Quote of the Day 2: Herb Dean Talks Kimbo Slice vs Roy Nelson
by Kid Nate on Oct 2, 2009 10:08 PM EDT
in MMA News
Email
Print
MMAWeekly: Firstly, Roy claimed that you didn't stop the fight in the first round because of Kimbo's status on the show. How do you respond to that?
Dean: Well, it's not that complicated. I'm there to protect the fighter's safety. Kimbo got up after that round pretty quick and spry, right? If I stop a fight it's because I believe a fighter's not fighting back, because he can't. And there's reasons why a fighter can't fight back. One is a positional reason like Roy had on Kimbo. It was positional. Could (Kimbo) handle blows and continue to fight? He did. He made it to the end of the (first) round and continued to fight. If the blows were any less, I would have actually stood them up. The blows were strong enough to warrant being on the ground, but they weren't strong enough for me to stop the fight.
...
MMAWeekly: So you felt the blows that Kimbo was taking in the second round were, whereas the ones in the first round weren't?
Dean: Well, I believe that the blows were solid blows. In the first round, they were solid blows, just like in the second round, but in the second round, it was the beginning of the round that he was down there. I can't allow him - he was not going to improve his position, he was not going to solve it - I couldn't allow him five minutes of that in the second round. Could I allow him to take it for 30 seconds in the first? Sure.
Referee Herb Dean talking to MMA Weekly.
I can't remember if I went on the record bitching about Dean's reffing of the match or not, but I must admit, he makes a compelling case for himself.
78 comments
|
2 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
The rule is flawed.
right now it’s something like “if a fighter is not intelligently defending himself” it should be “if a fighter is not intelligently defending himself AND this is causing the fighter to take damage.”
Kimbo would have lost that fight on points anyway, and to be honest i wouldn’t want to watch him get pitty patted on the head for 4 more minutes, but that stoppage still feels wrong to me.
Every stoppage now is either too early or too late
Besides Big John McCarthy I personally think Herb Dean is the best referee out there.
Maybe he has had a few bad calls but not like Mirgliaotta or Mazagattti.
The fight itself he ref’d it perfect, imo, round 1 there was no reason to stop the fight and round 2 when Kimbo couldnt defend himself he stopped the fight.
The fact is none of Roy’s punches were really damaging but when Kimbo was pinned and couldnt defend them Dean called a stop to the figfht.
by bigdmmafan on Oct 2, 2009 10:23 PM EDT reply actions 1 recs
This isn't wrestling.
a fighter shouldn’t lose because he’s pinned. Roy should have used his dominant positioning to finish the fight not rely on the ref to do it for him.
He didn’t lose because he was pinned, he lost because he was relying on the Homer Simpson gameplan: “Maybe if I let him hit me long enough, he’ll get tired.”
His defense for getting punched in the head was to keep getting punched in the head, and if there’s no sign of the attacker letting up and every sign that the “defender” is going to sit there and get punched for the entire round, there’s no reason for the fight to continue.
Baki
The rule states that if you cant intelligently defend yourself the ref can stop the fight.
I’m aware that you dont agree with the rule but that is the rule and so until it is changed by athletic commissions then Herb Dean did his job and did it well.
Do I agree that Roy should have done more to finish the fight? Sure. Does it make it a bad stoppage on Dean’s part? No.
Please read my first comment.
you are absolutely right, however I feel that this rule is flawed.
I do wish that, as Breen said, the "intelligent defense" condition for stoppage was coupled with "meaningful offense,"
Keep in mind too that this was an exhibition fight and not a professional bout.
It should allow a little more leeway for the ref to call the bout because one fighter is completely outclassed and the outcome has been determined.
You bring up a valid point
especially in this situation and I wouldnt mind seeing the rule get changed to that. I dont think that you will ever have a time where there are not controversial stoppages.
