IMO, Fedor isn't undefeated.
by ElliotMatheny on May 1, 2009 4:14 AM EDT
Email
PrintNow hear me out. I love Fedor- he's one of my favorite fighters in the sport. I also think that he's the top HW, undisputedly, and a top P4P fighter.
However, I got to thinking about it, and I wondered- how exactly is it that people can completely discount the loss to TK (with their reasoning being that the rules RINGS had were bogus), and at the same time brush off the Arona fight?
Most people who've seen Fedor's fight agree that Arona won that fight, but due to the odd judging criteria of RINGS, Fedor won the decision. In my opinion, it's setting a double standard to say that his loss to Kohsaka was bull, and at the same time justify his win over Arona.
(Grainy photo of Arona mounted on Fedor in rd. 2)
I have to say, that carmically, Fedor has lost 1 fight in his career. Granted, that loss is to the wrong person (as I also think that he shouldn't have lost the fight to TK).
I also think that the reason we, as hardcore MMA fans, do something so hypocritical, is that it's Fedor. We LOVE Fedor, can't get enough of him. And we can't stand the thought that he's ever lost, because we see him as the exception to a rule in MMA: that no matter what, if you're consistently fighting top fighters, you will lose. And Fedor has seemingly defied this rule. He also has a very humble and likeable personality, is an extremely exciting fighter, and so on.
However, i'd like you to take a second and think about the fact that Fedor's only 2 fights whose results have been contested (the loss to Tsuyoshi Kohsaka, and the win over Ricardo Arona) were both inside the RINGS promotion, and that he probably deserves 1 loss on his record. Think about it.
The FanPosts are solely the subjective opinions of Bloody Elbow readers and do not necessarily reflect the views of Bloody Elbow editors or staff.
51 comments
|
1 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
“but due to the odd judging criteria of RINGS”
That sounds like he won, but just without style points. You are admitting there that, according to the rules they agreed, Fedor edged it out, so where is the dispute?
The TK loss was from a cut from an illegal strike. That becomes a NC under any competent athletic commission.
I’d love to poke a hole in Fedor’s armor as much as anyone, but its just not in his record
Watch the fight.
Is all I have to say.
The 3’rd round is the only round that Fedor won. Rounds 1 + 2 were all Arona- he took Fedor down at will, passed to side control, mount, and taking the back several times, and threatening with several submission attempts. Complete domination on the ground by Arona. Then, for some reason, the judges allowed a 3’rd round to happen, and Fedor did win that round, by stuffing takedowns, using effective striking, and controling the fight for the entirety of the round.
At any rate, the fight should’ve been 29-28 across the boards, or at least a split decision win for Arona.
And I know that the cut was from an illegal strike, but the odd rules in RINGS dictated that it counted as a loss for Fedor, and that TK advance in the tourney.
Now don’t get me wrong, Fedor didn’t deserve this loss, but in a roundabout kind of way, he does deserve A loss.
Supporting all Las Vegas MMA.
'09 is the year of the FW's.
by ElliotMatheny on May 1, 2009 1:40 PM EDT up reply actions
By other promotions judging criteria, Fedor would have lost to Arona, sure. But you can hardly discredit that win as with different judging criteria, Fedor would have or at least may have adjusted his fighting style and gameplan.
As for TK. Its simple. Technically its a loss, we all know that, but really, it was an illegal strike 10 seconds into the fight. Take from that what you will.
I’m sorry guys, but it’s clear you didn’t watch the fight to be making those statements. He didn’t “edge it out” – it was scored a draw so they had an extra round to decide it.
If you go and search this fight it is totally clear that Arona won. It’s not just different judging criteria but a very bad decision. He takes Fedor down in both rounds, mounts him, takes his back, has side control, and most of the time dominant position over Fedor for the majority of the fight, with the few bits of standup in between being uneventful and fairly even.
I can only assume that the judges were not particularly informed in ground fighting, because on a few occasions when Arona gets a take down Fedor grabs a hold of the neck, attempting a guillotine, but Arona moves to side control and half guard and from those positions it doesn’t matter how tight the grip of the neck is – there is not enough leverage for Arona to be in any danger. To someone who doesn’t know much about grappling you might have thought those were sticky positions for Arona, so the only way in which the judges could have scored anything to Fedor would have been for the “submission attempts”, but as stated, grabbing the head in those positions were not submission attempts.
I think your point is valid. He got a lost that within the grand scheme of things wasn’t deserved (though nonetheless a loss by the rules) but then he also got a win that within the grand scheme of things he didn’t deserve either. And his win wasn’t the result of the rules like his loss was, but very bad judging, which is worse.
Good post TS.
Thanks man.
Like you said, in the grand scheme of things, during his run in RINGS, he lost a fight he shouldn’t have, and he won a fight he shouldn’t have. It evens out, in my book.
