The Case for Fighting Friends in Mixed Martial Arts
by Luke Thomas on Dec 27, 2009 1:12 PM EST
in MMA News
Email
Print
Georges St. Pierre airs his apprehensions:
"You can say 'Oh I'm going to play football, I'm going to play hockey, I'm going to play baseball.' But you can't say I'm going to play fighting. It's not a game," the UFC welterweight champion told fans last month during a question-and-answer session prior to UFC 105 in Manchester, England. "It's a sport, yes, but it's a full-contact sport. And the way I fight, my so-called friend, if I fight him, it can affect his well-being.
"So let's say I'm mounted, on top of my friend, and it's time to land this last big elbow that will probably make a scar in the middle of his forehead and knock him out cold and cause him brain damage," he added, drawing laughs from crowd. "No I'm telling it like it is, if he's my friend, I'm going to think twice before I do it. I won't be able to do that to a friend. So that's the reason why I will never fight a friend. I know a lot of fighters who will disagree with me, but me that's my personal belief."
On the other hand, the tenor of Dana White's argument isn't quite so accommodating:
"It's going to happen," he said. "Listen, it's the dumbest thing I've ever heard in the world. It's like Shaq not wanting to play against one of his friends. It's a sport and you're out there to compete with each to see who the best is, not you're my friend and I don't like you if we fight. You're competing to see who's better. Imagine if certain baseball teams didn't want to play other baseball teams because they're friends. 'He's my friend, I don't want to see him lose.' Give me a break. It's ridiculous.
"Every baseball team wants to win the World Series. Every football team wants to win the Super Bowl and every guy that fights wants to be considered the best in the world. And if you and a guy that you're friends with are two of the best in the world and you're in the same weight division, you're going to have to fight."
Forced to pick a side in this argument, I'd go with Dana White. For purposes of order and achieving hierarchy, even those fighters with conflicting interests cannot recuse themselves from their responsibility out of pure friendship.
The only problem is that White's particular argument is callous and not nearly as persuasive as it could be. White is ultimately right that for purposes of sport it's a necessary evil. But calling fighter reluctance "the dumbest thing I've ever heard in the world" is unfair and unthinking.
What GSP and other fighters who don't want to battle friends allude to is not just the particular carnage that can occur in a formal fighting setting, but that the particular intimacy of the carnage from the individual actors complicates relationships. And those relationships are not to be scoffed at. Think of fight teams as informal support groups. Here are a group of young men (generally) who begin their professional MMA career dirt poor, often without health insurance and without any guarantee this occupational endeavor will ever amount to anything. On top of that, they are engaged in an activity that necessarily requires their teammates and training partners to provide them as much counsel and positive reinforcement as they can stomach to simply make it through the training.
The relationships fighters have with one another in MMA are much closer, much tighter and more meaningful than those between relief pitchers in the dugout. They necessarily have to be for the unit to work and for the fighter's individual success. Ultimately, for purposes of their sport fighters have to make peace with the reality that they could eventually fight a teammate, but we shouldn't dismiss their trepidation as hugely unreasonable.
86 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Leave it to Dana
to voice the correct opinion in such an incorrect way that it borders on impossible to agree with him.
"Talk all the shit you want now!
I actually would like to see friends (especially the AKA figthers) fight each other. However, I don’t like the reasoning of using TEAM SPORTS as a reason why friends should fight each other. Using Shaq or baseball as a basis is different because they participate in team sports that don’t involve directly punching and attacking another person to the point where a fight has to be stopped. For me, it is about the best fighting the best and seeing how an elite fighter would handle fighting another fighter with a particular set of skills. Thiago Silva won’t fight Luis Cane, but honestly, a Cane vs Thiago Silva fight sounds very intriguing to me. The AKA guys are at the top of the Welterweight division, so seeing them fight each other is also intriguing.
Except you’re basing your expectations of that fight on how those fighters perform when they have access to their trainers and training partners…which won’t happen if they are facing their trainers and training partners. Do you want to spend PPV money to watch hard sparring?
They can find new training partners
Lets not kid ourselves and think that Josh Koschek can only perform well if he has access to AKA. He’s undoubtedly get a ton out of the relationship, but there are other gyms he could train with on a one off or even permanent basis.
Of course if they are going to go in there and half ass it because they don’t want to fight someone then there is no point in forcing him to fight someone from AKA. That said I don’t think he should have the “I’ll never fight someone from AKA attitude” and I fully support favoring fighters at the margin who are willing to fight anyone, anytime, anywhere.