If you look at simply 103 people argued over:
Koscheck’s defeat of Trigg
Daley’s defeat of Kampmann
Dos Santos defeat of Cro Cop
Now I had no problems with any of the stoppages there or last night but a lot of people did and I dont think even if they change the rule to a meaningingful offense along with intelligently defending yourself that it will change controversial stoppages.
IMO the rule is probably more old school
I also think it represents what would’ve happened if it were a real fight. Someone who pins you like that could quickly blind, paralyze or kill you. The greatest game is emulating murdering and maiming after all.
by asa on Oct 3, 2009 1:10 AM EDT up reply actions
I felt like the stoppage was consistent with the standard that’s been set by other fights, and about the best you could ask for given the circumstances. Herb may catch a little flak for the way it went, but if he’d let Kimbo lie there in a crucifix taking punches for 3 minutes, the internet would have exploded.
I do wish that, as Breen said, the “intelligent defense” condition for stoppage was coupled with “meaningful offense,” but we’re not quite there yet.
150% more Ultimate than the leading competitor.
how would that have changed this situation?
just let Roy beat on him for the rest of the second round and then give Roy the decision?
let it go on for a while and force a standup?
neither are good solutions.
Follow me on Twitter @KidNate
Well, it’s more that I’m wishful about the culture of stoppages being a little different, so that Nelson wouldn’t have been able to gameplan for a stoppage like that. I feel that if there was more of a precedent that you have to establish meaningful offense, the fight may have gone differently. But that’s more of an “If I had my druthers” thing.
I was trying to convey in my comment that I think the stoppage was appropriate, fair, and consistent with other MMA fights, and there’s nothing Herb Dean could have done here to single-handedly change the standard for all fights.
150% more Ultimate than the leading competitor.
That's my position.
I thought the same thing with the Shivers-McSweeney fight. Sure, the decision was poor and there should have been a third round, but the result of that third round would have been McSweeney doing nothing and Shivers doing less and then McSweeney wins by decision.
The only way we’d get a different outcome would be if Shivers’s heart exploded so McSweeney could get a bonus.
I like using semi-colons; they make me feel smart.
Good answers under pressure
Go get that bread, Kimbo Slice. - Mike Fagan
by SouthAlaBamaRampage on Oct 2, 2009 10:31 PM EDT reply actions
Under pressure? He’s had weeks to think about how he would answer those questions.
Walla walla walla I'm an idiot.
by ufc4 on Oct 2, 2009 10:46 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
Not under pressure in that sense but under pressure to say the right thing
Go get that bread, Kimbo Slice. - Mike Fagan
by SouthAlaBamaRampage on Oct 2, 2009 10:51 PM EDT up reply actions
OK but the point still stands, he has had plenty of time to think about what he would say when the questions inevitably come.
Walla walla walla I'm an idiot.
agreed
Go get that bread, Kimbo Slice. - Mike Fagan
by SouthAlaBamaRampage on Oct 2, 2009 11:02 PM EDT up reply actions
Seems like a logical explanation to me, Roy could have finished the fight in the first if he chose to but he played it safe instead.
Walla walla walla I'm an idiot.
by ufc4 on Oct 2, 2009 10:34 PM EDT via mobile reply actions
I just don’t like the logic behind it I mean he would rather someone get their head blasted on then if a guy who is in an obvious fight ending position take it easy on him
Well by that logic fights should be ended if one fighter secures an armbar or RNC before the other guy even taps, right?
Walla walla walla I'm an idiot.
by ufc4 on Oct 2, 2009 10:46 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
oh I think it does if an armbar is locked in and the opponent is not trying to escape it and the only outcome would be someone getting hurt then the right thing to do is stop that fight isn’t that why ref’s are there anyway to protect the fighters
It doesn’t matter if the guy is trying to get out or any of that other stuff, all that matters is one guy is “in an obvious fight ending position”, right?
Walla walla walla I'm an idiot.
