<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Sunday news review: Law and order</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.fightopinion.com/2007/11/25/sunday-news-review-law-and-order/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.fightopinion.com/2007/11/25/sunday-news-review-law-and-order/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 09 Feb 2012 16:14:23 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Mr. Roadblock</title>
		<link>http://www.fightopinion.com/2007/11/25/sunday-news-review-law-and-order/comment-page-1/#comment-42527</link>
		<dc:creator>Mr. Roadblock</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 26 Nov 2007 05:37:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.fightopinion.com/2007/11/25/sunday-news-review-law-and-order/#comment-42527</guid>
		<description>I think in certain circumstances interim titles are fine.  It&#039;s obviously something you want to avoid as much as possible, in the Sherk situation I think it is wrong, in the Hughes/GSP I think it is correct.

I&#039;d be shocked if Sherk wasn&#039;t on the gas and if he wasn&#039;t and CA got it wrong they are even more of a disgrace than they look like.  That is a scientific situation where a chemical test will determine yes he did or no he didn&#039;t take steroids.  So either BJ vs Joe is for the belt or  it is to be the #1 contender.  

Notwithstanding the fact that UFC&#039;s poor booking decision to hold off on Hughes vs Serra for 8 months so they could make a reality show with diminishing returns, this is a good use of an interim belt.  The show was booked around the 170lb title fight.  The Welterweight division has been the jewel of the UFC for several years and Serra being out is clogging the whole thing up.  A herniated disc stopped Vitali Klitschko&#039;s career dead in its tracks.  There is a chance (and I hope it doesn&#039;t happen) that Serra never fights again. There is a better chance that he can&#039;t fight for 6-8months.  This way GSP and Hughes fight for the title and will defend the title if Serra isn&#039;t able to come back soon.  If we hit April and Serra can&#039;t fight the interim belt becomes the official belt and hopefully UFC does the right thing, they give Serra a tuneup and title shot when he is healthy.

The messy part about interim titles is if you do one and then the interim champ gets beat by the champ and you have a guy in your title history who really shouldn&#039;t have his name associated with a belt.  When Randy Couture won the interim belt against Chuck he then beat Tito who held the official belt and things were orderly.  

I think UFC should do #1 contender fights.  They don&#039;t. That has long been a critique of mine against them.  I would also like to see #1 contender and/or good fights be 5 rounders.  Boxing has it where there are several different durations fights can be based on the fighters&#039; experience level and if it is a title fight or not.  3 rounds is good for most fights, but there are some non-title matchups that deserve a longer bout duration.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think in certain circumstances interim titles are fine.  It&#8217;s obviously something you want to avoid as much as possible, in the Sherk situation I think it is wrong, in the Hughes/GSP I think it is correct.</p>
<p>I&#8217;d be shocked if Sherk wasn&#8217;t on the gas and if he wasn&#8217;t and CA got it wrong they are even more of a disgrace than they look like.  That is a scientific situation where a chemical test will determine yes he did or no he didn&#8217;t take steroids.  So either BJ vs Joe is for the belt or  it is to be the #1 contender.  </p>
<p>Notwithstanding the fact that UFC&#8217;s poor booking decision to hold off on Hughes vs Serra for 8 months so they could make a reality show with diminishing returns, this is a good use of an interim belt.  The show was booked around the 170lb title fight.  The Welterweight division has been the jewel of the UFC for several years and Serra being out is clogging the whole thing up.  A herniated disc stopped Vitali Klitschko&#8217;s career dead in its tracks.  There is a chance (and I hope it doesn&#8217;t happen) that Serra never fights again. There is a better chance that he can&#8217;t fight for 6-8months.  This way GSP and Hughes fight for the title and will defend the title if Serra isn&#8217;t able to come back soon.  If we hit April and Serra can&#8217;t fight the interim belt becomes the official belt and hopefully UFC does the right thing, they give Serra a tuneup and title shot when he is healthy.</p>
<p>The messy part about interim titles is if you do one and then the interim champ gets beat by the champ and you have a guy in your title history who really shouldn&#8217;t have his name associated with a belt.  When Randy Couture won the interim belt against Chuck he then beat Tito who held the official belt and things were orderly.  </p>
<p>I think UFC should do #1 contender fights.  They don&#8217;t. That has long been a critique of mine against them.  I would also like to see #1 contender and/or good fights be 5 rounders.  Boxing has it where there are several different durations fights can be based on the fighters&#8217; experience level and if it is a title fight or not.  3 rounds is good for most fights, but there are some non-title matchups that deserve a longer bout duration.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Zack</title>
		<link>http://www.fightopinion.com/2007/11/25/sunday-news-review-law-and-order/comment-page-1/#comment-42519</link>
		<dc:creator>Zack</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 26 Nov 2007 03:53:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.fightopinion.com/2007/11/25/sunday-news-review-law-and-order/#comment-42519</guid>
		<description>I just wanted to make sure people don&#039;t get us confused. I&#039;ll gladly post under a different name if you&#039;d prefer. I just didn&#039;t want to have something too anonymous like 45 Huddle or anything.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I just wanted to make sure people don&#8217;t get us confused. I&#8217;ll gladly post under a different name if you&#8217;d prefer. I just didn&#8217;t want to have something too anonymous like 45 Huddle or anything.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Zach Arnold</title>
		<link>http://www.fightopinion.com/2007/11/25/sunday-news-review-law-and-order/comment-page-1/#comment-42517</link>
		<dc:creator>Zach Arnold</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 26 Nov 2007 03:48:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.fightopinion.com/2007/11/25/sunday-news-review-law-and-order/#comment-42517</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;i&gt;I’m Zack…Zach does the website.&lt;/i&gt;&lt;/blockquote&gt;