Leave it to Dana..to have no clue on fighting a friend
I’ve fought people before they were my friends and would not fight them after they became my friends. This has happened in sport and in the street.
I fight with “Bad Intentions” as Mike Tyson would say and completely agree with GSP’s comments. Without the killer instinct to finish a fight no matter what and with the thought of injuring a “friend”, you are weak in a fight—sport or not.
MMA is fast and brutal. Hesitation is lethal.
Say you flip the switch, turn off your friendship, fight, and then badly injure a friend, you’ll never be the same.
Training camps become family
One of the things that MMA fans that do not train do not understand is that you CANNOT go from camp to camp without some politics.
This is why we hear about so many Brazilians not wanting to fight each other. Even recently, Anderson SIlva was quoted rebuking Vitor Belfort by commenting that “He has lost himself.” Vitor use to train with him and it’s just s no no.
You cannot hop camps because you’re learning secrets from each camp.
Just like in traditional martial arts, masters pay attention to where you come from, who you’ve trained with, and schools have enemies. It’s the way it has been for thousands of years.
Dana brings the correct. He might not bring it with much class, but he brings it nonetheless.
MMA is the only sport I know of where guys refuse to compete against their friends and training partners. Elite level boxers and kickboxers who train together have been competing against each other for decades. MMA should be no different.
Forgot to add ...
wrestlers and judoka from the same camp/school have no problem competing against one another during nationals or world championships either.
I agree but
Don’t Sumo Wrestlers not compete against fighters from their own “Stable”? I recall this from the Freakanomics (I won’t get into the resulting corruption). I just wanted to use a counterpoint in combat sports.
Wrestlers and judoka don’t punch each other in the face.
Twitter: @Mike_Fagan_13
http://www.sackmikegoldberg.com
by Mike Fagan on Dec 27, 2009 6:13 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
\
The relationships fighters have with one another in MMA are much closer, much tighter and more meaningful than those between relief pitchers in the dugout.
Luke I normally agree with you and no one is going to argue about baseball relief pitchers, but football players I don’t know it all seems a bit relative saying some sport build better relationships. You picked an example at such a far end of the athletic spectrum that it kinda de-legitimize the point.
I think the closeness of the camps is part of the problem.
One area where MMA ould learn from boxing is in embracing the individual nature of the sport. Training partners in boxing are considered mercenaries, not friends. They are pieces of meat brought in for a particular fight and discarded after the fight is over.
While boxing might be a little too far down the mercenary path, MMA camps really do need to tone down the ‘we are family’ rhetoric. Collegiate wrestling teams are a very tight knit bunch, but if two Oklahoma State alums meet up at the Olympic trials, they don’t refuse to compete. They handle their business on the mat and then shake hands afterward.
Are you sure about the boxing thing? I heard some different stories…
"You hit too hard, too hard, too hard..."
Absolutely.
Larry Holmes spent the formative years of his career being Muhammad Ali’s designated punching bag, but when the time came for them to fight, neither guy tried to back out because of their history together. They got in the ring and did their thing.
Designated punching bag =/= Friend though. I don’t know much about boxing, but I’ve already seen two boxers from the same camp unwilling to fight each others, because they were friends. Maybe it was exeptional, that’s why I asked.
"You hit too hard, too hard, too hard..."
But that is my point.
MMA camps are TOO tightly knit. I’m OK with them being close, but not so close that they won’t even consider competing against one another. They could benefit from taking a little bit more mercenary approach to the sport.
Well, when the Top 10 pound-for-pound fighters have mercenary approaches, we’ll see up and coming fighters emulate that. But PERHAPS many fighters realize that, to become truly great fighters, they need to embrace the team mentality, put aside selfish individuality, and rely upon one another to improve each other. “Iron sharpens iron,” and all that stuff.
Also, maybe the reason many boxers are seen as unlikeable douchebags is the mercenary spirit, while the reason MMA fighters are viewed as down-to-earth is the team spirit and camaraderie. Just food for thought…
So your argument is, essentially, that when these fighters start making $10-20 million purses, we’ll see a lot of these friendships fall by the wayside, because it’s Business Never Personal.
Problem is, as long as MOST of the top-tier fighters owe their success to their teammates and training partners, there isn’t enough incentive to undermine those relationships just for a promoter’s whim. And make no mistake about it — this isn’t “the best interest of the sport,” it’s the promoter’s whim. And frankly, I’m never comfortable casting my lot with those guys.
