubt keep pouring in. If Holm wins, then the UFC has a brand new star to promote. Holly Holm – “The Ronda Slayer.”
We would also be privy to a bunch of exciting new fights at women’s bantamweight if Holm retains her title. If the UFC relents and grants Tate a title shot, could Holm use her striking to keep Tate and her grappling at bay? If Holm faced Zingano, that would be a MMA striking fan’s dream with Holm’s boxing and kickboxing going against Zingano’s Muay Thai.
It’s easy to think that Rousey losing to Holm somehow portends bad things for the UFC or women’s MMA, as my misguided friend above might imply. But guess what? The MMA world didn’t end when Matt Serra upset Georges St. Pierre, and St. Pierre worked his way back to a rematch with Serra and re-established himself as maybe the greatest MMA fighter of all time. Some people might have thought Brock Lesnar getting exposed by Cain Velasquez was bad for the UFC, but both parties emerged from that just fine.
The bottom line is, stars come and go in MMA, and in all sports. We may just have a new one in Holly Holm, who might just pick up where Rousey left off in carrying the flag for women’s MMA.
Chris Huntemann writes about mixed martial arts in the state of Maryland. He also opines on all things UFC, Bellator and World Series of Fighting. Check out his blog, or visit his Twitter: @mmamaryland.
As painful as it is to be knocked out via a Rock Bottom-style slam (or must be, I have no idea), at least you can take solace in the fact that, should that scenario befall you, you’d still more than likely get to walk away from the fight in one piece.
Thus, we come to option B for how to deal with a takedown/slam: The “Arm Resist Motion.” It’s an objectively terrible decision no matter how you look at it, yet also understandable given how we instinctively react to falling as a species. Unfortunately in MMA, it’s an instinct that usually results in a horrific injury like the one about to take place above, which happened during a middleweight contest between Pat McCrohan and Buck “Knuckles” Pineau at CES 31 over the weekend.
As painful as it is to be knocked out via a Rock Bottom-style slam (or must be, I have no idea), at least you can take solace in the fact that, should that scenario befall you, you’d still more than likely get to walk away from the fight in one piece.
Thus, we come to option B for how to deal with a takedown/slam: The “Arm Resist Motion.” It’s an objectively terrible decision no matter how you look at it, yet also understandable given how we instinctively react to falling as a species. Unfortunately in MMA, it’s an instinct that usually results in a horrific injury like the one about to take place above, which happened during a middleweight contest between Pat McCrohan and Buck “Knuckles” Pineau at CES 31 over the weekend.
Less than a minute into the fight, McCrohan snatched up his opponent for a big slam, leading Pineau to reach out and brace for impact. Rather than soften his landing, however, Pineau’s arm shattered like it was being used as a kickstand for a whale carcass, forcing him to instantaneously tap out in agony.
Tough luck, Knuckles (or as you’ll soon be known, “Stumpy”), but this is how we learn.
While we all collectively shake our heads and roll our eyes whenever Dana White breaks out the old “fighting is in our DNA” mantra, a new study argues that The Baldfather might not be that far from the truth. Sort of.
David Carrier, a professor of biology and comparative physiologist at the University of Utah, has spent years studying the impacts of fighting on the evolution of the human hand. Back in 2012, he published a report in the Journal of Experimental Biology that attempted to prove his controversial theory that the human hand — which features a shorter palm, shorter fingers and a longer thumb than our primate ancestors — evolved to meet much more than increased dexterity needs.
”If a fist posture does provide a performance advantage for punching, the proportions of our hands also may have evolved in response to selection for fighting ability, in addition to selection for dexterity,” said Carrier.
While we all collectively shake our heads and roll our eyes whenever Dana White breaks out the old “fighting is in our DNA” mantra, a new study argues that The Baldfather might not be that far from the truth. Sort of.