How does that not matter, just to be cleared I’m against the logic behind Herb’s statements I’m on the fence about that fight stoppage, but if it’s clear the guy is not getting out of a position that’s only gonna get him hurt and his opponent decides to save him the beatdown then yes the fight should be stopped
"That's only gonna get him hurt"
Roy was doing no damage. this is what im saying dont stop it unless the guy on top is mounting a respectable offense, otherwise you are stopping a fight because an opponent is “pinned”
Right
Nelson’s job isn’t to “save” Kimbo from getting beat down- it’s to beat Kimbo down.
Walla walla walla I'm an idiot.
by ufc4 on Oct 2, 2009 11:08 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Again I’m not talking about the Kimbo/Nelson stoppage but I don’t think a guy needs to put someones face through the canvas to warrant a stoppage
It’s not about putting someone’s face through the canvas, it’s about actually inflicting some punishment on a guy instead of just holding him down.
Walla walla walla I'm an idiot.
haha so it’s not enough to prove you can cause someone damage you have to actually do it that’s just silly
okay guy you need to relax I laugh because it’s funny not to be condascending and I thought my logic was pretty clear by this point I haven’t undermined your argument it’s your point of view and you are certainly entitled to it as I am entitled to disagree
What you are saying is some of the least logical drivel I have ever read on this site.
A ref can not stop a fight if a fighter is in the “look what I’m about to do” position. Just because a fighter has someone mounted and takes a couple shots doesn’t mean the fight should be stopped. By your logic, the Lutter/Silva fight should’ve been stopped when Lutter got the mount and tapped on Silva’s forehead a couple times, right?
Don't argue for the sake of arguing....
by Screwface on Oct 3, 2009 12:43 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
no actully that’s not what I have been saying at all what I was saying is what difference does it make of how hard the shots are unanswered blows are unanswered blows your preoccupation for seeing someones face getting smashed and hurt is troubling if someone can nullify another fighter pin him and put him and keep him in a position where he’s able to land as many blows as he likes why does he have to land shots that could potentially cause serious damage
Perhaps Roy should have smashed him once or twice really hard and then looked at Dean to tell him “are you going to stop it, because he ain’t moving and I can do this all day”.
Would anyone be complaining if Herb stopped it then, on the second blow, stopping it before Kimbo took a lot of pointless damage?
Well again I’m not talking about that fight because I’m pretty sure I would have let 30 seconds go if I was in Herb’s shoes however he definitely had him in a crucifix and if he felt like it could smash down on his head as many times as he liked because Kimbo wasn’t able to reverse or get out of that position
I can't be the only one
that watched that fight, let’s use the kimbo/nelson fight as the stand alone example of the rule of intelligent defense. Twice Kimbo got pinned and crucifixed, and twice he did absolutely nothing to defend himself. He tried bucking nelson once, other then that nothing. Now regardless of how hard you think Nelson was hitting Kimbo, the fact that doesn’t change is that Nelson was causing damage with every blow. How do we expect a ref to determine the amount of damage that’s being delivered to someone who is doing nothing to block shots or improve position? Does Roy have to drive his fist threw Kimbo’s skull? no, Roy did everything that the rule of stopping because your opponent can’t mount an intelligent defense states. Even if Roy wasn’t hitting as hard as he was, the rule still states that the ref stops the fight. I don’t like Herb all that much, but giving him flak, and having this particular conversation is pointless. Whether anyone likes it or not, the stoppage was justified simply because the criteria for the stoppage was met, all damage determines is when. If Nelson had being using elbows and hitting with less force, would we be having this same conversation, even if he was delivering less damage?
Perhaps not in those situations but a lot of time it would be. What about Franklin vs. Lutter, would that have been a good stoppage?
Walla walla walla I'm an idiot.
Definitely not, but based off my memory* Rich was in that armbar much less time than, for example, Filho was in his and also he wasn’t screaming in pain.
I can definitely agree it’s a fine line, though. Some fighters just have crazy flexible elbows (see Huerta, Roger) or are legally unchokeable (see Fitch, Jon).