How is MMA any different than other combat sports? You don’t think judoka/wrestlers/boxers owe much of their success to guys who train at their dojo/school/gym? Because when it comes time for Olympic trials, they are willing to put their relationships aside and compete.
Why should MMA be any different?
Well, we can start with MMA not being in the Olympics. Thus, at the end of the day, these guys are Fighting For Money. And then it becomes a matter of personal morality: How willing are you to put your friendships in jeopardy for Money?
by madiq on Dec 27, 2009 2:19 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
How willing are you to put your friendships in jeopardy for Money?
Nice strawman.
Why would it be putting friendship on the line?
I had no problems cut blocking a friend in football. Ditto for drilling a friend between the shoulder blades as he makes a catch across the middle. That could have done a hell of a lot more damage to him than an elbow to the face. Yet, I was perfectly willing to do that FOR FREE because we both understood that it was part of the game, and we were still friends afterward.
Way to get needlessly offended.
Essentially you are saying that FOR YOU AND YOUR FRIENDS, you are willing to risk seriously injuring a friend for fun. Cool. However, that doesn’t mean that EVERYONE should feel that they will be willing to risk seriously injuring (as a consequence of intentional infliction of harm, I might add) a friend for MONEY. Especially when fighting someone isn’t about 15-25 minutes in the cage, it’s about 8-12 WEEKS of training, gameplanning, and singular focus on asserting your dominance over a person physically. One might find themselves unwilling to be committed to that, or at least feel that experience is worth more to them than a few thousand dollars.
Because when I used the “you” construction, I wasn’t talking about you personally, yet you responded like I did. But my mistake, I apologize for assuming your tone was defensive.
What I was attempting to say is that for each fighter, the decision to fight for money is a PERSONAL one, and for many, training to fight is so intimate that they might view the use of inside info, gained from that relationship, to cultivate a game plan against them as a betrayal. With that background premise, one would see fighting a friend as putting the friendship in jeopardy.
Its OK to beat up someone you don't know
That’s the problem with defending the “I won’t fight my friend” It relies on a concept of the MMA that at its core its organized fighting and not really a “Sport”.
I tell my kid not to punch anyone. I don’t say don’t punch your friends.
I think you’re oversimplifying here. Mixed Martial Arts isn’t just about the “fight.” It’s about the training to fight, the studying your opponent, crafting a game plan based around your strengths and your opponent’s weaknesses, and drilling over and over ways to win.
You know how every fighter says he’s in the best shape of his life, and he had a great training camp? Well, your training partner knows when that isn’t true, and you have a nagging knee injury that you haven’t told anyone about. Your training partner knows that you drop your hand ever so slightly before you throw a kick, because he has gone over that in drills. Your training partner teaches you how to stuff his takedown.
If you know that you’ll fight your training partner someday, then you probably don’t share your secrets as much. And neither does he. You hold a little something back, because your friend might one day be your foe.
In the NFL, much was made about Brett Favre leaving the Green Bay Packers to play for the Vikings, a team in the Packers’ division, who would be competing for the division title. It was seen as a betrayal. Did it undermine the sport because people felt that the principle of loyalty to his former team and teammates should be valued more highly than his desire for continued accolades? No, it was merely another way of seeing things. And in that sport, there isn’t even any fighting.
I don't think this is the argument most people and GSP are making
there is some validity to it, but I think its naive to think your friends would never fight you. I think some camps would be better off splitting up when the concentration in a certain class gets too high.
GSP
I understand the complexity here, but we could reduce what GSP is saying to…I’m more than happy to scar a guy who I don’t know that well, but not do it to someone who I train with. To think its OK to damage someone you don’t know, but not someone you do comes across as a little odd.
I’m deeply uncomfortable with the idea that fighters ought to feel obligated to fight their friends. If they don’t want to do it, I that’s their prerogative, and they’ll deal with whatever career consequences there are.
But to hear some fans act as though it makes a person a coward to not want to fight a close training partner… it creeps me out, frankly.
by JRN on Dec 27, 2009 1:37 PM EST reply actions 2 recs
How do you feel about boxers or wrestlers or judoka from the same gyms being forced to compete in the Olympic trials?
When was the last time you heard of a boxer/wrestler/judoka refusing to compete because the guy across the ring/mat was a friend?
I don’t feel any particular way about it. Those are different sports.
I have heard of BJJ guys refusing to compete against training partners. I don’t have the same intuitive grasp of that discomfort, but again, I won’t begrudge them that feeling.