Supporting all Las Vegas MMA.
'09 is the year of the FW's.
by ElliotMatheny on May 1, 2009 1:42 PM EDT up reply actions
Yeah and Rashad Evans has won 3 razor thin split decisions in the UFC, with one draw he was super lucky to have gotten. Where is the “Rashad is not undefeated” thread?
The judging systems used are not made for MMA and as long as they are used you are going to get a lot of dispute over results. You gotta take everyones record with a grain of salt
Well, the argument about Rashad is a whole different thing, all together.
Because the decisions he won raise the question of whether takedowns should count for points, if they don’t lead to anything.
Supporting all Las Vegas MMA.
'09 is the year of the FW's.
by ElliotMatheny on May 1, 2009 1:45 PM EDT up reply actions
A bad decision isn’t the same as changing the correct result of a fight due to tournament constraints.
by Sam Cupitt on May 1, 2009 7:27 AM EDT reply actions 1 recs
^ This.
Gotta love the smell of revisionism in the morning. Why don’t we just go back and change, say, Bispings record because we all know that he should have lost to Hammill?
Actually according to fightmetric Bisping actually did win that fight according to the 10 point system, though Hamill had more total offense
The first round was all Hamill but it was just a clear cut 10-9 round. Rounds 2 and 3 were very very close, so it really should be that much of a problem for the fight to be scored for Bisping 29-28.
Therein lies the problem with the 10 point must system. Perhaps if judges were to be more liberal with 10-8 rounds and say give really tight rounds 10-9, a clear cut round 10-8 and an absolute blitzing round 10-7.
Thus the scorecards for the Bisping/Hamill fight would become 30-26 – Hamill, 28-28, 28-28.
My, oh my does that look more fucked.
Because Bisping won two of three rounds in a three round fight.
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
Personally...
I thought that fight should’ve been a draw. For some reason, judges in America absolutely HATE declaring a fight a draw, but in my opinion, Hammill def won the first round in a blowout, Bisping edged him out with better striking and defense on the ground, and the 3’rd round was a tie.
For some reason, we just have to give one of the fighters a win.
Supporting all Las Vegas MMA.
'09 is the year of the FW's.
by ElliotMatheny on May 3, 2009 4:25 PM EDT up reply actions
That fight didn’t take place in America.
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
Haha. Good call.
What I mean is that you very rarely ever see draws in Orgs like the UFC, even though I think many fights could be seen as draws.
I don’t know why, maybe it’s told to them that they need to just pick one guy. All a draw means is that two very evenly matched fighters went the distance, and neither one gained a significant upper hand over the other throughout the match.
And especially in situations where the fight was extremely back and forth, and evenly matched. IMO, a fight like Guida/ Griffin should’ve been a draw.
Supporting all Las Vegas MMA.
'09 is the year of the FW's.
by ElliotMatheny on May 5, 2009 5:20 PM EDT up reply actions
I know what you meant and you’re right. I wouldn’t have had any problem with that fight being scored a draw or even for Hamill. It was just that close.
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
It doesn't matter...
The fight was fought within the criteria of the rules. Those rules were followed. If that happened in an MMA promotion today, you’d be right, but it doesn’t matter at this point.
Follow my analysis of all things MMA on BloodyElbow.com
I'm just saying...
that according to our standards today, if you went back in retrospect and judged all of Fedor’s fights, he still has 1 loss.
And that’s why I think it’s hypocritical of people to say that Fedor is undefeated.
Supporting all Las Vegas MMA.
'09 is the year of the FW's.
by ElliotMatheny on May 1, 2009 1:47 PM EDT up reply actions
Well, it doesn’t really matter. We can’t go back with today’s rules, and he’s one of the best fighters in the world currently.
Follow my analysis of all things MMA on BloodyElbow.com
by Leland Roling on May 1, 2009 4:26 PM EDT up reply actions
What do you expect to hear from pointing out something that everyone already knows? Besides which, I don’t think being “undefeated” or “defeated” has much bearing on how good a fighter is. Anderson Silva (although everyone still seems sour on him since sheep follow what they hear last) has several losses but people still regard him at #1 / #2 p4p.
Maybe Fedor lost a long-ass time ago in RINGS, which in my opinion shouldn’t even be considered for MMA canon. But are people still talking about how Daiju Takase made Anderson look like a clown on the ground? Not really because he’s improved significantly since then.
I can’t wait for the deluge of “THE SPIDER IS BACK!” articles after Anderson murks Forrest.
by Chris Nelson on May 1, 2009 10:38 AM EDT up reply actions
I never said it did...
i’m just saying, Fedor does have 1 loss on his record. Whether you follow the goofy rules in RINGS, or the standards of modern MMA judging/ scoring, Fedor has 1 loss in his career. Out of 31 career fights, against some of the toughest comp in his division, that’s incredible.
