« Fight Opinion Radio: Episode 35 | Home | Sunday media links »
Champions & Contenders
By Tomer Chen | December 9, 2006
By Tomer Chen
Combat sports such as Boxing and Mixed Martial Arts, just like team sports such as Baseball, Football & Basketball, have always relied on the prestige of a recognized championship (or championships) to be the centerpiece of their products. Fans want to see who will win the World Series, Superbowl or Stanley Cup and be the king of the hill in their respective sport (at least for the next year in the case of team sports). In combat sports, however, the presence of sanctioning bodies (such as the IBF, WBA, WBC & WBO) or promotional organizations (such as UFC, PRIDE, KOTC, IFL and so forth) creates a great deal more obscurity of the ‘true’ champion (in most cases, at least). With this obscurity tends to follow a cry for some form of clarity within the ranks of the various weight classes.
In Boxing, there are 17 weight classes going up from Strawweight to Heavyweight, a significant increase from the 6 original weight classes as of 1900 (Light Heavyweight had its first champion in 1903 with Jack Root and Flyweight had its first champion in 1916 with the legendary Jimmy Wilde, which rounds out the ‘recognized eight’ of Flyweight, Bantamweight, Featherweight, Lightweight, Welterweight, Middleweight, Light Heavyweight & Heavyweight). There were 3 weight classes that existed for a brief period earlier in the 20th century and then came back in the second half of the century (Junior Welterweight, Junior Lightweight & Junior Featherweight), but as a whole, 9 of the 17 weight classes became ingrained in the Boxing world in the latter half of the century. What was once 8 single champions (with the National Boxing Association (NBA) and several state commissions being the only ones to create small schisms at the time) has now become at least 3-4 ‘major’ champions in any weight class (IBF, WBA, WBC and maybe the WBO being the ‘top’ of the alphabet soup of the sanctioning bodies). So, in the course about 80 years, Boxing went from 8 champions to 51 or 68 champions.
Of course, that number is based strictly on the theoretical maximum allowed, but that does not factor in the possibility of unifying the different belts under one champion or even having more champions (through the relatively recent invention of the ‘Interim’ champion and ‘Super’ champion) as well as various magazines champions and rankings (most notably The Ring magazine’s championships). Nonetheless, as the basic numbers show, the Boxing world has become a lot more complicated in determining who the ‘real’ champion is in a weight class. And, unfortunately for most of the fans of Boxing, it does not seem to be getting better as champions are continuously being stripped of belts or being awarded belts at a moment’s notice by the sanctioning bodies (who sometimes break their own rules in order to get something that would benefit them the most).
On the other hand, MMA has not had the sanctioning body influence come into their fold. Instead, they create contracts for their fighters and create promotions such as UFC, PRIDE, KOTC, IFL, SHOOTO, Pancrase, BodogFight and so forth. Whereas the sanctioning bodies merely want to collect their sanctioning (licensing name) fees (as often as possible, preferably), the promotions are more interested in trying to develop superstars who can bring in huge buyrates and gates for the organization by making their own set of champions. Their champions, therefore, have a comparatively smaller pool than Boxing’s because an organization like the UFC or PRIDE will not place their champions into the pathway of a top contender who is not signed under them for an extended term (similar to Don King’s policy on granting title fights to fighters only if he got options on them). Whereas you can ‘grease the palms’ of the sanctioning bodies and mandatory contenders to allow bigger fights to happen for belts, you can’t buy out the UFC or PRIDE as such since if they lose the belt, they risk having it dishonored like Riddick Bowe throwing away the WBC belt into a garbage can instead of fighting Lennox Lewis or even in the world of MMA, B.J. Penn fighting at K-1 Romanex shortly after dismantling Matt Hughes to win the UFC Welterweight Championship. As such, the pool of potential contenders for an organization is reliant on who is willing to sign a binding contract at the rates offered in the hope of getting good sponsorship money and hopefully a title shot eventually. While on one hand you can have a great talent pool such as UFC’s Welterweight division, you can have a mediocre or even poor division such as UFC’s Heavyweight division by relying on only contracted fighters. In this regard, the title picture is based on the amount of money offered by the promotion and so the quality of the division and belt are linked to who is willing to bite the bullet and accept the contract.
