Size matters

by IImastersII on Feb 2, 2009 9:34 AM EST Comment 21 comments

Is it any coincidence, that with the exception of the light heavyweight division, the titleholders in the UFC are all the biggest guys in their respective weight classes? It depresses me a bit, because I like to cheer for the underdog, the smaller guy who has more to overcome in order to win. It’s part of what made Van Damme movies so much more exciting than Seagal movies. Seagal just looked big enough to beat the snot out of opponents, Aikido or not.

GSP is a huge welterweight and he’s the WW champ. Who was the second best WW? Jon Fitch, who is also huge, coming down from light heavyweight. It’s probably no coincidence that he lasted the longest with GSP during GSP’s recent reign of terror. And who’s the second best WW now? Alves, who is also monstrous.

Anderson Silva too, has received some criticism for his size. It makes it harder to cheer for a guy, for me, when that guy is towering over everyone he fights. It’s like cheering for a bully. Along with the WWE stigma that Brock carries with him, his enormousness is part of the reason why people (well, at least I—) regularly root against him.

That’s why I love Fedor. He’s actually SMALL for his weight class, and beats the snot out of everyone anyway. Detractors speak of the supposedly lesser quality of opponents he faces in P4P discussions, but GSP, Silva, even Penn, are regularly beating elite opponents who are smaller than them.

I should probably clarify that I’m a big fan of those three fighters; I’m a proud Canadian, so I get behind GSP at all times (that doesn’t sound good…), but his recent thrashing of Penn got me thinking.

The FanPosts are solely the subjective opinions of Bloody Elbow readers and do not necessarily reflect the views of Bloody Elbow editors or staff.

0 recs | Comment 21 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

This is why I really would like to see weigh ins on the day of the fight. I think it would make the fights more interesting and that guys wouldn’t get rewarded for cutting 30-35 lbs and walking in the cage much bigger than they weighed in.

I know there are number of arguments against day of fight weigh ins, but I think it would make things more competitive in the long run.

by lbk on Feb 2, 2009 9:47 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

30-35 pounds? Other than Alves, exaggerate much? And Alves cuts less than 30 actually.

by iiowyn on Feb 2, 2009 11:58 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

And the arguments against day of fight weigh ins are that people die…that seems a pretty damn important argument.

by iiowyn on Feb 2, 2009 11:59 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs

That’s the beginning and end of any discussion of day-of weigh-ins.

Bolts from the Blue // "Game over." - Jamal Williams
Bloody Elbow // "Every normal man must be tempted at times to spit upon his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats." - H.L. Mencken

by Richard Wade on Feb 2, 2009 2:24 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Weighing in on the day of the fight might change who is the biggest guy in the weight class, but it wouldn’t eliminate the problem of having the biggest guy win. It would just be a different biggest guy.

by lhasafi on Feb 2, 2009 10:05 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

People would still cut weight, just in this scenario they would not be able to rehydrate and their brains would lose a lot of the liquid protecting it from concussive force. There would be a lot more brain injuries and a much much higher possibility of death.

by iiowyn on Feb 2, 2009 12:00 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Comparing the sport to Van Damme and Seagal movies is a really bad start. The example of Fedor which completly disproves your whole premise was a poor finish too. Skill decides champions not a couple of extra pounds of weight.

by who me on Feb 2, 2009 11:30 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

I’m a fan of martial arts. The example was a simple one: when watching any sort of martial arts action, I like cheering for the smaller guy. It really isn’t too difficult to grasp.

