Friend of our site


MMA Headlines


UFC HP


Josh Gross


MMA Fighting


MMA Torch


MMA Weekly


Sherdog (News)


Sherdog (Articles)


Lowkick


Liver Kick


Fightsport Asia


Caged In


MMA Junkie


MMA Mania


Bloody Elbow


Fightlinker


Fightnomics


MMA Ratings


Rating Fights


Infinite MMA


MMA Convert


Fightline


Fight Medicine


CompuBox


CompuStrike


MMA Frenzy


Ult MMA


Fighters


Kevin Iole


Yahoo MMA Blog


MMA Betting


Search this site



Latest Articles


News Corner


MMA Rising


MMA Chronicle


David Williams


Audio Corner


Oddscast


Tapout Radio


Sherdog Radio


Joe Ferraro


The Fightworks Podcast


Eddie Goldman


Pro MMA Radio


MMA Torch


Video Corner


Fight Hub


The Fight Nerd


Special thanks to...

Link Rolodex

Site Index


To access our list of posting topics and archives, click here.

Friend of our site


Buy and sell MMA photos at MMA Prints

Site feedback


Fox Sports: "Zach Arnold's Fight Opinion site is one of the best spots on the Web for thought-provoking MMA pieces."

Site Meter

« | Home | »

Wednesday war room: BMA and Big Brother

By Zach Arnold | September 5, 2007

Print Friendly and PDF

Lots of news coverage today regarding the state of Chris Benoit’s brain. ABC News has more details. Plus, check out the reader comments. On ESPN’s Outside the Lines today, they focused their 30-minute program on the Benoit brain tissue analysis and concussions in sports.

Commentary on Dana White: Komikazee | Fightlinker

The BBC is reporting that the British Medical Association is calling for a ban on MMA in Britain. The BMA used the dreaded term “human cockfighting.” As scary as this sounds, it sounds like the politics of MMA in the UK are similar to those in America — in 1993. More on this story at The Mirror and The Sun. Reuters has now picked up on the story. The Daily Mash responds in their own way to the BMA’s claims about MMA. Plus, an article on UK fighter Rosi Sexton.

Another MMA/dogfighting comparison, this time in the Canadian publication Macleans:

Farewell procedure, what about the crime? In gladiatorial human sports such as boxing, wrestling and especially mixed martial arts, there’s a good chance of injury and, occasionally, death. I find such sports sick-making, but participants enjoy themselves. I have no idea how dogs feel about fighting. They get terribly mutilated or killed, but this “sport” is apparently enjoyed by huge numbers. Just because many of us find it distasteful and brutalizing does that justify outlawing it?

I wouldn’t outlaw bullfighting, fox hunting or shooting birds, which makes me question why I am sympathetic toward outlawing dogfighting. Class and caste play their role: fox hunting is considered upper-class and dogfighting is seen as a vice of the cultural underclass. Dogfighting is gaining popularity in Russia and Afghanistan, where it was outlawed by the Taliban. I suppose it’s a step forward for both countries, which formerly used people rather than dogs.

The Gillette News Record in Gillette, Wyoming is reporting that a local man is in stable condition in a Casper hospital after suffering bad head trauma at a Ringwars MMA event promoted by Matt DeWolfe (based out of Rapid City, South Dakota).

Here is an article claiming that Mark Cuban hired Ed Fishman. Why would he be hired? He wasn’t.

A new issue of Total MMA is now available for downloading.

Wednesday night is the WEC show in Las Vegas and all the fighters made weight. MMA Madness has an event preview here.

Stephen Quadros previews UFC 75.

More on the bizarreness that is the on-going saga with Fedor. You’ll note that Fedor’s representatives in America are supposedly White Chocolate Management, LLC. They’re based out of Hollywood, Florida and they also represent Diego Sanchez and Cheick Kongo.