Where champions were once expected to face the top contenders of their divisions and be fighting champions, recently there have been numerous examples of champions who were granted numerous exemptions from fighting more than maybe once in a year (if that). One example is WBO Featherweight Champion Scott Harrison, whose last fight was over a year ago in a title defense against Nedal Hussein and was granted numerous leaves on his next defense due to potential criminal misdeeds. Finally, the WBO recently claimed they were stripping the inactive champion of his belt. Another example is WBA & WBC (Lineal) Cruiserweight champion O’Neil Bell, who actually unified the belts but decided to rest on his laurels (and subsequently lost his IBF Cruiserweight Championship when he failed to face mandatory Steve Cunningham). Whereas in most eras there would have been a serious backlash over his failure to defend his newly formed crown (he’s the second lineal Cruiserweight champion after Evander Holyfield), you do not hear too much complaining from anyone (fighters, sanctioning bodies or the media) because they realize that even if he technically is ‘the man’ at Cruiserweight, the physical belts (but not The Ring belt) will be yanked from him if he continues to stay inactive much longer. For me, having the champion get his belt(s) taken away rather than having him lose it in the ring is a rather weak way of moving the activity of the champion. True, there were a number of inactive champions in the past, particularly Heavyweight champions such as Bob Fitzsimmons, Max Baer & Jim Braddock who wait 1-2 years to defend their crowns, but at least they show some intention of fighting eventually. In the case of Bell, besides an interest at one point to enter the Superfighter Tournament (several 4 rounders at HW), he has shown no real desire to re-enter the ring. If he intends to be inactive with no hope of re-entering the ring in the future, he should probably just declare his retirement and vacate his crown rather than holding the Cruiserweight division hostage. To contrast the apparent lack of defenses made by a number of champions, there are (relatively) recent examples of fighting champions in Boxing such as Bernard Hopkins with others such as Larry Holmes & ‘Marvelous’ Marvin Hagler a few years earlier.
In MMA, it is generally pointed out that for all the fights that Fedor Emelianenko and Wanderlei Silva have had, they number of title defenses made by both of them thus far (2 for Fedor at HW and 4 for Silva at MW (LHW)) have been rather poor for the length of their reigns and the amount of opponents they’ve faced since winning their belts. Whether or not it is PRIDE trying to maintain long term champions is a tough question to answer, but nonetheless it has led to criticism of the fact that an opponent would have to beat the champion twice to win a belt (such as Ricardo Arona, who beat Silva in the semi-finals of the 2005 Middleweight Grand Prix, although the time frame of the bout was 5 minutes shorter than the standard championship bout). In addition, the decision to have Takanori Gomi face Marcus Aurelio in a ‘warm-up’ non-title fight only to get choked out and having Aurelio beat him again in order to win the physical belt is also regarded as an example of iffy booking by management. It should be noted, however, that in the earlier years of Boxing, champions sometimes lost non-title bouts in the same weight class as their belt, and sometimes didn’t even grant the opponent who beat them rematches for their crown. Tito Ortiz’s latter part of his Light Heavyweight title reign was also regarded as being rather poor (with him only defending once a year against Ken Shamrock in 2002 and Randy Couture in 2003).
It is often argued that a champion should always place their belt on the line when stepping into the ring/cage (unless they move up or down in weight classes, of course). Matt Hughes would be an example of such a champion who placed his belt on the line in all of his fights when he was champion (besides the Royce Gracie bout which was a catch weight bout and the Joe Riggs fight when Riggs failed to make weight for the belt to be on the line). Although not everyone may be a fan of Hughes’ attitude towards opponents outside of ring, it is generally regarded that he was a fighting champion who took on the best of his division and came out on top for the most part. It is this respect for his guts that generally gives Hughes recognition as one of the greatest if not the greatest Welterweights in MMA history (up until this point).
Probably the biggest factor that creates a lack of title defenses by champions is money, plain and simple. Why risk your title against the top contender who couldn’t draw flies into a house when you can risk it against someone who can fill up seats in the arena and thus bring a larger guarantee to the table? A champion will, more often than not, accept an offer to face an Oscar De La Hoya or Mike Tyson-level drawing card even at below a 50-50 purse split because of the potential revenues they can make off guarantees, gate receipts and buyrate cuts than they could against the best quality opponent out there. Sometimes the best drawing opponent in the division (or nearby divisions) is the same as the best quality opponent, but if they aren’t, a champion will, understandably, go with the bigger name opponent. However, so long as they maintain a competitive schedule and do fight the quality opponents when they find a relative lack of big drawing opponents rather than sit on the belt(s), there really is not too much harm in booking the big money fights. It is only when the champion is booking himself for big money paydays and not quality of resume wins that questions to their legacy can be founded.
A Floyd Mayweather Jr. who spent his last few peak years fighting 2-3 times a year on less than spectacular or very good opposition for a quick buck may hurt his long term potential to be regarded in the same pantheon of the ‘Sugar’ Ray Robinsons, Muhammad Ali’s and Henry Armstrong’s of the Boxing world. Money is good, but in order to justify one’s ego, fighting the best is necessary. ‘Sugar’ Ray Leonard, while making many millions fighting opponents, took on the best of his era (Benitez, Hearns, Duran & Hagler) and was able to say to the world through beating most of them ‘Yes, I am that damn great!’ and justify his historically high rankings in the Pound 4 Pound lists.