Also, there really wasn’t a ‘premise’ to disprove. I was just sharing my feelings on the fact that most of the current crop of champs are the bigger guys in their division. In Fedor’s division, he ISN’T one of the bigger guys, which impresses me. Again: not to difficult to grasp.

by IImastersII on Feb 2, 2009 11:50 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

Again it really has to do with skill level. Arlovski’s skill set compares pretty evenly with Marcus Davis’ skill set. One is a journeyman in their weight division, the other was ranked #2 before his last fight.

by iiowyn on Feb 2, 2009 12:03 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

What does smaller have to do with underdog though? Fedor isn’t even an underdog when he is fighting super-heavyweights, one of the cornerstones of martial arts is skill is more important than size. Honestly name a heavyweight that Fedor would be an underdog to in a fight? There is nothing wrong with being hung up on the perception of size but it’s skill and ability that decide underdogs not size. The premise that size matters is what doesn’t really hold water because it’s ability that wins fights.

by who me on Feb 2, 2009 1:21 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Skill and ability is what MMA is all about. But when skills are on par between fighters, the bigger man has the advantage. That being said, champs like Anderson Silva, while obviously heads and shoulders above their competition in terms of skill, also enjoy a distinct size advantage over their competition — which doesn’t really diminish their achievements, but is less impressive in my eyes than say (okay, forget Fedor) the achievements of Rashad Evans.

by IImastersII on Feb 2, 2009 1:30 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Name two fighters who have equal natural ability, skill, training and talent and also fight with the same fighting style? There are so many variables that go into this before you would get to “all things being equal the bigger man has he advantage” . Heck even in size there are a lot of variables before you would get to weight, you can be lighter and even shorter than your opponent but if your arms are longer you would have a striking advantage, every individual is completely different. Weight is a variable but there are lots of variables in a fight.

Heck you brought up Rashad Evans a guy who won TUF as a heavyweight, he’s nowhere near small for the division. Do you consider him a smaller fighter because he is a couple inches shorter than most of his opponents?

You also mentioned Anderson Silva’s size advantage but who were his belt challengers that he had this big size advantage over? Heck Franklin and Henderson are title contenders at light heavyweight, Travis Lutter missed weight for his title fight. Who was it that Anderson Silva had a distinct size advantage over?

by who me on Feb 2, 2009 4:08 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Actually, Rashad IS small for the division. He won the HW division of the UFC as a fat guy weighing 224. I bet he cuts from maybe 210 nowadays.

by Michaelthebox on Feb 2, 2009 4:51 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

He could probably make MW.

by iiowyn on Feb 3, 2009 12:24 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I get the boxing skill set comparison, but Arlovski is a former Sambo champ and is considered one of the most athletic heavyweights out there… whereas I think Davis had just that boxing skillset.

by IImastersII on Feb 2, 2009 12:06 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

And in recent fights Davis has been doing much more on the ground than Arlovski.

by iiowyn on Feb 2, 2009 12:12 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Ha, true enough.

by IImastersII on Feb 2, 2009 12:20 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

If you're not submitting, you're just rolling around with another guy.

by BJJDenver on Feb 2, 2009 3:47 PM EST reply actions 1 recs

Weight matters, but look at it this way . .

Most of the champions of which you speak are dedicated enough athletes that they’ll cut weight to fight at the lightest weight they can – that maximizes the ‘natural’ strength/weight ratio (ie: not bulking up a lot to get just a little stronger), and also the bone/weight ratio (if you have a given size cranium, let it be punched by smaller people!).

It’s a matter of good athletes maximizing their effectiveness. Maybe UFC needs to follow boxing and wrestling – it should be clear that the multiple weight classes in both those sports are based upon exactly what you’re saying.

My personal issue along these lines is this: one of my fave fighters is Franke Edgar – and he’s probably never going to make it at 155 because he’s a mere couple pounds lighter than most others. Incredible fighter, but look at how Gray Maynard used the slightest of size advantage against him.

by jeffro231 on Feb 2, 2009 5:19 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Go Frankie!

Though I almost want him to drop to 145.

by iiowyn on Feb 3, 2009 12:25 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I would say it is not size that matters; it is...

I would say the only thing that all the UFC champs have in common is that they can perform at their highest levels for a long amount of time. Size is not as important as being athletic and skilled. Every UFC champ is very athletic; even frank Mir won because he was fitter and could maintain him self at a much higher level then nog.

Size matters, but not in MMA.

by Beren on Feb 2, 2009 6:57 PM EST reply actions 0 recs