I have a new article up at Boxing Scene asking questions about what could happen if we see some big names in the worlds of boxing and MMA on the client list of Signature Phamarcy, the online drug operation that Albany (NY) authorities are still investigating. Dave Meltzer on the Signature Pharmacy drug scandal and wrestlers from WWE allegedly involved in it:

“My impression is there’s no other names, but … I got called by a nervous guy, not a famous guy, whose name is not on the list,” Meltzer said. “He told me everybody went there. Not 14 of them, it was everybody.”

The strange thing is, this scandal could be a good thing for the industry. Some performers, though, are past the point of help.

“If there’s outside regulation of wrestling and there’s regular testing, the death rate of wrestlers is likely to go down,” Meltzer said. “Good for WWE as a business? That I don’t know.

There’s going to be an interesting MMA event happening on 9/21 (Friday) at the Aleppo Shriners Auditorium in Wilmington, MA. promoted by World Championship Fighting. Joe Lauzon’s brother, Dan, will likely be fighting in the main event. A bunch of top local (New England) names will be appearing as guests at the event.

CBS Sportsline is reporting that Mark Cuban has hired Guy Mezger to help out with his new MMA operations. Will the various members of Lions Den be next to join the fold, including one Ken Shamrock?

Art of War promoter CJ Comu:

“Our IFA Champion (Rizzo) is the best stand-up fighter in the world and he is willing to take on anyone that wants to enter the cage at Art of War to prove it. He knocked out Josh Barnett, he knocked out Andrei Arvloski and dropped Jeff ‘the Snowman’ Monson in a pool of blood in the third round till the referee finally stopped the fight. Rizzo was able to knock out Monson — something the former UFC Heavyweight Champion, Tim Sylvia, was unable to do.” Comu added, “At this point, we’d put him up against the best in the world because Pedro Rizzo is back and he’s going to keep knocking them out.”

Famous pro-wrestler Johnny Powers is bringing MMA to Moncton, New Brunswick, Canada on 9/29. It will air on PPV.

The latest MMA Weekly fighter rankings.

Onto today’s headlines.

  1. Fox Sports (Alex Marvez): Rob McCullough puts 8-fight win streak on line
  2. WEC HP: From 100 bucks to a world title, the journey of Rob McCullough
  3. Sprawl ‘n Brawl: Highlights of Rampage on The Stephen Quadros Show
  4. Yahoo Sports (Kevin Iole): Chase Beebe’s style draws “Natural” comparisons
  5. Fightlinker: Victor Valimaki’s getting tossed out on his ass
  6. MMA Weekly: John Alessio to stake claim to title shot at WEC
  7. Jake Rossen: Bad Sports (fallout from Babalu firing by UFC)
  8. Sportsnet (Canada): WEC a “Natural” fit for John Alessio
  9. Sports Illustrated (“Insida MMA”): Operation Billington – Stann will have an army of support vs. Billington
  10. The Saipan Tribune: Rookie fighters rock the Octagon
  11. The Orange County Register: Inside Dan Henderson’s training camp (with video)
  12. The Orange County Register: WEC 30 preview with Frank Mir
  13. The Long Beach Press-Telegram: Injury puts Pulver on shelf a spell
  14. The Gary Post-Tribune (IN): Former amateur wrestlers fighting for money in MMA
  15. Fighting Words: The Grappler’s Guide to Sports Nutrition
  16. The Halifax News (Nova Scotia): No opponent yet for Roger Hollett’s Halifax fight on 10/20

Topics: Boxing, Canada, MMA, Media, Pro-Wrestling, UFC, UK, WEC, WWE, Zach Arnold | 42 Comments » | Permalink | Trackback |

42 Responses to “Wednesday war room: BMA and Big Brother”

  1. Jordan Breen says:

    Oh shit. Macleans bashed MMA? I’m really gonna get an earful next time I visit grandma.

  2. Great article on Rosi in the Guardian – professional and articulate as ever.

    For UK readers it is in todays G2 paper as well, Page 16.

  3. Rohan says:

    I don’t object to the the BMA position at all. I think it is entirely in keeping with their view of boxing – that is by its nature dangerous to the participants and therefore should not be allowed. If you note the quote is that “It (MMA) can cause traumatic brain injury, joint injuries and fractures.” That’s true. We can’t deny it.