The concept of interim champions and mandatories is a topic that often makes even the most ardent supporters of combat sports shudder. Interim champions are generally regarding as mandatory challengers for the main champion in a weight class who were given a belt as a ‘consolation prize’ for having to wait for the champion to give them their title shot. Interim champions often defend their ‘belts’ (really, claims to be the number one contender) until the main champion returns from his exemption period or will (more often than not) be awarded the vacated title. Juan Manuel Marquez recently KOd Jimrex Jaca in a ‘defense’ of his Interim ‘title’ as an example of how the sanctioning bodies allow fighters to pay sanctioning fees on technically non-belt belts in order to increase their own income. There have been cases, however, where the Interim champion was stripped of his mandatory status or was not even issued mandatory status by the sanctioning body in question. There are even times where title eliminators, the very essence of number one contendership bouts (mandatory status), may not actually lead to a mandatory number one contender. The World Boxing Council (WBC), for example, states in its rule 1.21 b) vii:
The WBC Board of Governors may, after a final elimination bout, and upon a 2/3 voting of the Board of Governors, retire recognition to the winner of such bout as official mandatory challenger based on lack of merits or performance in its sole discretion, or if it serves the best interests of the sport. In such scenario, the WBC will order the an additional final elimination bout;
Essentially, the WBC says that if it doesn’t feel you threw enough crisp jabs in your elimination bout, you can be denied your mandatory status by a vote and they don’t even have to give a reason why. A recent example of the application of this provision is the mandatory rematch between James Toney and Samuel Peter although Peter was awarded a Split Decision by the judges. Essentially, the ultimate judge of whether or not you get the title shot is the sanctioning body and not your actions in the ring. Super champions are a final area where a sanctioning body will essentially say ‘Hey, you’re holding belts in my body another, so what I’ll do is strip you of the physical belt, give you a Super champ status that you can use by paying our fee and we’ll all win!’. It’s simply another way for the sanctioning bodies to collect additional fees, by having a ‘Regular’ champion and an ‘Undisputed’ or ‘Super’ champion. Their logic behind this is mainly that the unified champion will probably have less defenses, so giving the main belt to someone else would allow them to collect more sanctioning fees since it’ll (likely) be defended more often.
I believe that a lack of a true consensus ranking system hurts both Boxing and MMA as sports. While in the case of Boxing many casual and hardcore fans rely on the word of The Ring magazine’s weekly rankings, I think that it, like the numerous sanctioning bodies, is prone to bias and imperfections. A less biased system would involve some sort of ranking based on the quality of wins and losses, such as Boxrec.com’s. For example, if Manny Pacquiao is ranked the #1 Junior Lightweight and he losses to #17 Gary St. Clair, that should hurt him more than losing to #2 Marco Antonio Barrera. On the other hand, beating Barrera should raise Manny’s stock more than beating #7 Alex Arthur. Of course, in practice, this system is also prone to flaws based on the initial ranking calculations (as can be seen in Boxrec’s case with a number of questionable quality fighters being alongside or even above the truly tested quality fighters) and how to value the quality of the win (brutal KO versus controversial Split Decision, etc.) or loss. Nonetheless, it would reduce the impact of individual bias from entering the equation. Unfortunately, the sanctioning bodies will never let it happen as that would require recognition of competing champions (such as the WBC having to recognize Wladimir Klitschko, Nicolay Valuev or Shannon Briggs in their own rankings as a potential contender that would force unification bouts and reduce the amount of potential fees they could get as a result and not just as another titlist, if that). Nor will the UFC or any other organizations get on board for this because of the same reason (they want to be regarding as number one).
So, overall, I think that the worlds of MMA & Boxing will have to make significant changes in order to gain universal recognition of their champions and contenders in the big picture (both in the mainstream media and by the hardcore fan base). It should be noted, however, that UFC has gained significant market share over the years by being the pioneer promotion in the North American MMA market and has made MMA associated with Ultimate Fighting (and thus the UFC). In that regard, the UFC is the mainstream promotion of champions in (at least) North America, even if they do not hold all the top champions and contenders of all the weight classes. However, given that several weight classes in the UFC do not have the vast majority of the top contenders and champions available potentially (Welterweight is really the only very solid weight class that can claim itself as the Welterweight division of the world with some very solid claim), there will naturally be a contrast between the mainstream belief that Sylvia, Liddell, Silva, St. Pierre and Sherk are the best in their weight classes out of everyone and the hardcore fans who will know about fighters such as Fedor Emelianenko, Wanderlei Silva, Antonio Rodrigo Nogueira, Mirko ‘Cro Cop’ Filipovic, Takanori Gomi and how they would pose serious threats to most of the current UFC champions.
