One thing I don't understand about MMA...

Discussion in 'MMA Forum' started by horst, Jun 22, 2011.


  1. horst

    horst Guest

    ...why does Joe Silva, Dana White, the UFC, the fighters in the UFC, MMA fans and the MMA world at large not believe in the value of tune-ups after lay-offs, so that when we see the top guys meet in big fights, they are both at their best?

    For those of you who don't know me at all, I'm very much a boxing fan first and foremost (you can find one of my "Top 50 Wins" series threads on the Classic main page just now), and a relative newcomer to MMA (first MMA event I ever watched was UFC84 Penn vs Sherk in 2008), but I consider myself a big fan of MMA now, I think it's a fantastic sport.

    My reason for this thread is this: whenever a boxer comes off an 18-month or more lay-off or comes back after undergoing surgery, they have a tune-up fight (or more than one) in order to shake off the ring rust, get back into the groove, and ease themselves back in so they can be at their best for their next meaningful fight.


    In the UFC, Silva, White and the fighters themselves seem to either not understand this or simply don't believe in it, and I'd be interested to know what hardcore MMA fans think about this issue.

    Consider this:

    - Vitor Belfort vs Anderson Silva, Feb 2011
    Belfort's last fight: September 2009
    Time out of the cage: 17 months
    Circumstances to consider: Belfort has never been knocked out on his feet before, despite spending most of his career fighting lightheavyweights
    Result: KO'd in the 1st round

    - Shogun Rua vs Jon Jones, March 2011
    Rua's last fight: May 2010
    Time out of the cage: 10 months
    Circumstances to consider: Rua undergoes knee surgery in June 2010. Rua has never been stopped by strikes in his career, and has never been dominated in any fight
    Result: Utterly dominated and TKO'd

    - Brock Lesnar vs Shane Carwin, July 2010
    Lesnar's last fight: July 2009
    Time out of the cage: 12 months
    Circumstances to consider: Lesnar is seriously ill between October 2009 and January 2010, is unable to train for a long period due to this condition. Lesnar has never been knocked down by strikes.
    Result: Takes a horrible beating for the majority of round 1, before the over-muscular Carwin gasses out completely and allows Brock to submit him in round 2

    - Rampage Jackson vs Rashad Evans, May 2010
    Rampage's last fight: March 2009
    Time out of the cage: 14 months
    Circumstances to consider: Rampage takes time off training after his fight in March '09, and even announces his retirement in September '09. Rampage has only lost one of his last nine fights, and that loss was a hotly-disputed and controversial points decision.
    Result: A toothless and energy-free performance from Jackson sees him deservedly outpointed by Evans



    All four of these guys came straight off either a long lay-off (over 12 months) or came off surgery or illness (meaning they weren't training for long periods), but then got pitched straight back into a huge fight with a top-class opponent.

    And all four were pretty dire.



    What do you think, should the top guys be allowed a tune-up if they want one to get them back up to full capability again, or is it right that they get thrown back in at the deep end right away?

    :bbb
     
  2. Sam Spade

    Sam Spade Member Full Member

    166
    0
    Jun 6, 2011
    You have to be 100% even against an overmatched opponent. Top boxers can be at 80% and dominate most lower level fights, in mma you cant do that because there are so many ways into the fight. A full camp takes a lot out of a fighter as well and unless youre fighting an absolute bum (and can take it easy but gain nothing) you cant half-ass it in training. Camps and training and all the things that go with a it are a big piece of the mileage on a fighters body and you dont want to waste it on questionable fights.
     
  3. zarman

    zarman Guest

    I agree, unless they are the champion and have to fight the top contender it doesn't make any sense at all.
     
  4. BobDigi5060

    BobDigi5060 East Side MMA Full Member

    10,898
    2
    Feb 7, 2006
    #1 reason is pride, followed by philosophy.

    Matchmaking in boxing and MMA couldn't be more different. When you got a huge number of fighters under one banner (UFC) its nearly impossible to land a "tuneup" after a layoff or lose.

    Pretty much all the fights in the UFC are virtually even matchups, whether it be two 40 something year olds like Couture/Coleman or Leben/Stann.. Men move up and down the ladder.

    No bum of the month in that organization to scrap off the floor, nor does UfC matchmaking bring in cans from outside the organization.

    This is what I like about UFC matchmaking and why I despise top boxing promoters, and the boxers who control their own destiny.

    No guts no glory.

    "I'm not fighting Pacman this year.. Just give me a JMM or Victor Ortiz while Pacman continues to view OSDT as jumping through a ring of fire."

    "OSDT? I'm scared of needles, but how dare he! You will be hearing from my lawyer while we try to 1 up one another in fighting guys like Mosley and Marquez."

    It's moves like this that made me turn to and appreciate MMA that much more.
     
  5. greathamza

    greathamza Boxing Junkie Full Member

    10,652
    1
    Feb 14, 2011
    A lot of ppl will be butt hurt over that and start to attack him at press conferences and so on
     
  6. Count Pacula

    Count Pacula Cashweight Thrillionaire Full Member

    1,237
    0
    May 19, 2011
    I have no complaints when it comes to MMA matchmaking. They are doing an excellent job. In Boxing you get main events where guys like Chavez Jr. and Canelo Alvarez respectively fight bums or guys who don't pose much of a threat. In MMA guys like Jose Aldo and Jon Jones neither have the option to pad their record nor do they want to do so. I'm not saying it's good to rush a young, talented fighter. But it's kinda ridiculous when he's already had 30+ fights and is still being over-protected. And yes, I understand why these things occur. But it still does not erase the frustration.
     