    There are two areas where we should be looking at the battle:

    1. Are there limits to what we should allow humans to do (even if they are not harming others by doing those activities)? The traditional libertarian arguement for MMA is that the participants are willing participants and therefore the state doesn’t have a role in banned the activity. However Zach and Luke Thomas who publically oppose a ban and fully support tight regulation of the sport. They need a cohesive answer to the question of why the Government has a right to regulate but not ban MMA. On what basis do you argue for a difference? Why is unregulated (e.g. Pride and K-1) MMA unacceptable in the USA but the UFC is acceptable. Are the injury rates in Nevada and Japan so different? The BMA would argue that is in the public good to ban boxing and MMA because there are public and social costs (i.e. there are costs to soceity beyond those to the willing individuals) – the costs of publically funded medical treatment, the decline in utility of participants etc. We need to anwser the arguements and the questions and not just say:

    2 – The injury rate is less than other major sports. That may be so but it doesn’t make it right. MMA it is widely ackonwledged puts a huge strain on the body (mainly through the training neccesary), particularly on joints, and yes it does effect the brain (through sparring more than fighting). It has a short lifetime and therefore the long term effects of the sport are not known. However seasoned observers such as Dave Meltzer (who I always love reminding MMA purists is one of Dana’s closest media confidents, and judged a UFC event in the pre-Zuffa days) have spelt out there is going to be a price to pay for many of them putting aside any drugs (particulalry pain killer) related problems.

    I feel the level of debate on why we as MMA enthusists reject ban calls has plateaued. We are stuck in the mindset that our crtics are stupid. Some are – a Conservative politician called for ban on Cage Rage before one of their events based on some pretty Day Today arguments. However some are not. The BMA is putting forward a well thought out principled argument. We need to respond.

    And we also need to recognise there is something rotton in the borough when we go to big MMA events. Yes there are some who have a good understanding of the sport, and some who are drawn in by the storylines/feuds, but there are a significant number of ignorant fans who primarily lust knockouts and blood. A sport cannot chose its fans. However it can question itself and examine if the lust for violence itself is a key component whether that is a good or bad thing. That goes for boxing as well.

  4. Zach Arnold says:

    1. Are there limits to what we should allow humans to do (even if they are not harming others by doing those activities)? The traditional libertarian arguement for MMA is that the participants are willing participants and therefore the state doesn’t have a role in banned the activity. However Zach and Luke Thomas who publically oppose a ban and fully support tight regulation of the sport. They need a cohesive answer to the question of why the Government has a right to regulate but not ban MMA. On what basis do you argue for a difference? Why is unregulated (e.g. Pride and K-1) MMA unacceptable in the USA but the UFC is acceptable. Are the injury rates in Nevada and Japan so different?

    If you don’t have some form of regulation of this sport (and it is a sport), then watch the deaths pile up like they have in pro-wrestling – another industry that Congress is seriously considering imposing sanctions or even regulation upon. If it’s a sport and it involves commerce in individual states and also interstate commerce, why shouldn’t there be state and/or Federal oversight on the industry?

    The argument that states don’t profit on MMA isn’t going to hold water for much longer. When athletic commissions are getting 5% or higher in terms of the profits from the gate and you have UFC-type gates, there’s money to be made. On the major league MMA level, the states are generating income into their coffers.

    Then there’s another angle you bring up (which could and probably would degenerate into massive flame wars), which is socialized health care versus private health care. In the States, promoters pay insurance (or bonds) on fighters so that if injuries occur, they get taken care of at the hospital. In the UK or Canada, there is socialized medicine so the taxpayer picks up the bill if the promoter isn’t paying insurance.

    MMA is a violent sport and you’re never going to remove the violent aspects from it. It’s an industry with skilled fighters who knowingly participate in regulated fights with rules. If you want to see the symptoms of what an outlaw industry looks like without regulation, go look at the Japanese scene right now. Let me know how that is working out.