Basically, I don’t feel comfortable watching a fight between two less-than-willing participants. And so this general tone of “what’s the matter with you? get out there and hurt your friend, you pussy!” is uncool to me.
by JRN on Dec 27, 2009 1:51 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
I agree that calling a guy a pussy because he won’t fight his friend is wrong. Though I haven’t heard anyone in this thread make such statements.
But I don’t think there is anything wrong about expecting athletes to be willing to determine who is the best in the world, regardless of who they train with.
I don’t hate fighters for not wanting to compete against guys from within their own camp, but I am disappointed in them. I prefer athletes who are pathologically competitive and have a burning desire to prove they are the best in the world, no matter who is across the ring/cage from them.
But this is the giant straw man at the center of the argument. Most fighters who say they wouldn’t fight their friends say that if the money was right, and if it was for a title, they’d find a way to put their friendship aside. What they WON’T do, however, is act like fighting a training partner is No Big Deal.
If that is the case, then I have no problem with it.
I don’t want to see camp versus camp fights unless it is absolutely necessary, and that usually means a champion versus a clear #1 contender. I just don’t want guys to rule out that possibility.
Problem is, I think you are oversimplifying. There are a lot of fighters out there who say they will never fight a guy from their camp under any circumstances. That is the attitude I have a problem with. I totally get why they would be resistant to fighting a teammate without something huge on the line.
REALLY? Because the only ones I know of are the Black House guys and the Gracie Scrap Pack. Even among the Jackson Camp, only GSP seems to draw the hardest of hard lines. Sure Jackson says that he won’t coach against his fighters, but he has basically said that if two of his fighters fought, he wouldn’t choose sides.
Rashad and Jardine have taken a pretty hard line on the possibility of them fighting.
Miletich & Hughes wound up passing the torch on the WW title rather than meeting in the cage.
The Chute Boxe guys back in the day were also in the ‘never gonna happen’ camp. Ditto for BTT.
Well,Chute Boxe and BTT are kinda disdanded now, and Miletich is retired, while Hughes is close to it.
As for Rashad and Jardine, they get asked those types of questions all the time, and while they certainly have taken a hard line, when pressed, they tend to mention that there is a slight possibility that if it came down to it, there was no one left to fight, and a title was on the line, they might consider it. But they quickly dismiss it, because they consider it highly unlikely that that situation will happen. Yes, it’s a hard line, but it’s one that I’m OK with, because I want to see fighters fighting at their best, unconflicted, and singularly focused on defeating their opponents.
what does chute boxe being disbanded and pat being retired have to do with the argument? for one, it doesnt change the fact that this isnt a new thing to mma.
as for rashad and keith, they took a hard line. they absolutely refused to fight each other. i dont know where you got the notion that they “get asked the question a lot” and imply that those two were just casually saying they wouldnt fight each other just to answer a question. those two are really close friends and gave each other space to gain a title shot.
by sadface on Dec 27, 2009 4:42 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
According to the book on Pat (Blood in the Cage), it wasn’t a choice to pass on the torch. He planned on getting the rematch against Newton, but the UFC decided not to give it to him, and instead give it to Hughes. And if I’m still remembering correctly (been awhile since I read it), Hughes was going to turn down the offer because he felt it betrayed Pat, but Pat convinced him that he should take it in order to keep the belt in the gym.
by Swordslasher on Dec 27, 2009 6:25 PM EST up reply actions
I agree with Dana to a certain extent
But it is extremely difficult to fight at 100% intensity against a friend
For example: You have your friend in an armbar and he can’t get out of it, what do you do? Do you just stay in that position or break your friends arm?
I don’t know about anyone else but breaking a friends arm is just not right.
If those fights happen and both guys are unwilling, they will probably look like regular sparring matches and we will rarely get a finish
If my friend decides not to tap, I will respect his decision and crank the arm harder. After the fight, I will be the guy holding his beer if he cannot.
Guillotine.
Exactly
He knows what will happen if he doesn’t tap, and I have to respect his power to make his own decisions. This is one thing my friends and I get in to from time to time, if one of us wants to help another with their homework rather than working on their own paper, we don’t argue; I can’t tell my friend to look out for himself if he’s already made the decision to put his work on hold to help me out. To do that would be to imply that he doesn’t understand his own workload or the implications of his decision.
Disagree strongly
It athletes want to compete without fans for no money then my opinion doesn’t matter, but fans, media etc get to criticize as soon as they start gleaning all of these benefits start coming it.
Maybe I’m just a big softie, but I have to agree with GSP here. Some things in life are more important than fighting and proving who is the best. Also, I don’t want to see 2 friends fight each other if one or both can’t give 100% because of the friendship.