Topics: All Topics, Boxing, MMA, Tomer Chen | 19 Comments » | Permalink | Trackback |
I give u alot of credit for taking the time and effort to write this article but (no offense and dont put it as a put down) but I think the argument is moot. The argument of a worldly recognized ranking system in MMA is almost a double edged sword that is as likely a occurance as a college football playoff system. The simple fact is that PRIDE and UFC and any other big MMA organization that comes up will NEVER recognize the others champions (its just the simple fact of competiton). If ur trying to tout ur champion as the BEST why would u bother recognizing another orgnization’s champion? Also if u do recognize that champ, would u or the other fed risk having a unified title fight between the champs with the outcome possibly being u losing ur orgnanizations belt and possible fan base? As u stated before its ALL about the money and when u run the risk of losing revenue because ur champ got beat by someone’s else’s champ its easier just to ignore the other champions and claim ur the best and hope that the AVERAGE fan will believe it. UFC beenefits from the fact that just NOW PRIDE is starting to become mainstream (if that) in the US, and that it has no other strong competiotn in the states.
I can see the smaller feds (ie IFL, Rumble on the Rock, Cage Rage, Strikeforce, etc) maybe forming a loose union with a universal ranking system but then again back in the early 50s the wrestling organizatrion NWA was like that until Vince McMahon Jr crushed it by breaking off and creating the mamoth that became WWF. Why did Vince leave? Simple he could make more money BY HIMSELF if he could claim to the average fan that his fed and champion were the best and at the time (the 80s) Hulk Hogan was the best (sadly). So I dont think the smaller MMA feds will last that long under a union either because one of them eventually will try to make their federation stand out and break away…which is kinda the mess that the boxing world is in with each organization trying to prove to the rotherr there champion is the best and with each organizaiton VERY WEARY of unification fights.
Like the college playoff system…its a nice little dream and yes a unified ranking system would, in a perfect world, make sense BUT when money and individual greed comes about sadly I doubt it will EVER happen.
JOSH,
I agree with your point that it’ll never happen (and I even acknowledge it at the end of the ranking system rant), but nonetheless I think for the long term good of both combat sports, there will need to be clarity of some sort because eventually you’re going to run the well dry off of a few big stars and if you don’t have any other big stars that have been promoted as such, you will be up creek without a paddle (just like the WWE’s down period in the early 90s). Just because it was the smartest move for Vince McMahon to do kill off the NWA in the 80s doesn’t mean he didn’t pay for it when Hulkamania ran its course in the early 90s and he was out of any really big eye catching stars (you can also say the same now as business has been pretty much stagnant) until Austin. Being a virtual monopoly or the market leader can hurt you more than being in competition at times because you become a victim to your own demand curve if you produce a product which fans will not be willing to pay as much for.
And I agree with the union of feds not being feasible for two reasons: (i) the Justice Department would shut it down like it tried to do in the 1950s with the NWA (where they were forced to sign a contract saying they were not working together to collude, when they actually did) and (ii) game theory (and human nature which it is based on) says that if there is an opportunity for one party to benefit greatly by jumping off the collusion boat, they will.
So yeah, it was just a long rant on my feelings on what’s wrong with the screwed up system. But unless we intend to surprise free enterprise, we aren’t going to see a truly fixed system. Hopefully, though, there will be a bit more clarity if the UFC does acquire more talent to deepen the pools of some of their other divisions besides Welterweight.
I would say to that then, dont worry about it. IMO as long as there is competition there will be STARS. U pointed out the end of hulkamania (kudos to ur deep wrestling knowledge, hard to find these days) granted it did hurt WWE but it also proved that wrestling is cycular. With the end of Hogan, came DX and AUstin, with the end of Austin came the Rock and now with the end of Rock someone (and its definitly not Cena or Batista) will come up and turn wrestling into a mainstream giant again.
I can see that with MMA as well, people thought at the beginning that Royce Gracie was the be all that ends all. Then came in guys like Dan Severyn, Mark Hunt, Randy Couture and then after them guys like Ortiz, Liddell and Hughes and now with guys like GSP there will always be someone that will come up and “run with the ball”. Thats why PRIDE and UFC have one sided can fights, why they have non title fights…they do that so they can build up their champs and challengers and get people to know them. If all u were worried about was legitimate stars…u dont need a rnaking system to figure that out. C’mon EVERYONE knows Fedor is the p4p best HW fighter…and we dont need a universal system for that.
When looking at who the best champions are one needs only to look at the rule sets for each organization. A UFC champion should never get the benefit of the doubt over a Pride champion because they don’t have to worry about getting they’re heads stomped, kicked, or knee’d when they’re on the ground. I’m not saying Pride’s champions are automaticlly better, but you can’t ignore the fact that the UFC octogon doesn’t allow these techniques that are among the most effective in the sport. If you argue with that, you’re probably a UFC homer who can’t be reasoned with anyway.
Yeah, that’s a good point about the rule differences making it difficult to objectively rank people in a fair manner. I also agree with Josh on his point about talent rising to the top in the MMA world.