  7. horst

    horst Guest

    I think you have posted this in the wrong thread. My opening post was concerned only with fighters returning after lengthy lay-offs or returning after surgery or illness. I have no idea what relevance your post has to this issue.
     
  8. horst

    horst Guest

    Ok, rather than throw Belfort, Lesnar, Rampage and Rua into those fights where they performed very poorly, what about if they'd been allowed these fights before facing the opposition they did fight:

    - Belfort vs Akiyama/Leben

    - Lesnar vs Gonzaga/Struve

    - Rampage vs Brilz/Ortiz

    - Rua vs Hamill/Matyushenko

    What would have been the problem with these fights? Even if those holding titles (Lesnar & Rua) had to have these fights on a UFC Live/Fight Night card or something while the other top fighters (Velasquez vs Carwin and Jones vs Evans) fought for the interim title until the champ had had his tune-up.

    I honestly think this would be fairer. It's really unfair to expect guys to be able to perform at their best pitching them straight in after periods of convalescence and inactivity.
     
  9. TheBradyHawkes

    TheBradyHawkes ۞ Full Member

    2,209
    1
    Jul 5, 2008
    I really don't think there is such a thing as a tune-up fight in the UFC. Of course style-wise you could make matchups that better suit the fighter in question, but all of these guys are high level MMA fighters. What happens if that "tune-up" fight doesn't go according to plan? Now your superstar is set back another notch. I personally like the philosophy they seem to use. Make the best fight regardless.
     
  10. BobDigi5060

    BobDigi5060 East Side MMA Full Member

    10,898
    2
    Feb 7, 2006
    Those are all fights that Shogun, Rampage, Lesnar, and Vitor should win, but are still very tough matchups.

    Struve is a handful, and he probably would have beaten Lesnar if he can stay on his feet long enough.. Gonzaga is likely to knock Lesnar into next week as he had Carwin rocked.

    Akiyama or Leben would have had Belfort in a dog fight. Both opponents are hittable, but I wouldn't count either out.

    Rampage should/could handle either opponent, and the same goes for Shogun.

    The matchups you choose underline my point in that their are no stiffs in the UFC.

    By tuneup do you mean a non title fight for the champ? Because I'm telling you man, I see the matchups you choose for Lesnar and Belfort at the time being virtually even.

    I think the reason why Belfort lost was because he came down in weight (not sure who/what division he is fighting in at Rio).

    I'm just not sure it would really make a difference.. So many ways to lose in MMA, so many different styles, strengths an weaknesses, thus twice as many "bad matchups" as there is in boxing.
     
  11. The Mighty One

    The Mighty One Well-Known Member Full Member

    2,988
    167
    Nov 20, 2008
    That is why most UFC events are good from top to bottom and most boxing events are one sided snooze fests.....it seems that every main event match is boxing is a "tune up" until the money is right.
     
  12. greathamza

    greathamza Boxing Junkie Full Member

    10,652
    1
    Feb 14, 2011
    belfort could have got Ed Herman or CB Dollaway as a tune up fight

    Shogun has it more difficult as he is in a stacked division but i think he could make it against Ortiz or Brandon Vera

    Lesnar...he got exposed as a big dude but cant take a punch for ****

    Rampage isnt Rampage anymore he is this safe dude who is going for points and not doing those slams and stuff as he use to in pride
     
  13. leejunfan777

    leejunfan777 Guest

    dana gives them tune ups when they loose
     
  14. Primate

    Primate Boxing Addict Full Member

    4,833
    6
    Nov 16, 2010
    Silva needed an opponent. It was a title defence, and at the time there was no one else at middleweight. Belfort asked for the fight with Silva, which generated some bad blood between the two, as they had been training partners in the past.

    Lesnar/Carwin was a title unification. Lesnar was out with diverticulitis, and while he was out Mir and Carwin fought for the interim title (as bull**** as that was). When Lesnar came back, the first order of business was to unify the interim belt and his own. Granted, Struve would've been an interesting fight.

    This is a tricky one. Rampage has been toothless for a while now, and this fight was basically par for the course from Rampage in recent years. It was a close enough fight, and at the time Rashad was on the p4p list, so it's not like the time off really hurt Rampage.

    Rua needed to defend his title, and if you believed some of the Shogun nuthuggers then Jones was a tune up fight.

    One of the things I love about the UFC is that the title fights are almost always meaningful defences. Say what you will about them sheltering their prospects (coughbispingcough), and the occasional bull**** title shot (Dan Hardy), but for the most part their title fights are fair match ups.

    There are also very few undefeated fighters in MMA in general. The UFC will purposely match up guys who are undefeated (Silva/Machida). I like this aspect of UFC match making, and it's one of the things that turned me off boxing. Just look at boxrec and see all the guys with losing records who are fight guys that are like 18-0. There's nothing wrong with starting out with a few sure things to get some experience, but it gets to a point where it just becomes ridiculous.
     
  15. CrimsonBeast

    CrimsonBeast Active Member Full Member

    732
    0
    Dec 8, 2007
    I agree with the OP. Tune up fights are something from boxing that should be borrowed. Ring rust is real and these fights will be good for the sport. I really hated to see shogun rua lose to forest griffin and a tune up fight would of prevented that :-(