"If I wanted to spend a half hour between two hairy legs I'd go to your mother's house." -Don Frye
by mburtoni on Dec 27, 2009 2:13 PM EST via mobile reply actions 4 recs
Rec'd
For succinctly covering the main points everybody is making.
For those of you who criticize without fighting… you have the right to make philosophical suggestions but are ultimately misinformed. If you get in the ring and your stance (no pun, seriously) does not change that’s totally fine, but when you train you are welcomed into a family. It’s real hard to stomach an intentional betrayal like that.
"Someone is WRONG on the internet. What do you want me to do? LEAVE? Then they'll keep being wrong!"
-Randall Munroe
I want to agree with Dana, but I have to side with GSP on this one.
Take the Jon Fitch fight for example. Would GSP have been able to dish out such an epically brutal beating if he had been buddies with Jon Fitch? From the sound of his quote I don’t think he would.
There’s no point in putting on a fight when one of the participants doesn’t have his\her heart in it. Maybe this is something that needs to be assessed on a case by case basis, rather than with a blanket policy. I feel it should be up to the individual fighters.
I think that everyone forgets the biggest reason....
Its competition….
In this specific case… The friendship is secondary to the closeness that the competitors “share”. Most importantly in working out, sparring and rolling. Maybe even deep, personal discussions. It becomes an issue of seeing or knowing someones weaknesses that you would not see normally. And turning that into an advantage. I mean, come on these are men. It all comes down to the competition.
if you dont want to fight a teammate, you shouldnt have to.. with exception to championship fights, if the challenger and promoter want the fight, then it should happen… champions cant pick their opponents.
"I’m not going to stop yelling because that would mean, I lost the fight!"-Kenny Powers
shooter/cutter for AllElbows.com
by ekc on Dec 27, 2009 3:29 PM EST reply actions 1 recs
I don’t think it should only be restricted to championship fights, I also think top contenders could be asked to fight friends if the right opportunity is there.
The question is, how bad do you want to be the best? If you don’t want it bad enough to fight your friend, then you really don’t want it bad enough, so using AKA as an example, if you turn down a match with your teammate for a title shot (or for a belt) you lose the right to whine about getting a title shot, because you passed on the fight that could have made it.
To be the best you have to fight the best, and if you refuse to fight the best, for whatever reason, you don’t want to be the best, and there should be repercussions to that.
It shoudln’t happen, but then they shouldn’t be upset if they get stuck on the undercard fighting scrubs.
and they shouldn’t immediately bend to that person’s desire to have a title fight if the champ loses.
Something tells me that if the ranks of contenders is so shallow that they’re trying to get teammates to fight, putting a potential title challenger on a non-televised undercard would be cutting off the nose to spite the face.
not with like jon fitch.
I think every time it’s time to offer him a fight they should say, “koschek, swick, or this bum on the undercard.”
It hurts the fighter’s business just as much if they get crappy fights.
That’s just silly and spiteful, for no good reason. Casual fans aren’t really clamouring to see Fitch-Koscheck or Fitch-Swick; and they’ll have to sell fans on any Jon Fitch fight. If they’re not interested in promoting him because there are two people on the roster that he doesn’t want to fight, then they should just let him go to Strikeforce. Clearly being the #2 Welterweight in the World isn’t enough to get you PPV time in the Phildo’s UFC; you have to be a Company Man and do what you’re told, even if what you’re told has a spiteful and self-serving purpose.
They aren't interested in promoting him for LOTS of reasons.
- He never will fight like Mitrione vs. Junk, which apparently was an amazing fight?
- He fought to not give away his image rights and tried to create collective bargaining amongst fighters. Hence the 2 day cut and shit talk from Dana.
- He won’t fight Kos or Swick.
- He will beat every welterweight in the UFC other than GSP, with Alves and Koscheck being compelling matchup. And in my opinion, he’d squash BJ if they match up in an eliminator for GSP rematches.
"Someone is WRONG on the internet. What do you want me to do? LEAVE? Then they'll keep being wrong!"
-Randall Munroe
Fair enough, but Phildo mentioned a specific scenario where he was basically telling Fitch, “fight your teammates, or we won’t promote you,” so I was responding to that proposal.
Oh, I agree.
I was motivated to write that post by you saying Phildo’s reasoning was “silly and spiteful for no good reason.” Think about Dana, read my second bullet point, and then really think about Dana again. We all know how he does. The not fighting team mates thing is a sub-issue of Fitch’s ‘power to the athletes’ mentality, which he already gets punished for.