  5. AB says:

    The Heath Herring interview dates from UFC 69

  6. Zach Arnold says:

    That’s what I get for reading the articles too fast. Thanks for pointing it out. I wonder why it was on search engines today…

  7. That MacLeans article is retard-tastic.

  8. Psygone says:

    I wonder what bothers the BMA more the idea of fighters getting hurt or the idea that we enjoy watching it? This sounds like a thinly veiled moral argument made out to sound like a health concern.

  9. D.Capitated says:

    I wonder what bothers the BMA more the idea of fighters getting hurt or the idea that we enjoy watching it? This sounds like a thinly veiled moral argument made out to sound like a health concern.

    Considering the following quote isn’t from the BMA or even a publication or writer from the continent of Europe, I would guess it falls in line with the BMA and American Medical Association’s calls to totally ban both MMA and boxing (amateur and professional) over the years due to the inherent medical concerns of any sport that results in the inherent neurological damage of its competitors. While you can point at other sports, none place a value, particularly total victory, on disabling the opponent by concussion. Boxing, kickboxing, and MMA do.

  10. cyphron says:

    Hey guys,

    Heard it through the grapevines that Fedor has been signed. Announcement is expected this Saturday.

    Randy VS Fedor ‘08.

  11. Psygone says:

    Damn those fighters and there bad intentions.

  12. D.Capitated says:

    Damn those fighters and there bad intentions.

    Considering that chronic traumatic encephalopathy is a very real and very horrible thing (to say nothing about joint or spinal injury), I’d say that physicians would be wise not to suggest combat sports. It goes against the very oath they swear.

  13. Rohan says:

    Zach – good point. I just wonder what MMA’s argument against the BMA is then. Are we saying that a sport where a primary aim is to concuss is acceptable on the basis that the Government shouldn’t have the right to ban that sport because it is the individuals right to participate? I’m not sure this arguement is consistent with regulation.

    Or are we saying that the injury rates in regulated MMA and boxing (inflicted because of the primary aims of those sports) are within acceptable levels and therefore the Government should allow the sports but regulate them. That seems to be where we are at. It seems to me that is a pretty poor arguement – i.e. look at all those other sports that are worse. I think as a combat sport we need to explain why we allow MMA but not the equivilent of earlier forms of pankraton. That is especially the case in the UK and in some american states (or is it just reservations?) where there is no regulation – why should Governments allow this to happen unregulated when the only rules are those decided by the promotors.

    I’m a supporter of MMA but in the UK and unregulated states we are running arguements that don’t work. I hope the UFC are successful in involiving the British Boxing Board of Control in the regulation of the sport in the UK – but it a very muddy picture and I’m not sure how other promotors would react if that happened. Certainly some of Cage Rage’s more freakshow matches (Butterbean , Sentryo, Julias Francis) which are aired live on a major cable station shouldn’t happen, and wouldn’t in Nevada or Calfornia.

  14. Psygone says:

    Suggestion (or lack of) and banning are not synonymous. Actively fighting the legality of MMA to save a potential few from themselves is poor allocation of time and resource.

  15. cyphron says:

    Everybody wants to ban something until there’s money to be made.

    It’s difficult to ban things that has its roots in human history. You don’t ban alcohol because it’s been around since the beginning of civilization. And you don’t ban combat sport because it’s also been around since the beginning of time. Human beings like to fight, that’s why we’ve survived and thrived for so long. If our ancestors ran away when the Sabre Tooth came at us, then the human race would be extinct right now. When people don’t see eye to eye, you take out your fists, knives, or guns and settle it. Humans beings are good at two things: inventing things and kicking ass.

    Look at World War I, II, and Iraq right now, etc. All these intellectuals and politicians think that we as human beings have evolved so far into an enlightened state that we can just kiss babies and hug each other to settle our differences. Hell no. Man needs an outlet for our aggression. And MMA is it. Take it away and you better be prepare for some social upheaval. =)

  16. Jim Allcorn says:

    cyphron,
    Well, let’s hope that’s the case. With Fedor confirmed to be putting in an appearance at Saturday’s UFC, it would seem natural ( no pun intended ) for that to be the showcase for Dana to make the big announcement. He DOES love the spotlight!

