Friend of our site

MMA Headlines


Bleacher Report

MMA Fighting

MMA Torch

MMA Weekly

Sherdog (News)

Sherdog (Articles)

Liver Kick

MMA Mania

Bloody Elbow

MMA Ratings

Rating Fights

Yahoo MMA Blog

Search this site

Latest Articles

News Corner

MMA Rising

Audio Corner


Sherdog Radio

Eddie Goldman

Video Corner

Fight Hub

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."

« | Home | »

Eddie Goldman interviews Thomas Hauser

By Zach Arnold | June 30, 2008

Print Friendly and PDF

Download the interview here. Listen to the interview and give me your thoughts about what Mr. Hauser says about MMA.

Topics: Media, MMA, Zach Arnold | 9 Comments » | Permalink | Trackback |

9 Responses to “Eddie Goldman interviews Thomas Hauser”

  1. Big Bill Bob says:

    I loathe this interview. Eddie, It appears you failed at establishing any valid arguement against this boxing dinosaur. The reason why martial arts practitioners did not strike on the ground, or to the face was a matter of honor. Over the course of evolution people recognize this is no longer a realistic method of self defense. Sort of like how Bruce Lees fighting system amalgamated any useful methods and zero impractical. Im actually disappointed you didnt put up a better arguement Eddie.

  2. The Citizen says:

    This guy really hates mma. Perhaps he has some personal friends that got hurt in the sport, or some other hidden vendetta against freestyle combat. No one can truly say, but this dude is a hater, no question.

  3. Tomer Chen says:

    Considering that Hauser, like many of the other Boxing writers out there (such as Bert Sugar) have devoted a significant portion of their lives towards writing about ‘The Manly Art’ (Hauser is most famous as the writer for the most famous (and IMO best) Muhammad Ali biography: “Muhammad Ali: His Life and Times”), they would implicitly ‘circle the wagon’ when they feel as though their sport is being attacked by a newcomer.

    “Who Killed Davey Moore?” by Bob Dylan sums up the traditional Boxing writer mindset best:

    “Not me,” says the boxing writer,
    Pounding print on his old typewriter,
    Sayin’, “Boxing ain’t to blame,
    There’s just as much danger in a football game.”
    Sayin’, “Fist fighting is here to stay,
    It’s just the old American way.
    It wasn’t me that made him fall.
    No, you can’t blame me at all.”

    In summation: Boxing writers always push back against criticisms of the sports violence by pointing out how other big sports (such as football) have inherent violence yet they quickly turn around in cases of other combat sports (primarily MMA today) and decry it as being ultraviolent just like what happened with them and try to brush off the calls on the seemingly hypocritical attitude.

    I believe the scientific term for this type of behavior is cognitive dissonance.

  4. Peter Peterson says:

    Serious question. Why not post Carson’s Corner over Goldman’s show?

    Carson is a Goldmanite, but at least the interviews are good. This latest one with Frank Shamrock deserves to be heard.

  5. jim allcorn says:

    Hmmmm …

    Interesting interview to listen to for me as Hauser is my favorite boxing writer, but at the end of the day I don’t think he made any really substansive arguments against the sport of MMA. Though he tried, they just weren’t any more capable of holding water than the typical boxing abolishionist’s arguments against pugilism IMO.

    Hauser’s whole “MMA is too violent while boxing is as well, but it has a long cultural tradition thus it ought to be allowed” argument just didn’t make a whole lot of sense to me as someone who is a lifetime boxing fan, boxer & martial artist. Rather than celebrating MMA’s failure at legalization in NYS, he’d have been better suited at simply explaining his anti-MMA stance as a matter of strong personal preference rather than trying to portray himself as some sort of idealistic pacifist. THAT just came across as elitist & lame.

  6. Tomer Chen says:

    The funny part is the history of Professional Boxing in the 1890s through 1920 (when the Walker Law in NY was passed which established the current commission and regulations) is basically a huge mess with regards to actual regulation of the sport; apparently, there were lots of temperance and ‘moral right’ groups that basically called Boxing the same exact things Boxing writers have been saying today. I even brought up the similarities in their progression in this article.

  7. Big Bill Bob says:

    Peter Peterson I fully agree if his podcast should be included in the Audio Corner, I’ve sent Zach a recommendation for it. Its probably my favourite mma radio show currently and he really asks questions most media outlets are terrified too. +1 for Carsons Corner.

  8. D. Capitated says:

    Hauser’s done similar pieces in writing before, so I decided to skip it. The one thing I’ve always agreed with him on is that there’s a strong contingent among the hardcore fans who seem to have no interest in seeing the best fight the best. As he puts it, the titles are “fungible”. No better example might exist than the attitudes of people towards Noguiera and his “heavyweight title”, who’s one win in the last 12 months has a lot of people talking about him as if he is the true heavyweight champion of the world instead of the guy who beat him (Fedor) or the guy who is the actual UFC heavyweight champ (Couture).

  9. Peter Peterson says:

    Big Bill Bob, the problem Carson has to overcome is that he started off as a joke show a few years back, basically just attacking everyone for a cheap laugh or two. That has definitely changed now and it is really the only show I listen to with any regularity. I enjoy the interviews quite a bit.


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