David Carrier, a professor of biology and comparative physiologist at the University of Utah, has spent years studying the impacts of fighting on the evolution of the human hand. Back in 2012, he published a report in the Journal of Experimental Biology that attempted to prove his controversial theory that the human hand — which features a shorter palm, shorter fingers and a longer thumb than our primate ancestors — evolved to meet much more than increased dexterity needs.
”If a fist posture does provide a performance advantage for punching, the proportions of our hands also may have evolved in response to selection for fighting ability, in addition to selection for dexterity,” said Carrier.
Carrier’s initial experiment was rather simple. Gathering a group of volunteers between 22-50 — all of whom had previous boxing or martial arts experience — Carrier asked them to hit a punching bag with a variety of strikes ranging from an open palm to a closed fist. Unsurprisingly, the closed fist strikes provided three times more force than an open palm strike on average, while “the buttressing provided by a clenched fist” increased the stiffness of the knuckles fourfold and doubled the ability of the fingers to deliver a punching force.
Carrier noted several other significant evolutionary sightings among primates to back his study — mainly, the difference in body size between the sexes (known as sexual dimorphism), which tends to be greater among primate groups where there is more competition between males. Basically, as the human hand was growing more delicate, it was forced to evolve from one based around open palm striking to the closed fist in order to inflict damage on opponents without damaging itself. The fact that no ape other than humans hits with a clenched fist seemed to support Carrier’s theory.
Likewise, Carrier additionally argued that the male human face may have developed a stronger and more prominent jaw, cheeks and brow to withstand more punches in these often ferocious competitions for mates. The anecdotal nature of the evidence gathered to support Carrier’s theory, however, led to it being challenged by a number of his colleagues across the scientific board.
One such challenger was Professor Frank Fish, a biomechanist at West Chester University in Pennsylvania, who argued that, just as the sperm whale’s bulging head had not developed for ramming other male whales to compete for females, the male fist had not evolved to do the same. “I can hit you in the face with this, but it did not evolve for that!” said Fish, suggesting that the effectiveness of the closed fist in combat was merely the result of the evolution of the human hand, not the impetus behind it.
Cut to last week, when Carrier published additional research in opposition to Fish’s claims. (via The Daily Utah Chronicle):
Carrier, with graduate student Joshua Horns, tested the force of three different hand positions when hitting a weight. They observed how much strain was put on the bones, proving that a full fist is better at protecting the hand when in combat.
Using cadaver arms, Horns removed the skin and attached fishing lines to different muscle groups in the arms. Guitar tuners were adjusted to change the tension of the hand and position it as an unclenched fist, a fully clenched fist and an open-palmed slap. The hands swung into a dumbbell and they measured the impact the force had on the bones.
According to the LA Times, the results were quite impressive, if not entirely conclusive.
“As expected, they found that the clenched fist, buttressed with the fingers tightly curled into the palm and the thumb providing reinforcement across the knuckles, reduced deformation in the metacarpals, thus lowering the risk of breakage.”
The main issue continues to be that, as Fish argues, many parts of the human body *can* be used in combat, but did not evolve specifically for that purpose.
One way to dig deeper, Fish said, would be to study fossils from our predecessors, including species in the genus Australopithecus, and see whether there have been changes through time that developed a better-buttressed fist.
Harvard University’s biological anthropologist, Richard Wrangham, also seems to believe that, in order to truly test Carrier’s theory, the evolution of primal female species should be studied as well. Carrier’s tests have thus far been composed using only male test subjects, and should he find a similarly significant evidence about the evolution of the female hand, it would more or less invalidate his “fighting as an evolutionary catalyst” claims.
It’s an interesting idea that Carrier is hypothesizing, to say the very least, and one that he feels has come under such fire because, if proven, could possibly align with those of us who use the “fighting is in our DNA” discourse to justify violence.
“The way I respond to that is by saying understanding is not justification,” said Carrier, who clearly has never painted JUST BLEED across his chest like the true savages among us.
Check out some more of Carrier’s findings over at EurekaAlert.