It’s unrelated to the main, but we also know that in Fitch vs. TBA, Fitch by decision is a good bet as low as -250. My wallet likes it, promoters don’t…
"Someone is WRONG on the internet. What do you want me to do? LEAVE? Then they'll keep being wrong!"
-Randall Munroe
I think it’s completely fair. If he wants to be the best, he should fight the best. Right now the best are a guy that just beat the ever living shit of him, or his teammates. If he wants another shot at GSP, he should have to beat one of his teammates, it’s just the way that the division should shake out.
If he refueses, that’s his choice, but he shouldn’t just automatically jump back to the top of the line after GSP beats all his teammates, because I don’t think it will be very easy for him be deserving of a title shot without beating top fighters 9who happen to be his teammates). It isn’t right for someone to refuse to fight someone (for whatever reason) and then get a title shot because that person lost.
I’m amazed at how Dana White and a bunch of non-fighters decide to tell top-tier fighters about how things should be. When you consistently hear top-tier fighters say that they don’t feel comfortable fighting their teammates and training partners, did you stop to think that maybe there’s a reason why, and possibly a reason understood by other top MMA fighters but not outside observers, fans, and Dana White?
I tend to by sympathetic to GSP’s statement that he might think twice about beating a close friend unconscious with elbows from the mount, while he me might not hesitate when it’s not a guy that he spars and trains with day in and day out.
Also, did anyone bother to think that maybe, just maybe, these guys are able to become such great fighters because of the closeness and trust they have with their training partners, which allows them to push it to the next level while knowing that the other guy will be respectful and stop before hurting his friend?
MMA is not like other contact sports like wrestling and judo, since those guys’ faces don’t like like hamburger meat after a fight. The closest is probably boxing and kickboxing or Muay Thai, but even then I can see where guys might feel a bit different, since you aren’t sitting on your friend’s chest and beating him to a bloody unconscious pulp.
I’m not an MMA fighter, and I don’t think it’s my place to criticize these guys when many of them tell you the same thing… that they don’t feel comfortable beating the shit out of their close friends, the same guys who they feel comfortable sparring with on a daily basis and who they spend a lot of their time with.
MMA isn’t about being the best point guard, pinning a guy in the Olympics, tapping out someone in a grappling tournament, or even just punching a guy in the face… it’s about beating the shit out of the other guy – within the confines of a relatively small set of rules – in any way possible… on the feet or on the ground. To say a guy like GSP or the AKA fighters aren’t “competitive” or have the drive to succeed… that’s ridiculous and offensive. They might be “entertainers” and athletes, but their “entertainment” and sport is trying to beat a guy unconscious or submit him, while inflicting maximum physical damage in the process.
Yeah, I can see why they might have a problem fighting their friends. And until we get to the point where there are only one or two training camps, I can’t see any reason that these guys should be forced – or expected – to fight their friends in order to entertain us or make some more money for Dana White.
by mma_critic on Dec 27, 2009 3:48 PM EST reply actions 7 recs
And it’s not like the fans pay the bills. Who the hell are they to voice their opinions?
I miss the good old days when fighters fought in the back room of their dojo and only a handful of people got to watch. I mean, it’s not as if anyone would have wanted to see the massive beating Rickson Gracie put on Yoji Anjo. We were much better off when the fans knew their place.
Here’s a great excerpt from an interview with Renzo Gracie:
Realfighting: In many traditional judo schools in the USA (with Japanese instructors) there’s not much teaching going on, but there’s lots of bullying from senior to junior students. I noticed that it’s very different in BJJ, especially in your school.
Renzo: No, that stuff doesn’t happen in Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu, especially in my school. The normal mode in my school is “don’t hurt your partners,” you have to use them tomorrow again to train. That’s a basic rule.
Realfighting: I notice in your school, people respect each other, and they don’t go over the line, and that comes from the top…that comes from you.
Renzo: Yes, I’ve always believed that first: you must enjoy your time on the mat. It’s not only a time for you to train but also to have a good time with your friends, to relieve your stress, to relax, tell stories, have fun. And in this way, you actually learn more through your brotherhood then when competing hard against your classmates. If your partner is trying to kill you and you him, you stop trying to relax, to see what’s necessary because you don’t want to lose. So once you get into that mode you’ll hit a plateau where you won’t be able to move up and improve anymore.