I think the pro wrestling analogy isn’t especially apt because unlike in pro wrestling, talent is more important than charisma or that “it” factor. If you’re really flamboyant and well liked in the MMA world but get KO’ed every fight you’ll be gone with a quickness. Whereas even if you’re not really flamboyant and charismatic but are a great fighter the fans will respect and admire you. This is the case with both Liddell and Fedor. Pride Fanboys or not, Fedor got a SCSA reaction at their Vegas show.
It’s not as though all of the best fighters are fighting in a vacuum and will all retire leaving the companies to scramble to find new fighters. They’re constantly bringing new guys into the fold and seeing how they do.
And you run into problems with having a giant organizing body ranking things since they’re not always objective. And assuming the people doing the ranking are ethical, you still run into the fact that they can be influenced. Look at the BCS rankings, Florida is not the second best team in College football but the coach who campaigned for the number two spot got it.
Personally, I like the free market approach MMA takes and I think that’s why it’s beginning to eclipse boxing in terms of popularity. Instead of some stupid commision with governors voting on things, you’ve got competing companies that have to put on the best shows to get you to buy their next one. The fans determine who the best MMA guys are by paying (or tuning in) to see them and the companies deliver them—or as many of them as they can, so they can continue to succeed. Better the fans decide than some secret consortium of shady people in dark, smoke filled rooms, I say.
A true ranking system will never work b/c MMAth has shown to be completely flawed. I don’t particularly care who holds what belt, I just want to see good fights. It is really up to the fans to put pressure on the UFC/PRIDE brass to get the fights they want.
Bryan: I dont entirely agree with that. I honestly think there has to be some kinda charistmatic factor to a fighter (definitly not as much as in wrestling considering thats more sports “entertainment” anyway) BUT u definitly need to show some charcter. Militech was an amazing fighter who was on top of his game BUT his matches were boring and he himself was a very plain boring guy and he was not as popular a champ in UFC compared to guys like Tito Ortiz or Randy Couture. In the case of Fedor I think its pretty recognized by PRIDE fans that this guy is just amazing…I mean c’mon how can u NOT like a guy who gets dropped ON HIS HEAD and still goes on to win? I think UNLESS ur an amazing fighter with a huge highlight reel of knockouts or wins, u need some type of charisma or nobody is really going to care about u. But u are right u can be an amazing personality but if ur being KO left and right ur pretty much done as well.
But I agree with u whole heartidly on the problems with a governing body..it just sadly wont work in a “realistic” world.
BTW…non MMA related…to be honest Florida got the number 2 spot becuase USC lost…simple as that (and Im a USC alumni) Nobody wanted to see Michigan/Ohio St II. Florida was the only team left. I just feel sorry for all the LSU fans that bought 1000s of Rosebowl tixs in advance and now their team isnt going to be there. lol.
The MMA & Boxing systems are both flawed and overtime will breakdown. It has already happened in boxing and will at some point happen in MMA.
The only system that would work is the have a true MONOPOLY, with one MMA organization having all the fighters (and lower ranks) under their name brand. Just like MLB and NFL are the only true sporting events for baseball and football respectively.
Now, some fans will say that this monopoly would be unfair to fighters and their salaries. And I agree. Therefore, just like in MLB and the NFL, there needs to be a checks and balances system. This would be through a fighters union. This union would make sure the payscale is proper for each fighter.
This would create the best of both worlds. We would have all the fighters being able to compete against each other, without the worries of fighters not getting their true market value.
I cringe when I hear guys like Mr. Penn (BJ’s older brother) talk about how his Showtime concept is so much more superior. It is just another boxing concept with more bells and whistles on it, which will always fail at some point.
Unfortunatly a fighter’s union will never happen either because any MMA owner will dissallow it. Unions (like most sports unions) are really a source of headaches for most owners (case in point the NHL strike and the numerouis MLB strikes), thus the reason why after all these years the WWE (and any other wrestling fed) has NEVER allowed a union for wrestlers. I highly doubt if there was a organized MMA they wouldnt allow a union hell K-1, Shooto and “fighter friendly” IFL dont have a union for their fighters.
JOSH:
I’m not sure I would say that Wrestling is per se cyclical. I think the biggest problem was the overexposure of stars like Hogan, Austin and The Rock through the expanding medium of Pay Per View and more TV hours being given to the stars. It’s fundamentally diminishing marginal utility theory in practice: you give people too much of something they like, they will begin to turn off to it.