Supporting all Las Vegas MMA.
'09 is the year of the FW's.
by ElliotMatheny on May 1, 2009 1:49 PM EDT up reply actions
Irrelevant
It doesn’t matter if Fedor has that blemish on his record and lost to Arona early in his career. He is still the best in the world and arguing over something that happened years ago is pointless in my opinion.
AWmusic - mp3 blog on independent music..
I never said that he wasn't.
I’m just saying that everyone who states that Fedor should be “undefeated,” either hasn’t watched all his fights (and therefore isn’t a very well informed fan in the first place), or is completely biased. If you’re going to retroactively say that the judging in Rings was unfair by handing Fedor the loss to TK, then you also have to accept that he lost to Arona.
Supporting all Las Vegas MMA.
'09 is the year of the FW's.
by ElliotMatheny on May 1, 2009 1:51 PM EDT up reply actions
Haha.
Gold.
Supporting all Las Vegas MMA.
'09 is the year of the FW's.
by ElliotMatheny on May 1, 2009 1:51 PM EDT up reply actions
If the only argument that can be mounted
about Fedor not being undefeated is one related to judgment, then this a discussion that is not even worth having. I am not a huge Fedor fan, although I hugely respect him as a GREAT fighter, but I am not willing to get into discussing a decision. How many fights have there been where a guy could have reasonably won or should have lost, thus changing their record. The fact is, there is only one fight where you can even talk about this. So what is the point?
Arguing on the internet is like being in the special olympics, even when you win you are still retarded.
Bigger Question
Why didn’t we ever get to see Fedor/Arona II? Japanese promotions do it all the time – protect their champions. Remember how Wanderlei had over a dozen non title fights as champ? Same deal.
Fedor won the PRIDE HW title off Big Nog in 2003 – and defended it a total of three times until PRIDE FC closed its doors (Nog, Crocop, Hunt). During that same time he fought a total of nine non-title fights. Even if one discounts the HW GP of 2004 (four non-title fights and one title defense), there’s still five non-title fights (Fujita, Goodridge, Kohsaka, Zulu and Coleman).
Champs fighting non-title fights would get a truckload of badwill anywhere outside Japan.
by Monday Morning Martial Artist on May 1, 2009 2:58 PM EDT up reply actions
You cant disregard the rules of Ring which is why I dont say that Fedor has never been beaten but when telling my friends I say he has never been beaten by legal strikes. Arguing he lost the Arona fight is a non factor we could sit here and argue decisions all day the fact is he won vs Arona and lost the other fight just via illegal elbow.
I think you're missing my point.
I’m saying that looking back at Fedor’s career, in retrospect, it’s clear that he lost 1 fight. Out of some strange kind of luck and misfortune at the same time, the rules in RINGS made it so that he won a decision he didn’t deserve, and lost a fight he should’ve won.
And honestly, I don’t really hear anyone arguing about the Fedor/ Arona decision. And honestly, I think Fedor would absolutely maul Arona in a rematch, especially at this point in time; the fact of the matter is, Fedor was out grappled by a world class BJJ artist/ sub grappler early in his career. Fighters improve, and Fedor is a perfect example of that. But anyone who watches that fight, that knows anything about the sport can tell that Arona should’ve won that fight.
Supporting all Las Vegas MMA.
'09 is the year of the FW's.
by ElliotMatheny on May 1, 2009 8:02 PM EDT up reply actions
I get what your saying but im just saying I disagree. IMO he won the Arona fight. The difference is the Arona fight went to decision and he was declared the winner end of story, he won that fight nothing illegal. So if you dont want to count that illegal elbow as a loss that doesnt mean you have to say well he lost to Arona. The thing to me with the elbow is that it was illegal and if Fedor could have continued in the tournament he would have won via DQ, therefore they actually recognize him as the winner and only because he couldnt continue the other guy got to go on.
Regardless of whether the elbow was 'illegal' or not...
it was the powers that be in RINGS who decided that it was declared a loss for Fedor.
It was also the powers that be in RINGS who decided that Fedor won the fight against Arona.
Carma- who knows? But it worked itself out that Fedor deserves 1 loss on his record, and he just happens to have it against the wrong opponent, in the same Org,
Supporting all Las Vegas MMA.
'09 is the year of the FW's.
by ElliotMatheny on May 2, 2009 12:58 PM EDT up reply actions
Ok so my question is if Fedor would have been able to lets say get stitches and then continue in the next fight would they not have awarded him the DQ win? Also in the Arona fight IMO Fedor won the second round, then clearly won the overtime. I think its clear that RINGS did not score points for takedowns if you did not do anything with them. Fedor was the only one attempting to finish the fight ( which is what I understand they judge based on but who really knows with them.) Arona attempted one kimura or key lock and thats it I dont know if he ever landed a punch the whold fight. Again its only my opinion but I dont think you should be awarded a victory for meaningless takedowns.