That’s the way we do it, for example that’s why we win so much. In the last competition we won by 386 points versus 118 for second place, our score was more than triple those of the competition.And I believe this is the result of our method of training. Everyone is sincere and trying to help each other. You know it’s impossible for you to ask anyone in the academy any question about training without getting their best answer.
Realfighting: In many Japanese schools they demand respect but it’s mostly students are responding out of fear.
Renzo: In those schools, they demand respect they don’t deserve. In our martial art, I believe the respect is there, even though we don’t demand it. It’s based on friendship and sincerity.
Realfighting: I notice many beginners go a little crazy and roll as if they were fighting in the UFC, but once students go up in the ranks they start to relax.
Renzo: Yes, they start to relax and calm down and start to understand the concepts, because every time you think martial arts, the first thought that comes into your head is, I can’t lose, I have to win. So when they first come in they go crazy and as soon as they realize that’s not the model they need to follow, they calm down and they are able to evolve much faster.
As I said before, I think we need to acknowledge that maybe there is something about the relationship with training partners that allows these elite fighters to reach that elite level. When these guys say they don’t feel comfortable fighting each other, maybe it also means that their training wouldn’t allow them to reach such an elite level if they did not have that relationship. If so, it means we might not see such elite fighters if they had to fight their training partners.
People accepted that Wandy and Shogun wouldn’t fight for the title in Pride, so it’s a bit odd that the debate comes up so much now. I suspect it’s mostly because of Dana White and the fact that GSP has wiped out the WW division, while the rest of the top WW fighters includes several AKA guys that don’t want to fight each other.
by mma_critic on Dec 27, 2009 4:58 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
People accepted that Wandy and Shogun wouldn’t fight for the title in Pride, so it’s a bit odd that the debate comes up so much now.
I think you are mistaken.
There were a ton of people who would have LOVED to see that fight. But Chute Boxe made it very clear that it would never happen, and DSE never pressured them to make it happen, so it was never became a huge issue. The reason it is in an issue now is because the promoter is taking a hard line on intracamp fights.
I would LOVE to see A. Silva vs Machida (and would’ve loved it more before the performance Shogun put on against Machida), but I simultaneously accept that they won’t fight each other. LOVING a potential fight and accepting that the guys won’t fight each other are not mutually exclusive.
And I agree that it’s an issue now because of the promoter, but I don’t remember fans pushing the issue before the way they do now, even though their desire for such fights shouldn’t change just because of a promoter’s public comments… these fights would still have been great hypothetical match-ups for MMA bloggers and journalists to write about. Maybe my memory is wrong, but I just don’t remember this being such an issue before Dana White decided to talk shit about fighters. And let me emphasize, these are professional fighters… Dana White can’t make that claim, and neither can we.
We’ve seen informal agreements by fighters to keep it standing (see Davis vs Lytle), and I expect more “agreements” if these fights are forced upon fighters.
That’s not a commentary on Davis vs Lytle, just my way of saying you can expect more “gentlemen’s agreements” if teammate vs teammate fights are forced upon unwilling fighters.
by mma_critic on Dec 27, 2009 5:48 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
We’ve seen informal agreements by fighters to keep it standing (see Davis vs Lytle), and I expect more "agreements" if these fights are forced upon fighters.
Yup. And fans would be screaming Bloody Murder, like something was taken away from them. Fighters from the same camp can fight each other in the video game, right?
I actually believe both said that they would fight in the final of the 2005 LHW GP but then Wanderlei lost to Arona
Follow @MMARocks and @tjmarciniak
by greco-roman airlines on Dec 27, 2009 7:16 PM EST up reply actions
I'm sympathetic to GSP
but you have to understand that the fighters are not concerned with the business side of things. SOMEONE needs to look out for that side, and in this case it’s Dana. He’s right to constantly bring up the fact that every team wants to win the super bowl, every team wants to win the world series. Without that drive to be the best, the whole organization sort of falls apart.
I’m not discrediting the fact that almost every top level fighter has said the same thing, I truly believe that they’re right, but, it’s the line of work they got in to. Nobody likes every part of their job, sometimes we need to do things we might not enjoy so much.
This is a very good point
and why Dana White should be more respectful in speaking about fighters when they consistently voice the same opinion about fighting teammates. But we should keep in mind a few things…
- Shogun was typically regarded as being better than Wandy, but people respected their decision not to fight each other. Being “the best” doesn’t just mean having a belt. Fedor is widely regarded as the best even without the UFC HW belt (though I’d love to see him fight Lesnar as much as anyone).