I personally think there’s certainly a place for a ref stopping a fight if there’s a tight, prolonged armbar, because a ref’s job sometimes entails protecting a fighter from their own hubris, but I personally have no problem with a ref letting a dude get choked unconscious.
I personally think there’s certainly a place for a ref stopping a fight if there’s a tight, prolonged armbar, because a ref’s job sometimes entails protecting a fighter from their own hubris
I agree but that wasn’t really what I was arguing, drano was saying the fight should be stopped if a guy is “in an obvious fight ending position” which I would consider almost any submission attempt to be, at least one that is locked in.
Walla walla walla I'm an idiot.
Referee's in any sport have the hardest job
Because there are people that are cheering for or bet money on a fighter or team and so if that team or fighter loses people are gonna be pissed and say it was a bad call even if it wasnt.
Overall when you step into the ring or cage you understand that the referee can stop at any point same with the doctor and if you put yourself into that position where they feel the fight should be stopped than it’s kind of your fault.
Do the referee’s, doctor’s and judges all need to do a better job? Yes but when you step into the cage you understand what can happen.
Herb Dean did a great job, good explanation.
Meaningful offense needs to be added to the rule. That’s my opinion.
Follow me on Twitter @lelandroling
"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I’m not sure about the universe." - Albert Einstein
by Leland Roling on Oct 2, 2009 11:13 PM EDT reply actions 1 recs
Based on the current rules I agree, I love herb dean!
I also agree the current rules need to be modified.
Big Country better learn some decent ground n pound if he expects to last in the UFC. Controlling a guy on the ground and tapping his head with your fist isnt a very solid way to win a fight. I have problems with Lesnar’s hammer fists too but at least he puts some effort into them and throws with bad intentions. Roy seemed quite content to control Kimbo on the ground and just flop him to a stoppage.
Herb Dean did the right thing here. No complaints from me.
"Like a ballet of violence clothed in fine Brazilian silk." ~ MMASuPreMaCy
Big Country doesn't need to learn how to ground and pound
Keep in mind this was a tournament, and the best strategy for winning (as Nelson has reiterated numerous times) is to minimize the damage you take and win fights as quickly and effortlessly as possible.
Nelson did just that. Why risk breaking his hand throwing bombs? Then he’d have finished Kimbo dramatically, but he’d be out of the competition with an injury. Other than to impress Dana and the Fertittas, why worry about putting on an exciting performance in the early rounds of TUF, if there are no win bonuses involved and when you’re essentially just participating in an exhibition match in front of your training partners?
If Roy was fighting on a live show, I’m sure his performance would be much different, and he’s intimated as much in recent interviews.
What would peoples thoughts on this be if Kimbo were constantly yelling to the ref “Im good, Im good” so its clear the punches weren’t doing damage. Kinda like back in the pride days “GIVE UP?! GIVE UP?” There was communication between fighter and ref in those tricky positions.
Im from the pride train of thought where its a fighters role to try and end the fight via TKO or submission.
I think a the situation should have been handled like so:
REF: Kimbo, are you good? Kimbo, are you good? (no response, stop the fight. Positive response, allow the fight to continue for another 5-10 seconds)
Repeat that for about 20 seconds and if Kimbo is still good then its time to talk to Roy.
REF: Roy, you have to do more than that. Improve your position. (give Roy 5-10 seconds and if nothing changes, stand them up otherwise Roy adjusts his position/tactics and the fight continues)
I think it sets a dangerous precedent. What about in the next fight where the guy is pinned to the mat and his opponent is punching him in the side, or the arm or the leg……the guy cant defend the shots so where do you draw the line? Is it only head shots that can end the fight? What if the undefended shots to the body are harder than Roys shots to Kimbos head? I just dont like the road this kind of decision takes us down, much like Bispings ‘jab your way to a decision’ win against Leben. TKO or submission is the goal. Pissy little peppering shots to the head should earn you a stand up, not a victory.
by GeeDub on Oct 3, 2009 2:01 AM EDT reply actions 1 recs
I’m going to agree with this. It seemed like Kimbo was pinned and couldn’t move Roy, but Roy wasn’t hurting Kimbo. Had Roy thrown Elbows and opened up a cut or something, then I think it would be another story. Either way, Kimbo lost and Roy won. Both will most likely have a fight around 107. I still want to see what Kimbo can do after ‘all this training’.
by CliChe Guevara on Oct 3, 2009 2:16 AM EDT up reply actions
Agree with dean.