In about 90% of all of my correspondence in the MMA world (e-mails, online), people always call me &quot;Zack&quot; and do it without hesitation.  What&#039;s it like to have a twin online MMA brother?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p><i>I’m Zack…Zach does the website.</i></p></blockquote>
<p>In about 90% of all of my correspondence in the MMA world (e-mails, online), people always call me &#8220;Zack&#8221; and do it without hesitation.  What&#8217;s it like to have a twin online MMA brother?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Zack</title>
		<link>http://www.fightopinion.com/2007/11/25/sunday-news-review-law-and-order/comment-page-1/#comment-42512</link>
		<dc:creator>Zack</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 26 Nov 2007 03:31:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.fightopinion.com/2007/11/25/sunday-news-review-law-and-order/#comment-42512</guid>
		<description>I&#039;m Zack...Zach does the website.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m Zack&#8230;Zach does the website.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: 45 Huddle</title>
		<link>http://www.fightopinion.com/2007/11/25/sunday-news-review-law-and-order/comment-page-1/#comment-42502</link>
		<dc:creator>45 Huddle</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 26 Nov 2007 01:34:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.fightopinion.com/2007/11/25/sunday-news-review-law-and-order/#comment-42502</guid>
		<description>I don&#039;t mind the Interim title thing, but I agree with Zach on having clear cut #1 Contender Fights that are 5 rounds.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I don&#8217;t mind the Interim title thing, but I agree with Zach on having clear cut #1 Contender Fights that are 5 rounds.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Zack</title>
		<link>http://www.fightopinion.com/2007/11/25/sunday-news-review-law-and-order/comment-page-1/#comment-42500</link>
		<dc:creator>Zack</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 26 Nov 2007 01:15:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.fightopinion.com/2007/11/25/sunday-news-review-law-and-order/#comment-42500</guid>
		<description>All #1 contender matches should be 5 round fights. Also, they should have clear cut #1 contender matches in the first place. Interim titles make no sense because the guy holding the belt isn&#039;t the champion, he is the #1 contender. Having more people wear belts than just the champ dilutes the meaning of the real title.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>All #1 contender matches should be 5 round fights. Also, they should have clear cut #1 contender matches in the first place. Interim titles make no sense because the guy holding the belt isn&#8217;t the champion, he is the #1 contender. Having more people wear belts than just the champ dilutes the meaning of the real title.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Steven</title>
		<link>http://www.fightopinion.com/2007/11/25/sunday-news-review-law-and-order/comment-page-1/#comment-42484</link>
		<dc:creator>Steven</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 25 Nov 2007 23:19:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.fightopinion.com/2007/11/25/sunday-news-review-law-and-order/#comment-42484</guid>
		<description>Today is the pre-sale. General public is Dec. 2.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Today is the pre-sale. General public is Dec. 2.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: JThue</title>
		<link>http://www.fightopinion.com/2007/11/25/sunday-news-review-law-and-order/comment-page-1/#comment-42481</link>
		<dc:creator>JThue</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 25 Nov 2007 22:32:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.fightopinion.com/2007/11/25/sunday-news-review-law-and-order/#comment-42481</guid>
		<description>Did the Yarennoka ticket on-sale date get pushed back from today to Dec. 2nd, or was it just a pre-sale that began today, OR have I completely misread the whole thing?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Did the Yarennoka ticket on-sale date get pushed back from today to Dec. 2nd, or was it just a pre-sale that began today, OR have I completely misread the whole thing?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: JThue</title>
		<link>http://www.fightopinion.com/2007/11/25/sunday-news-review-law-and-order/comment-page-1/#comment-42480</link>
		<dc:creator>JThue</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 25 Nov 2007 22:27:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.fightopinion.com/2007/11/25/sunday-news-review-law-and-order/#comment-42480</guid>
		<description>I AGREE WITH 45 HUDDLE.

Seriously though, I can&#039;t wait to hear the argument of what would be a better solution, short- and long-term, than interim, specifically in this latest case. Stripping the champ could be one argument, but saying &quot;you got injured in November instead of August, tough luck, you&#039;re out&quot; in a sport where mid-long term injures are a norm doesn&#039;t make sense to me. And not stripping or interimming(HAH!) leads to the old lesson of holding back big fights in MMA. Will try to stay somewhat open minded until I&#039;ve heard the show though.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I AGREE WITH 45 HUDDLE.</p>
<p>Seriously though, I can&#8217;t wait to hear the argument of what would be a better solution, short- and long-term, than interim, specifically in this latest case. Stripping the champ could be one argument, but saying &#8220;you got injured in November instead of August, tough luck, you&#8217;re out&#8221; in a sport where mid-long term injures are a norm doesn&#8217;t make sense to me. And not stripping or interimming(HAH!) leads to the old lesson of holding back big fights in MMA. Will try to stay somewhat open minded until I&#8217;ve heard the show though.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Matthew Watt</title>
		<link>http://www.fightopinion.com/2007/11/25/sunday-news-review-law-and-order/comment-page-1/#comment-42478</link>
		<dc:creator>Matthew Watt</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 25 Nov 2007 22:14:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.fightopinion.com/2007/11/25/sunday-news-review-law-and-order/#comment-42478</guid>
		<description>You are spot on with the HCF complaining about the Carter fight, that it was too one-sided. Pretty damn funny if you ask me. At least we now know that HCF and MFC have a great working relationship and view each other with the outmost respect ;)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You are spot on with the HCF complaining about the Carter fight, that it was too one-sided. Pretty damn funny if you ask me. At least we now know that HCF and MFC have a great working relationship and view each other with the outmost respect <img src='http://www.fightopinion.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_wink.gif' alt=';)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