    But, what the hell. I don’t begrudge him that as long as he gets the job done. And hopefully he has in regards to Fedor.

    If not & the sitch is still undecided or Fedor & his people have elected to go with someone else by then, then it will add a sad element of the anticlimax to the evening. Not enough to ruin it by any means, but enough to be sent home with with a massive set of aching blue balls I think.

  17. Tomer Chen says:

    It goes against the very oath they swear.

    Can’t the same be said for Futbol due to butting the ball, Hockey for the brawls and getting sticked and so forth?

  18. cyphron says:

    Jim,
    Watch the UFC Countdown show this week. Dana will mention Fedor as a top 3 fighter. Since when does Dana or the UFC mention a fighter they don’t have on contract? Never. All stars in the sky has aligned.

  19. LR says:

    cyphron,
    If you don’t mention Fedor as a top 3 fighter, even if it isn’t your promotion, die-hard MMA fans are going to consider you a complete moron. And we all know that Dana White can’t stand the Internet backlash.

  20. Rohan says:

    “Can’t the same be said for Futbol due to butting the ball, Hockey for the brawls and getting sticked and so forth?”

    Not the sole purpose of those sports – measures have been taken to maximise safety. On the latter front can’t say the same about American Football but in the end I think there will be rule changes, further safety measures. Rugby has the safety measures (changes to the scrum, concussion guidelines) but in its current form may be inherrently injury prone. The difference is that the sole purpose of these sports is not to knock people out, and in MMA to manipulate joints. Doctors have and will speak out on issues like concussions in sport. But the intentions of the participents acting within the rules of the game don’t by themselves risk brain injuries.

    P.S. interesting news on Benoit’s brain. I wonder what a range of MMA and boxer’s brains would look like – on the MMA front outside regulated states this is never an issue and cans like Tank Abbot, Julias Francis etc get thrown into fights in the UK Cage Rage promotion without any questions being asked any questions by a regulatory authority.

  21. cyphron says:

    LR,

    That has never stopped the UFC from going out of their way to not mention Fedor and Pride before. Remember when Rogan goofed and was mentioned Nogueira before he was officially signed? Someone off camera told him to shut up. If you can find one instance of an official mention of Fedor before this (on a UFC show, and not in the press), then I’d be interested.

    Dana is a businessman first and foremost. He couldn’t care less about the “Internet knuckleheads” like us. Remember, Pride was once “fighting in Japan” or “overseas.”

  22. LR says:

    This is true, but Dana White has mentioned Fedor in most of the press conferences when he has been asked questions about PRIDE, and the fighters they want to bring over. He hasn’t shyed away from saying Fedor is the best HW he needs to bring over, and is one of the best, if not the best. Granted, this is not in the mainstream.

  23. Rohan says:

    Do you think Fedor is going to draw big money in the states? I can see it happening but I think it’s a 50/50 shot which will need much better use of the tape library than they have previously managed.

    Happy to see the dream fights of course!

  24. LR says:

    Dana White is a businessman, and it wouldn’t affect his decision making process, but he has shown he gives a shit what people say on the Internet. He wouldn’t blast Gross over a letter online if he didn’t. He obviously keeps up with what’s being said.

  25. cyphron says:

    I said in a UFC show and not in the press. Anyway, there are multiple underground sources who have confirmed that he has already signed. I was doubtful when one person said it, but with multiple sources then I have to think that it’s true.

    I bet you that he signed when he came here to America and this “crazy Russians” talk is Dana’s smoke screen. It’s all a ruse. Why is Dana giving those crazy Russians tickets to UFC 75? To help Dana’s competitors? Right… Dana would never announce a unified belt match would he? I’m sure he’s never done that before!

  26. LR says:

    Well, then you definitely make a good point. But there would be no point to mentioning a fighter outside the organization if it isn’t going to help him get more PPV buys.

    I also believe he has signed a contract. I think with the signing with Affliction, it really raises a flag that he is becoming fully integrated into the UFC promotional machine. It has setup the two best heavyweights in the world sitting side by side to promote a clothing line, but I also think it’s to begin to hype the biggest upcoming fight in MMA.