As for the build up of champions and contenders through feeding them easier opponents, I understand the premise of giving them some camera time to shine although it still is puzzling that in their prime years, Fedor and Silva are being given less than great opposition to maintain a good winning streak given their talents. They aren’t exactly down at the skill level of a Primo Carnera where careful booking (and some dive making in Carnera’s case) was neccessary to keep the train running. And to be honest, I’m not sold on just how many people would know who Fedor is as he is not in the UFC nor is he even acknowledged on UFC TV or PPV (and rightfully so). However, as mentioned, the universal ranking system would work in MMA for the very same reason that it won’t work in Boxing: the sanctioning body/promotion would be put into awkward situations where the logical booking seen by even the common fan would be interpromotional/unification. It would essentially create a borderless MMA/Boxing world, which goes against the very premise of promotions and sanctioning bodies.
AJAX:
Yes, there is some significant variation in the rules between organizations, which is another element of the ranking system which would be hard to objectively measure. However, beating a quality opponent irregardless of the organizational rules is still a quality achievement. Yes, you can argue that one set of rules favors one fighter over another (such as PRIDE favoring strikers such as Wanderlei Silva & Mauricio ‘Shogun’ Rua vs. UFC favoring grapplers), but at the same time, the rules are reflective of the society at the time in their region more than the quality of the champion. For example, in 1958, Archie Moore was involved in a fight of the year against Yvon Durelle where he almost was murdered in the first round (dropped 3 times and staggering around) and if it was modern referees/commissions, it would have been halted there instead of letting him come back into the fight and ultimately KO Durelle.
My point is that, simply, yes there are rules variations, but the rules in of themselves are not going to be significant hinderances so long as you anticipate what the rules will be (IE: Wanderlei Silva should be preparing for a fight where he can’t through soccer kicks to a downed opponent’s head). Unless the fighter is completely reliant to the moves which have been forbidden (kicks and knees to the downed opponent in the US & elbows in PRIDE), it should not be a truly big factor short of them screwing up and executing an illegal move, causing a DQ (like Anderson Silva vs. Yushin Okami). It does make certain fights where, if the rules of the organization were in effect, potentially different, but at the same time, the fighters would have been cognizant of the rules in effect and would have most likely taken a different approach to defending themselves than they did.
Bryan:
Isn’t the BCS ranking system a series of rankings that are compiled together and averaged out through some formula? If I remember correctly, it includes human polling (which is inherently more biased than a computer system’s). My argument was that a computer generated ranking system such as Boxrec’s or even the IBO’s would be more equitable (assuming that the initial criteria to determine re-ranking after fights and also initial placement in the rankings was as realistic as possible, since it would be impossible to be perfect when it comes to a computer’s computations).
Of course, no ranking system would ever be truly equitable as computers are set in stone and may not realize mitigating circumstances that justifies exemptions (such as TK’s ‘win’ over Fedor being illegitimate even by RINGS rules at the time) and human based systems are flawed due to human nature and favoritism to certain fighters and/or styles. In addition, as mentioned before/above, factors like varying rules and criteria used to judge fighters would make it that much harder for a system to mention it.
Nonetheless, I think it is very hard to argue that having no universally recognized ranking system and allowing every mom and pop sanctioning body/promotion to make their own champions and potentially pad their own top ten rankings with less than very good quality opponents (I wonder who would fill out the bottom 5 of the UFC HW top 10, for example) is better than having a ranking system which is full of quality opposition. And although I fear that the Pandora’s box of the sanctioning bodies/promotions will prevent any chance of going back to an early 1900s Boxing world where the top 10 rankings were all inclusive and not just on a sphere of influence (IBF, WBA, WBC or UFC, PRIDE, HERO*S), I still think that for the long term health of the sports (particularly MMA, which is in its growth stage) will be reliant on having a larger pool of opposition to build up as THE fighters that fans should be going out to watch.
After all, Joe Louis, Muhammad Ali & Mike Tyson were three of the biggest drawing Boxing superstars (and the 3 biggest drawing HW) of all time because they were dismantling the generally regarded best with relative ease. Now with no clarity in Boxing’s heavyweight division, the best they can hope for is a unified champion who will take on anyone and prove that they are a durable champion (such as Lennox Lewis in recent years).
Im guessing tomer ur not a wrestlng fan because wrestling IS cyclical. Its a proven fact, early 80s Hogan was on top and EVERYONE watched. Around mid 90s Hulkamania was dying and no one cared when guys like Bret Hart and Shawn Michaels were on top of the world. Then came Austin, DX and on the WCW side NWO which sparked a bigger popularity for wrestling than when Hogan was on top. After Austin, Rock, DX became too boring people stopped watching again which is where we are right now because ratings are super low as well as PPV revenue. Wrestling is very much cylical which is why McMahon isnt too worried that wrestling isnt ruling the world because it only takes ONE idea, angle or superstar to explode and make WWE mainstream popular again. It has NOTHING to do with giving people too much of what they like…its more or less having an idea and beating it too death (ie Rock and Austins millions of comebacks, reforming DX, NWO AND ECW when they were all just basterdized versions of themselves) with no change, variation and nothing to excite olf fans or new ones.
