Is There a Place for Compassion in MMA?

Hey everybody. I think there's been a very illuminating discussion of the Josh Koshcheck fight stoppage, both on the pro and against side, and I'm particularly heartened by the polite tenor of the discussion.

In a Fanpost, mma_dude made a point that comes at it from a slightly different angle that got me thinking:

Whether or not the knocked out fighter's opponent is compassionate or blood thirsty, should have no bearing on the referees decision.

What I thought was interesting was the use of the word "compassionate." Which left me wondering: Is there a place for compassion in MMA?

For the purpose of this discussion, I am limited "compassion" sheerly to the decision of whether to pull up when it looks like an opponent has been knocked out.

An example of this compassion can be found in the Pedro Rizzo vs. Roman Zentsoz fight recently replayed on Pride's HDNet show. Rizzo throws his trademark leg kick and Zentsoz uncorks a  left hook that sends Rizzo to the mat. Zentsoz approaches, arm cocked, but gives the ref ample time to stop the fight, as it should have been, rather than administering undefended blows to an unconscious opponent.

On the other end of the spectrum is Rampage's recent fight against Wanderlei. After Wandy suffered a brutal knockout, Rampage stood over him and delivered several extremely hard shots to the unconcious Ax Murderer, in what looked more like revenge for two brutal knockouts in the past rather than an attempt to finish the fight (which was clearly over) and get the victory.

Now, it's true that the rules say to keep going until the ref stops the fight, and it's the ref's job, not the fighter's, to assess if an opponent can no longer continue and the fight should be stopped. Certainly, we have seen examples where a fighter held up to his eventual detriment--Herring vs. Nog springs to mind.

For the sake of the argument, let's eliminate cases in which it's unclear whether a fighter is conscious (we would all say the fighter should continue in this instance). What I am interested in are fights in which the opponent is clearly knocked out and the other fighter has the option to sneak in an extra hit or two before the ref has time to stop it.

My question: Does a show of compassion in this instance impact your feelings about a fighter? I can say I honestly have more respect for fighters who stop, or give the ref a chance to intervene while still maintaining position, vs. those that use the opportunity to inflict extra damage on their opponent. I can say I lost a little respect for Rampage, whom I love, and gained respect for Zentsoz, who I otherwise don't know from Adam, based on their responses to this situation.

Yes, the smart thing is to keep pounding the opponent, to never let up, to keep going until the ref pushes you off. But on a humanistic level, the sight of a fighter taking extra shots--especially in cases where there is a history of bad blood--makes me queasy, and gives me a bit of the feeling I had watching the early UFC's, where you didn't know if somebody was going to die because "There are no rules!"

I'm not trying to prescribe how fighters should act, or impose a new rule, or take the stoppage out of the ref's hands, where it belongs. But I think there is honor in pulling up, it's a credit to the sport and reinforces that this isn't a bar fight but rather two men testing their skills against one another, and from a fan's perspective, it increases my appreciation of the fighter, while the opposite diminishes it.

I'm curious how other fans feel, whether I'm alone in this or if it's a real phenomenon that affects a fighter's popularity one way or the other (probably some people would rather see the extra brutality). I thought about posting a poll, but this issue is too complicated and fraught to be reduced to a binary "yes/no" answer.

So ... how do you feel? And if anybody has any good GIFs to post, allowing people to dissect various knockouts as have been done in minute detail with Koshcheck, please post them here.