  27. Jeff says:

    The best news of the day for fight fans seems to be the announcement of the new “HDNet Fights” program which will air live mma events starting with Steele Cage’s International Fighting Organization’s Sept. 21 event at The Orleans Arena in Las Vegas.

    http://ufcjunkie.com/2007/09/05/tristan-yunker-slated-for-ifo-title-shot-scratched-from-fight-with-brian-geraghty/

  28. cyphron says:

    Good point. If we think in terms of business, Affliction would only make money if Fedor is in the UFC. I’m not sure if the Japanese buy Affliction clothing.

  29. Psygone says:

    Rohan, the hinge of their augment centers on intent and intent alone, which is why I see this as a moral argument. Hospital errors account for unnecessary deaths in the tens of thousands per year and that’s with the best of intentions. Saving people from themselves has pesedent, seatbelt laws are victomless but a quarter of all deaths are motor vehical related, but when less than 400 fighters have died in the last 60 years I would aurgue litagation for banning is pretty unnessary.

  30. Zack says:

    LOL @ Fedor being “top 3″

    “However seasoned observers such as Dave Meltzer (who I always love reminding MMA purists is one of Dana’s closest media confidents, and judged a UFC event in the pre-Zuffa days) have spelt out there is going to be a price to pay for many of them putting aside any drugs (particulalry pain killer) related problems.”

    Isn’t Meltzer closer with Joe Silva?

    Also, I want to say the UFC he judged for was Bas/Randleman but I could be wrong.

  31. Zack says:

    Breen…you see this thread on the UG?

    http://mma.tv/TUF/index.cfm?ac=ListMessages&PID=1&TID=1122348&FID=1

    Someone knows the Just Bleed guy….his name is Jamie Ladner.

  32. Rohan says:

    Indeed Meltzer had a shocker when he did judge!! I wondered when someone would call me on it. Central point remains:-) I stand corrected if he is closer to Silva – I had always thought right back to Shamrock/Ortiz 1 that it was White – I only had what he wrote which always seemed to me to regard what Dana White was up to especially recently (i.e. Dana White is meeting with Lesner, Lesner is working an angle etc and other non-prowrestling related examples).

  33. Sam Scaff says:

    I feel no need to respond to those who would have MMA banned in the entire country (or any state).

    Whether it be a moral argument or a sociological argument, they are both meritless and utterly preposterous.

    The reason I feel this way is because these people are unfairly targeting MMA while ignoring literally millions of other activities. The people who want to ban MMA and boxing choose to ignore the many, many dangerous and anti-social sports and hobbies that Americans choose to engage in on a daily basis. The obvious ones like football, pro-wrestling, car/moto racing, skiing, sky-diving, etc, etc, are all clearly very dangerous activities. And one could argue that hobbies like promiscuous sex, drinking, partying, dancing, etc, etc, are immoral and degrade societal values. Yet these people are generally ignoring these things, because they realize it is a waste of time to try and control them. But because MMA is new and on the fringe and explicitly graphic in its display of danger and risk, they choose to persecute the sport and its community.

    That is why I will not for a second entertain the question of whether or not MMA should be banned. Uneven, unfair, and irrefutably biased persecution and criticism does not warrant a response….other than to say that I will not respond…and in doing so, have just responded. Well you know what I mean.

  34. MMA Game says:

    That Daily Mash article is great :)

    I must say I find it quite weird how none of the UK red top rags are jumping on the MMA bandwagon – it’s certainly an opportunity to win over a few people to their paper. I think they’re underestimating how many people would like positive coverage and also how many people probably know more about MMA than the person writing the article and don’t need to hear the monotonous details.

  35. D.Capitated says:

    Sam, we’re talking about the AMA and BMA. These aren’t small crackpot groups. The AMA is the largest association of doctors in the US. They put out the medical journal with the largest circulation of any on the planet. 1/3 of all physicians in this country are members.