Also the feeding of nobodies to Fedor and Silva isnt puzzling its simply the lack of star talent (plus the factor of Injuries which took Fedor out of the game for the majority of the year) and the fact PRIDE wants to runa GP every year and put their champs in it. Both guys have fought plenty of quality opponents…but quality opponents dont just grow on trees. I mean seriously right now who does Fedor or Silva have left to fight? Fedor has beaten Nog (who is a top three BJJ fighter in the world) TWICE, will eat Hunt at NYE and will probably make short work of Barnett. The only person who can give Fedor some semblance of a challenge would be Mirko and yes I believe PRIDE probably screwed that up with both figthers planning on possibly fighting elsewhere in 2007.
Silva has beaten everyone thrown at him, INCLUDING a few heavyweights in the OWGP. He has beaten Arona who beat him, and wont face Shogun who everyone in thier right mind believes could be the ONLY man to beat Silva. Silva will probably face lil Nog next year but other than that…again who is there left to face?
the PRIDE champions are (and this isnt to say they are BEST in the world) of very high class that I think its better to at least have them fight SOMEBODY then have them wait for somone to catch up to their skill level. Then we would NEVER see them figth.
JOSH:
You just admitted what I said in my previous response to you: Hogan, Rock & Austin were overexposed because they kept on having them beat up people with their schtick with little to no variation (especially in the later years when relatively unique feuds were running thin). In effect that means that the law of diminishing marginal utility was in effect because the fans became bored of seeing the same old, same old. Yes, there will be another growth period (most likely, unless McMahon can’t find another great formula, which I seriously doubt since I consider him one of the greatest promoters of all time in any industry and the greatest Wrestling promoter of all time).
My point is this: Wrestling is (generally) cyclical in the promotional sense due to the overexposure of the big stars of the moment to try and cash in as much as possible leading to a faster burnout and a down period where business becomes stagnant or even falling. However, it is not truly cyclical in a business sense where the business reacts heavily to recessionary or expansionary trends of the market place. It is an industry which is reliant on variation of the product and keeping the fans glued to the TV screens and reaching for their wallets to buy PPVs, tickets and/or merchandise.
As for Fedor and Silva being tossed less than great fighters, my biggest issue is that Fedor is going to defend his title against Mark Hunt, who was last seen getting submitted by Josh Barnett. I don’t understand the logic of booking Hunt against Fedor as a reward for losing to Barnett, who should be getting the title shot instead (if Mirko really doesn’t want to face Fedor on 12/31). Mark Hunt is slightly more deserving of a title shot than a Hidehiko Yoshida would be (and at least Yoshida would be somewhat more competitive with Fedor, at least when it comes to the ground; also, Yoshida did submit Hunt when you examine them head to head). Fedor is the number one Heavyweight in the world, by far, and to have him placed with a guy who might be in the top 20 in a title fight is embarassing, to be honest. If there is a dearth of opposition, then PRIDE should be trying to get higher level opposition into the fold to challenge him rather than throwing together a fight that not only will probably end in 2-3 minutes in Fedor’s favorite but won’t be a big drawing card. Still, a few opponents who may provide decent competition would be Fabricio Werdum and Sergei Kharitonov (although he lost pretty badly in his last few outings).
As for Silva, besides Little Nog or Arona III, he could fight Alistair Overeem (although he did recent lose to both of the aforementioned which would hurt his credibility) or he could possibly face Kevin Randleman (although at this point he’s pretty much jobbing to the top guys, but he always has that one punch ala Cro Cop in the 2004 HW GP). But yes, Silva does have a relative dearth of big names he hasn’t fought and beaten as well. He may be well served to move up to Heavyweight to expand his opportunities, or perhaps someone like Murilo Bustamante, Denis Kang or even Dan Henderson again may be able to challenge him again.
My problem isn’t the quality of opponents that Fedor and Silva faced, far from it. It has more to do with the fact that Silva or Fedor could theoretically lose a ‘warm-up’ bout and still have their belts (which is what happened to Takanori Gomi). Also, the fact that Silva had his belt put up less than great opposition (Tamura & Kanehara) is annoying, too, but that has more to do with Japanese politics to draw in a bigger crowd in hoping the native beats the gaijin champion.
Honestly u cant compare wreslting to a typical buisness model (thats like trying to make applesauce with oranges). So yes wrestling IS very cyclical, no if and buts about it.
As for the quality of champions issue…the reason why Fedor is fighting Hunt is simple. Barnett is hurt, Mirko is coming off of foot surgery and PRIDE wanted to make sure both men were 100% when they faced Fedor. Becuase they arent and NO ONE wants to see a Fedor/Nog IV then who else is there to fight? Originally it was going to be Yoshida…but c’mon that guy has no chance either. At least with Hunt they can pull up the K-1 WGP reign and the fact he has never been knocked out.
