How does the PRIDE compare to present day UFC?

by HeartbreakShot on Feb 11, 2012 12:27 PM EST

Sadly, i started getting into MMA when PRIDE was finished, meaning i missed out on all of the epicness it provided. However, i have gone back and watched some of the fights etc and i must say everything about it seems so amazing, the atmosphere, the fighters, the entrances, the Japanese-ness of it all and even the ring lol

As a total package, PRIDE seemed amazingly entertaining, i mean, who doesn't find this fantastic?!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kcybkaN2Zqk

My question though is that how do you think current day UFC compares to PRIDE at its best? Right now the UFC IMO is also doing wonderful things, for the most part putting the best fighters together with interesting fights on almost every card, how do you think they compare?

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

Tweet Comment 43 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

nothing compares to Pride imo, but thats because I got into MMA during that era. it took me a while to get used to the UFC and to appreciate it as a whole, but I came around. they’re both great shows in their own right, and were/are the biggest promotion at their peaks. I miss Pride but I’m glad we have the UFC.

I call you, I talk to me - Anderson Silva

by Orcus on Feb 11, 2012 12:36 PM EST via Android app reply actions

I wasn't a fan of MMA when Pride was around

But I’m incredibly nostalgic for an era I missed.

I can get into the spectacle side of the sport, the crazy entrances and all of that stuff would have been really cool.

As far as the fights and caliber of fighter. I believe that Mixed Martial Artists are always improving…each generation is better, I think. Modern day UFC outclasses Pride in the same way it outclasses that respective era of the UFC.

I would say modern day UFC is more legitimate. You don’t see ‘freakshow’ fights purely for the sake of it, like a guy with 1 fight, a loss, fighting the heavyweight champion.

We get the rare one-off like Toney-Couture…but that was done to sort of prove a point, not just because they thought it would be cool.

They had plenty of sort of throwaway ‘squash’ matches…I mean, there was a point, they liked building guys up, creating big winning streaks, having guys fight a lot and sort of build these ‘epic’ scenarios where guys with loads of wins would fight.

In the UFC, the champions exclusively fight guys who are deemed number 1 contenders.

"Junior Dos Santos is next." - Alistair Overeem

by Chris Groves on Feb 11, 2012 12:44 PM EST reply actions

I agree with this

Pride was better spectacle, UFC is better sport. There are times when I miss the spectacle, and I’d still love to see some foreign promotion do things more like Pride did things. But the UFC has turned MMA into legitimate sport in a way that Pride never was, and all things considered I strongly prefer legitimate sport to spectacle.

by MichaelDavidSmith on Feb 11, 2012 1:08 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs

er

Pride was legitimate, sure, they had their freakshows but you can’t tell me they were the majority type of fights during the Pride era, in fact, they were very minority, otherwise we should just call Pride pro-wrestling and not MMA. on top of that, you still got many Pride fighters still doing well in the UFC today, you can’t say that for most of the UFC fighters from that era. Pride had the best fighters during that era, they also put them in GPs (champs included), and no, they didn’t fix fights as some may seem to believe (with the exception of a few in the very beginning). so as far as sport goes, Pride was promoting the sport of MMA, even their freakshows were sport because they were not fixed. aside from that, you could make an argument as far as not doing background PED tests and having open weight GPs, but that’s not the ‘spectacle’ side of Pride…

I call you, I talk to me - Anderson Silva

by Orcus on Feb 11, 2012 1:51 PM EST up reply actions

I didn't say Pride wasn't legitimate

I just said it wasn’t as legitimate as today’s UFC.

by MichaelDavidSmith on Feb 11, 2012 2:30 PM EST up reply actions

legitimate in what sense?

*were fights fixed? I don’t think so (with the disclaimer of some in the beginning)
*were decisions fixed? I don’t think so
*were there PED tests? no, but from all the talk about steroids for the past few years I think it’s fair to say that fighters that do use steroids find ways around the tests, they may get popped for it every now and then but they are usually welcome back fighting for the promotion again, I don’t think that necessarily makes it more legitimate.

all in all, I’m not really trying to fight over this, I just think it’s not fair to say that Pride was not a legitimate show, or that it was ‘less’ legitimate somehow. I think both companies are legitimate, and I think both companies have produced great fights and great fighters. I don’t really see the need to point out differences between one or the other since they are two very different companies, from two very different cultures, with different rules and different audience.