There is no polemic for me, kimbo lost, the end, let’s move on he is coming back anyway.
You don't look like a Tanaka.
Dean was clearly in the right here.
Dean did his job by adhering to the unified rules. Kimbo was not even trying to improve his postion. That being said Roy just did the same thing Gray Maynard (barring his last two bouts) and almost every other wrestler in MMA has done. He exploited the rules to win a “match”. Thats what he won, a match NOT a fight. Theres a big difference.
The way you fix this is easy. 2 very simple rule changes.
1: If a fighter isnt mounting signifigant offense, be it sub. attempts, posturing up to land signifigant blows, attempting to pass or Improve position, etc., the fighter should recieve a warning that the fight will be stood up in 10-15 seconds. Thus Roy wouldnt have been rewarded for non-fighting. This would also make the Lay-n-Pray strategy alot more taxing as having to secure a takedown every 25 seconds or so wouls be very tiring.
2: (this wouldnt help Kimbo so much) Judges should be required to nullify any point concideration awarded for a takedown if the fighter fails to do anything with it other than secure position. Way to many fights are scored Control, Aggression, Damage instead of the other way around. To me forcing a standup is every bit as much “control” as a takedown that results in a gaurd or side mount from which no damage is done. Especially if that lack of damage is a result of gutless Lay-n-Pray
What do you
define as “significant offence”, mounting someone, pinning them and rendering both arms useless, while raining down shots for over a minute isn’t a “significant offense”? Then what is? What if it’s the end of the fight, and, in this case, Roy didn’t have enough in the tank to land these “significant blows”?, he’s still in a dominant position. But by your reasoning, anyone who gains full mount, should be stood up if all they are doing is peppering with shots, what if the guys plan is to pepper with shots until an open comes up? It might take 40 seconds to a minute before an opportunity presents itself, but you would want the ref to stand them up. That is the type of argument made by those who are only interested in seeing brutal knock outs and blood. But there is another aspect to the MMA game, and it’s on the ground, whether you like it of not, this fight was a perfect example of how to utilize a ground game, especially in the format that it’s being fought in. The people on TUF have to fight three times in a couple of months, the less damage they take the better.
You completely missjudge my comment and miss my point.
signifigant offense includes setting up submissions and I do believe I mentioned that. Nelson however was making absolutely no effort to finish the fight. I was not seeking to land damaging blows (no elbows to cut, no looking to land punches in an area that actually damages the opponent, etc.) he was not lokking to set up a submission, he wasn’t doing anything signifigant, ground game or otherwise. should a guy who has seated mount who is using short punches to multiple targets to set a sub need a stand up? no. but a guy in mount who grapevines then starts playing the hardest part of the human body (ie top of the skull) like a bongo drum in a coffee shot (ie weak six inch hammerfists that don’t even cause him to break a sweat) should. as should a wrestler who takes a guy down only to sit in guard the whole round. This sport has two major facets, ground and stand up. it is not a wrestling match, its a fight and no one should be rewarded for that. I’ve watched MMA since 93 and I’ve studied martial arts since 91, practically my whole life, so Im not a TUFboy griffin-bonnar every fight fan. But this sport is mixed MARTIAL arts the art of FIGHTING. if I sound like a bloodthirsty heathen then you are obviously a BJJ fan boy who can tell me that Ken Shamrock- Royce Gracie was the greatest MMA match of all time with a straight face because it wasn’t stood up and two early grappling masters got to work their magic.
by Dynamitedan on Oct 4, 2009 5:56 PM EDT via mobile reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
MMA Rankings
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