    The fact of the matter is that no physician almost anywhere on this planet can consciously tell you that professional fighting is in your best interests because it isn’t. The act of hand to hand combat for money is inately risky for yourself and your opponent by its very nature, moreso than any other organized sports in the world. Arguing that the BMA and AMA are ignoring more important social issues is just flat ridiculous and shows a particular level of ignorance to the scale at which either operates.

  36. ukiro says:

    Regardless of how dangerous it is to do a heel-clicker backflip on a bike (or pretty much whatever hazardous recreational activity you can think of), what separates that and pretty much all other sports from MMA is that in this sport inflicting damage is the very point. This has already been said by others, but it’s very very important. If you punch someone in the face in hockey you get a penalty, regardless of how integral fighting is to the unwritten rules of the sports. And even though people die in horse jumping accidents, having the horse fall over and trapping the rider underneath isn’t the point of the sport.

    Many fighters are very well aware of this, and take every opportunity to emphasize that it’s a sport and they’re just looking to win by whatever means fit within the rules, and that hurting the opponent is not a primary objective.

    What I think was a major point for Pride is that in their pre-fight interviews, fighters rarely spoke of wanting to “destroy” their opponent, or use other destructive and threatening language. Instead they spoke of tactics, heart, sportsmanship, technique and conditioning. Well, with the exception of Josh Barnett, who always came across as crude, rude and immature to me.

    Compare that with the image portrayed in UFC interviews – it’s bloodlust, hatred and war terminology. I know there are exceptions on both sides and I have the impression that the UFC interviews have toned down the “I will murder him” attitude lately, but I think it would be wise by the UFC and all other promotions to shift focus more to the values I attributed to Pride. Because what happens if someone says “I’ll kill him” and then ends up doing just that?

  37. cyphron says:

    Ukiro,
    Good points. But I think the difference is in culture. Americans tend to over use hyperbole. Japanese culture and American culture are different. The UFC has succeeded wildly in the way they market their product. I don’t think that it’s going to change any time soon.

  38. Jordan Breen says:

    “Breen…you see this thread on the UG?”

    Actually, a guy emailed me today with this (maybe after seeing the thread):

    http://www.mdoc.state.ms.us/InmateDetails.asp?PassedId=124583

    I’m really gutted over the whole thing. Hopefully the WEC can cheer me up.

  39. LR says:

    Well, Jordan.. just think, 1/24/2013 will be a great show.

  40. StreitigKaiser says:

    I wonder if Tito will be moved to the WEC if he loses his rematch with Evans. He would certainly dominate their light heavyweight division and probably bring the name of the promotion up even further.

  41. Sam Scaff says:

    D Cap you missed the point of my post.

    The point is not that the BMA and AMA should be paying attention to more important social issues. Thats really funny and obviously not my argument at all. and I’m not sure what “particular” level of ignorance I was displaying, but…

    The point is that there are many other sports and activities that are equally, if not more dangerous AND socially detrimental than MMA and boxing. And when doctors choose to focus their criticism on MMA and try to outlaw them, while ignoring, and probably in many cases, participating in the many equally risky behaviors (ie, drinking alcohol, smoking cigarettes, skiing/horseback riding) they are being completely hypocrtical.

    Now considering that the doctors are not recommending that alcohol and cigarettes and all sports (which are inherently dangerous) be banned, in choosing to make public statements about MMA and recommending that it be nationally banned (as is the case with the BMA) these doctors associations are really making a POLITICAL statement, which, as doctors, should be beyond the scope of their influence.

    They are not just recommending that people not compete in MMA. That I can understand that and I acknowledge that it is their responsibility as doctors. But trying to influence politicians to ban the sport is something I simply cannot accept. Doctors’ jobs are to treat people and give them advice, not force them to do things and control their lives. The AMA and BMA have absolutely no right to try to control what adults living in a free country do with their lives, as long as they are not hurting others (well, you understand). Just as they have no right to try and force the government to outlaw smoking, drinking, or driving fast cars.

  42. klown says:

    “Our research shows that three concussions may be the threshold for lasting damage,” Bailes said.

    Uh-oh.

Comments

*
To prove you're a person (not a spam script), type the security word shown in the picture.
Anti-spam image