I call you, I talk to me - Anderson Silva

by Orcus on Feb 11, 2012 3:00 PM EST up reply actions

I think the point about legitimacy is more about certain match-ups

There was a heavy reliance on using pro wrestlers in Pride and some of the freakshow matches were almost sadistic.

Bob Sapp vs. Tamura, the whole sad Takada saga, and especially those two fights Gary Goodridge had against that old wrestler were cringe-inducing.

I loved Pride; its what got me back into MMA this century. That doesn’t change the fact that they valued novelty and sensationalism just as much as athletic competition (maybe more).

"The President has been kidnapped by ninjas. Are you a bad enough dude to rescue the President?" -Anonymous

by Forbidden Psychological Technology on Feb 11, 2012 5:27 PM EST via mobile up reply actions

if they valued it more, then there would be more freakshows than regular fights. but that was not the case. tell me, how many freakshows were there, and how regular fights were there? what percentage would you give to each?

I call you, I talk to me - Anderson Silva

by Orcus on Feb 11, 2012 7:56 PM EST via Android app up reply actions

I honestly have no idea what the ratio was

I can only speak to my perception and memory. And because those images of Yarborough and Zulu and Giant Silva and all the others are every bit as vivid as Shogun/Little Nog, Silva/Rampage, and Fedor/Crocop, I think my statement is still accurate.

One reason freakshow fights are relatively rare is because freaks are a very limited resource in our world. I expect Al.Gore to make a documentary about this issue any day now.

"The President has been kidnapped by ninjas. Are you a bad enough dude to rescue the President?" -Anonymous

by Forbidden Psychological Technology on Feb 12, 2012 7:56 AM EST via mobile up reply actions

I agree with this

The UFC has had one fight in the last couple years that could fairly be described as a freak show, James Toney vs. Randy Couture. And even that wasn’t nearly as much of a freak show as something like Butterbean vs. Zulu, or Butterbean vs. Minowa, or Fedor vs. Zulu, or Giant Silva vs. Minowa, or Daiju Takase vs. Emmanuel Yarborough.

by MichaelDavidSmith on Feb 12, 2012 10:02 AM EST up reply actions

gracie vs hughes? kimbo?

I call you, I talk to me - Anderson Silva

by Orcus on Feb 12, 2012 10:54 AM EST via Android app up reply actions

bs, I’ll give you a number, less than five percent. anyone who watched Pride constantly should agree. but, like I said, Pride was for a different culture, trying to compare both would be unreasenable. you, having a western view of things don’t quite make Pride any ‘less’ legitimate.

I call you, I talk to me - Anderson Silva

by Orcus on Feb 12, 2012 10:53 AM EST via Android app up reply actions

I'm not sure anything I'm saying justifies such a defensive attitude

But let’s take that 5% you suggested. That means than, on average, every other 10-fight card had a freakshow fight with little-to-no athletic merit. That’s still pretty high. And, like I said, that was fine for Pride. It was a different organization with a different vision.

But if MMA is a sport (and I think it is) that kind of vision lessens it’s legitimacy as a “sport” organization.

"The President has been kidnapped by ninjas. Are you a bad enough dude to rescue the President?" -Anonymous

by Forbidden Psychological Technology on Feb 12, 2012 9:50 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs

not really being defensive

when I get defensive, it really shows usually with some contempt, saying BS and saying that you have a western view of things is not me trying hard at all :p

I call you, I talk to me - Anderson Silva

by Orcus on Feb 13, 2012 10:16 AM EST up reply actions

Yeah, defensive was a poor choice of words. Sorry about that.

Maybe insistent is more accurate. But, that again just speaks to how Pride was different things to different people. Like us, for example.

"The President has been kidnapped by ninjas. Are you a bad enough dude to rescue the President?" -Anonymous

by Forbidden Psychological Technology on Feb 13, 2012 10:53 AM EST up reply actions

I'll agree with that brother :p

I call you, I talk to me - Anderson Silva

by Orcus on Feb 13, 2012 12:30 PM EST up reply actions

UFC should have a special Pride rules fight night in Japan, to pay homage to MMA’s roots. But I missed that era, unfortunately.