Some very valid points.
To answer your first question, I have no idea. I’m inclined to think that it would’ve been a NC (because the elbow strike was inadvertent), but that’s not the point. The point is that Fedor lost the fight (that he shouldn’t have lost), as a result of RINGS. He also won a fight, which by popular opinion, he should’ve lost. Fascinating coincidence.
Regarding your opinion on the second round of Fedor/ Arona, i’m going to have to disagree. Not only did Arona take Fedor down at will, while really not taking any strikes standing, but he also continuously advanced position, while attempting submissions the whole time (like you said- the armlocks he attempted), as well as landing several pretty hard body shots. Fedor’s only “attempts to finish the fight,” were guillotines attempted from half guard, which he used to try to sweep Ricardo, which were in turn countered- allowing Arona to pass to side control in the process.
Supporting all Las Vegas MMA.
'09 is the year of the FW's.
by ElliotMatheny on May 4, 2009 12:29 AM EDT up reply actions
Also, just rewatched the fight...
2’nd round is pretty debatable, because Fedor landed some good shots on the feet, swept Arona once, and went for an ankle lock at one point in time. Still, modern MMA scoring would’ve given that round to Arona.
Another important thing to note is that Arona was the winner on 1/3 judges scorecards, while the other 2 scored the fight a draw.
Supporting all Las Vegas MMA.
'09 is the year of the FW's.
by ElliotMatheny on May 4, 2009 12:43 AM EDT up reply actions
Good point, I have to say I do really like this post but I guess another point of mine is your theory only works if you believe Arona should have won that fight(which as I am finding out most people do)
Also I read somewhere that Kohsaka was a big hometown favorite in this tournament. They were saying they thought the whole thing was really shady and they believed that the judges awarded Fedor the victory over Arona purposely 1. because Arona had opened up a pretty good cut on Fedor already and 2. Because Arona was thought to be the tougher challenge at the time. So this could be just conspiracy theorist working here but I just kind of found that interesting and nothing would surprise me when it came to RINGS ( or any other japanesse based org. really )
Well...
I think that kind of shady business practice is what spelled the end of Rings, and at least played a significant role in the demise of PRIDE.
But yeah, I def think that Arona had the bigger name at the time, because of his tremendous grappling pedigree. Fedor, while a good fighter, was pretty much a no- name.
Supporting all Las Vegas MMA.
'09 is the year of the FW's.
by ElliotMatheny on May 4, 2009 8:03 PM EDT up reply actions
some japanese promotions have odd rules
i dont know that this is the case for RINGs but some promotions declare a tiebreaker round if there is no finish in the first two rounds. the rest of the fight is not judged, only the last round. so under that, the arona win would be justified
RINGs seems like a bizzarre enough org that they might think thats a good system
Exactly.
And if they rule the fight against Arona a win, then people have no right to bitch about the loss to TK.
It’s just as arbitrary and unfair as Fedor’s win over Ricardo.
Supporting all Las Vegas MMA.
'09 is the year of the FW's.
by ElliotMatheny on May 2, 2009 6:21 AM EDT up reply actions
Arona won that fight by UFC judging criteria. Case closed.
Also, I would argue that Mark Hunt was winning the first 7 1/2 minutes of his fight with Fedor as well, and pretty handily too. Fedor is a man, but he is still the best fighter on the planet right now.
by Nick Travaglini on May 1, 2009 10:28 PM EDT reply actions
Agreed completely.
Except Hunt was finished decisively, and ironically by the same submission that he’d threatened Fedor with earlier in the fight.
Supporting all Las Vegas MMA.
'09 is the year of the FW's.
by ElliotMatheny on May 2, 2009 6:23 AM EDT up reply actions
Arona won the fight period, Fedor deserves to have that 1 loss on his record I just chose to award it to Ricardo and not TK.
by Raker on May 2, 2009 5:40 AM EDT reply actions 1 recs
This guy gets the point.
Supporting all Las Vegas MMA.
'09 is the year of the FW's.
by ElliotMatheny on May 2, 2009 6:24 AM EDT up reply actions
Do you guys really think that those old RINGS fights should be categorized as mma? Wasn’t there no striking to the head on the ground and standing 8 counts?
Yes.
Even though the RINGS rules were different from today’s standard for MMA (like you said- prohibited strikes to the head of a grounded opponent, as well as their judging system, standing 8 counts, etc), it’s undeniable that a very high level of competition took place in RINGS.
Plus, standing 8 counts are still in effect in modern MMA (Shooto comes to mind), and in many amateur/ feeder orgs, they still prohibit S.t.t.H.O.t.G.
Supporting all Las Vegas MMA.
'09 is the year of the FW's.
by ElliotMatheny on May 2, 2009 1:10 PM EDT up 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.