- Dana White has played up the teammate angle himself to punish fighters. Remember Jon Fitch getting cut, along with suspicions that Cain might have been next? Dana White has punished AKA fighters for being teammates with other AKA fighters… so why shouldn’t they feel some sense of solidarity with each other?
- The main problem with forcing a fight that neither guy wants is that we will likely see a lot of hesitation from both guys in the octagon (or ring, or other type of cage). But I wouldn’t be surprised to see fighters going for positional advantage and decision wins instead of looking for a finish when they fight their training partners… and that’s not the fight any of us is looking for. But you can’t control the fact that a guy might not want to smash his friend’s face open. Hell, even Matt Hughes gave up the submission on Royce Gracie because he knew Royce wouldn’t tap and felt bad about breaking his arm. Would you expect teammates to be more callous in looking for a finish?
I want to be more explicit about our options, since I think there are some great potential teammate-vs-teammate match-ups. But going back to the training issue… our options might be a top P4P GSP who won’t fight his teammates and several top WW fighters from AKA who won’t fight each other, or a suboptimal GSP who will fight his teammates and a bunch of pretty good WW fighters from AKA who will fight each other. I prefer the former, and I think it drives camps forward in making sure all of the athletes in MMA are improving in all aspects of their fighting skills.
Oh, and I can do without a shitty wrestling match between Fitch and Kos where neither one really wants to engage with the other in a way that can result in serious injury, and I think that’s the most likely scenario when you see teammate-vs-teammate fights.
by mma_critic on Dec 27, 2009 5:26 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Fighting is a very personal and yet violent thing. Part of hitting someone with bad intentions is not picturing his kids, wife, family. Kicking a person in the face who just helped push your car 3 blocks to a gas station after you had lunch together isn’t a natural.
These men are friends, maybe it is hard for some to understand that. I would drive 100 miles at 4am for my friends. I would fight 2 v 1 for my friends, I would watch their kids, help roof their house and even be the Godfather to their children. Once your relationship turns to friendship, the rules change.
If these guys publicly state they don’t want to fight, what kind of display would they put on if forced to do so?
That being said. I would like to see more of the people form the same camps fight. This is what the fans and the UFC want. Everyone remembers Chuck killing all the contenders while Tito held the belt against cans. Eventually they will have to fight.
I think the problem with friends fighting friends is they might unconsciously not do every thing they could to win. If I had my good friend in a heel hook do I want to end his career to win? Just the slight hesitation, could lose me the fight.
In high level grappling/BJJ tournaments it’s not uncommon for two friends/teammates to get matched up against each other, only to decide who will “win” and go to the next round before the match takes place. For example, Xande and Magalhaes at Grappler’s Quest or Horn and Huhges at ADCC.
MMA already gets enough accusations of cheating, working or throwing fights even between non-teammates. The last thing we need is to throw in yet another conflict of interests that fans can question if a fight looks even remotely fishy.
by George Lucas on Dec 27, 2009 8:54 PM EST reply actions 1 recs
People are always misquoting GSP. What he actually said was:
Yoo cahn say ‘Oh I’m go-eeng to play fooootbahl, I’m go-eeng to play ock-ey, I’m go-eeng to play baseball.’ But you can’t say I’m going to play fight-eeng. It’s not a game.
Which puts a TOTALLY different spin on his argument I think.
Don't believe a word I say, I don't train BJJ.
I blog at TangleBones - you should follow me on Twitter here.
It should be no secret by now that I think Dana’s far too obnoxious and foul-mouthed to my liking. It’s not like I get to decide how he should be. But still, I’d like to see him respond to criticism or opinions that aren’t same as his with a little more class and in a little more understanding manner. Going on tirades like this – in public, no less – isn’t going to help him sway anyone’s stance on a matter like this. He comes across like a tyrant who gets to decide who does what and makes his underlings go against their will just for the hell of it on a whim. I do think it would be nice to have friends/members of the same camp fighting each other, but not having that wouldn’t be the only ‘nice’ thing I’d like to see/have in this world. If Rashad and Jardine never fight, it’s not the end of the world. Ditto with Silva-Machida – or any other such pairing in the MMA world.
Just because either us or Dana wants to see something happen, wants to see some fight made shouldn’t mean UFC has permission to strong-arm their fighters into doing something against their will. Yes, UFC does pay them to fight, but I do think it would be better for the business to have happy fighters and lose some potential matchups than have each and every matchup Dana, Joe Silva, whoever decides to have and alienating the fighters in the process.
by Monday Morning Martial Artist on Dec 28, 2009 10:25 AM EST 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.