Why is it a title shot? Well simply to appease the masses who keep claiming trhere arent enough title shots. Otherwise yes it would have been a typical non title match (and in this case u just cant please everybody). And for those who argue those matches shouldnt happen…I posted this on MMA critic’s web blog. Would u rather have ur champion fight as often as possible or fight once to twice a year against quality opponents (which is similiar to how UFC champs do it). To be honest I am in the middle because I dont mind either way…just as long as whoever fights for the belt deserves the belt. The names u claim like Werdum or Kharitonov have less of a legitimacy then Hunt does (as well as less of a chance).
U pulled up a bunch of names for Silva but u also explained why none of them deserve a shot either (c’mon Randleman?) And Bustamante is old and would have no shot against Silva and Henderson already lost to Silva so I doubt he would jump up a division when he is already king in the WW. And Kang jumping up though intriguing doesnt seem smart on his stand point.
As for losing a warm up match…yea it sucks but hey going back to a few paragraphs back, would u rather see less of ur champ or see him fight more often. Not everybody is champion caliber especially when ur champs are of top value. Look at the UFC LHW division…whose next after Tito? Rasheed? Forrest? C’mon! Just like the WW…I still think Sanchez is at least a few fights away from challenging GSP. Im not going to be suprised at all if most of 2007 will be just rematch fights for the title because the gap in talent is too huge. I would rather see a champion put his belt on the line when the opponent deserves it. If the opponent beats the champ then hey lets see them do it again. If ur the best U should be able to beat the same person twice (thats why BJ sadly isnt WW champ). It sucks sure…but again its a case where u just cant please everyone because I know people will complain about Silva and the rest of the champs only defending twice a year. (and yea I agree with u on the early Silva title defense total BS but thats japanese politics…gotta love it).
Personally, my preference of a champion is a Joe Louis-type champion who constantly fought the best (or close to the best if they weren’t available) and put his belt up on the line in every fight since he won the Heavyweight title. In my mind, a champion should always be offering his belt on the line when he enters the ring (besides catch weight bouts or if you move up or down in weight classes, of course). If you’re a champion, in my mind, you should always be ready to defend your claim to the title and not decide when you get to put it on the line. I’m not a fan of the numerous Boxing champions of the past who lost non-title bouts but then refused to grant rematches for the belt and I think it is inherently unfair to both the fighters and the fans to have a champion who can lose 100 non-title bouts, but win 1 or 2 title bouts a year and be champion for 100 years.
Oh, and I don’t mind the occasional ‘tune up’ fight, but if it’s in your weight class as a champion, you should place the belt on the line just to show you are somewhat serious about the bout’s significance and to give the ‘no hoper’ a chance of winning your belt if they pull a ‘Cinderella Man’.
Fine I agree with u on some points on that…but dude this isnt boxing? There are not that many competiots in ANY division (except maybe LW) where the champ can defend every other month (and even then boxing champs someitmes fight once a year for the belt). So YES if u want the champ to defend the belt everytime he steps in the ring…I agree with u they should BUT not against people who dont deserve it. PRIDE cant do it becuase again not enough top level competiotrs and constant GP fights. BUT they DO (unlike boxing) grant rematches to those who beat them (Arona, the guy who beat Gomi whose name escpes me for a second, and soon Misaki) so u cant fault anyone there.
Marcus Aurelio is the guy you are thinking of. And I don’t mind champions fighting 2-3 times a year, so long as there is a reasonable effort to give him the top possible contenders (even if they end up not being top 10 due to a dearth of challengers). After all, the world of Joe Louis where most of the money was made off of live attendance is long gone (since TV didn’t exist until the tail end of his career and PPV was around 40 years away), and TV and PPV allows for less shows to be run for the same (if not more) profits as beforehand. And the occasional ‘scrub’ challenger is fine, too, so long as the champion isn’t feasting on them.
As long as there is a reasonable effort to give them top contenders? U dont think PRIDE is doing that? Except for the early Silva defenses I think all the PRIDE champs have been pretty far given the right contenders. I dont think anyone in PRIDE has been overlooked as a challenger.
Some would probably argue that Takanori Gomi could face guys like Joachim Hansen & Vitor Ribiero (if PRIDE brought him in). Also, if Gilbert Melendez beats Tatsuya Kawajiri on 12/31, he’ll become a legitimate contender. As for Dan Henderson, there is Paulo Filho, Denis Kang & Kazuo Misaki III (which will happen) as potential challengers. Not horrible amounts of overlooked contenders, but nonetheless, the opportunities are there.
Yes and they will be met. C’mon the LW and WW dvisions were JUST established in 2005. In that time they both had GPs with the WW having 2. Give them a chance. If by 2008 Gomi hasnt faced Hansen or Ishida in title matches OR Henderson hasnt faced Filho or Kang for a title then Ill owe u a coke.