Fuck you, double fingers
- Nick Diaz
Clothes make the man. Naked people have little or no influence on society
- Mark Twain

by TheLastEmpress on Feb 11, 2012 12:45 PM EST reply actions

UFC doesn't fix fights

Or offer more money to lose, gives fighters their match-ups more than a few weeks in advance, isn’t overtly run by major criminals, and is operated under the oversight of athletic commissions.

Sure, some of the fights were good and we got a lot of good moments, but there’s a lot of nostalgic white-washing going on when most people talk of Pride.

by WheelieMonkey on Feb 11, 2012 1:05 PM EST reply actions 1 recs

The Fertittas are at leadt 3rd generation Mafiosi.

by PeteJ on Feb 12, 2012 2:47 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs

I believe in the apples and oranges theory here...

UFC and PRIDE are apples and orange. Not really the same sport.

PRIDE was great, though. Loved it. Just hated all the comparisons to the UFC.

Host of Bloody Elbow Radio/Founder of Team Buh Bye
Follow me on Twitter

by Matt Bishop on Feb 11, 2012 1:33 PM EST reply actions

PRIDE was something special.

Bishop is right that it’s apples to oranges, without question the UFC is better as a sport and as a legitimate way of determining who the best fighter in the world is at a given weightclass. Still, the spectacle and the wide-open ruleset combined with the wild matchmaking and diversity in fighter styles and skill levels made for some truly amazing events.

Though there are some excellent fights before, mostly from Sakuraba and Igor Vovchanchyn, if you’re going to look through the PRIDE video library, I’d watch the 2000 Grand Prix, then skip to PRIDE 15 and watch everything from that point on. The events before then tend to have wacky rules and have about a 50-50 ratio of good fights to unbelievably, mind-numbingly, tortuously boring fights.

Share for share, share alike, you'll get struck each time I strike.

by gzl5000 on Feb 11, 2012 1:49 PM EST reply actions

PRIDE's ruleset was fantastic

But the rose colored glasses always come on when discussing it. There were plenty of lame matchups and freak shows in Pride history. If the UFC adopted some of Prides rules, it would be far superior to PRIDE in almost every way.

Join the BECW Prospects Camp if you want in the game for Season 3!

by discoandherpes on Feb 11, 2012 1:58 PM EST reply actions 1 recs

I love what the Pride ruleset did for the fights..

and I certainly love Pride as a whole.

But I think head kicks to a downed opponent are incredibly dangerous.

by Sabate on Feb 11, 2012 2:48 PM EST up reply actions

No more dangerous than a head kick to a standing opponent

Soccer kicks are not easy to land on elite mixed martial artists. Most of the guys you saw Shogun and Wandy smash them with weren’t high level fighters.

Join the BECW Prospects Camp if you want in the game for Season 3!

by discoandherpes on Feb 11, 2012 3:15 PM EST up reply actions

I agree

Soccer kicks aren’t nearly as bad as they look, however I think stomps
should remain banned. I’m definitely for knees on the ground to but i think
it would have to be more specific, cuz knees to the top of the head can
be very dangerous.

by tesla9 on Feb 11, 2012 7:23 PM EST up reply actions

Agreed with stomps

But top of the head is a legal place to hit.

Join the BECW Prospects Camp if you want in the game for Season 3!

by discoandherpes on Feb 12, 2012 1:18 PM EST up reply actions

PRIDE knees. Yes please.

by M.Sphinx on Feb 11, 2012 2:50 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs

So right on time

It rhymes

Join the BECW Prospects Camp if you want in the game for Season 3!

by discoandherpes on Feb 11, 2012 3:15 PM EST up reply actions

PRIDE at its best was better than the UFC.

The again, Giant Silva has my eternal pity and I cannot forgive PRIDE for that.

by M.Sphinx on Feb 11, 2012 2:49 PM EST reply actions

but that was the best fighter evah!

I call you, I talk to me - Anderson Silva

by Orcus on Feb 11, 2012 3:02 PM EST up reply actions

I did enjoy PRIDE

But the whole Japanese feel never really did it for me. I was always more of a UFC guy even back in 2002-5 which would be considered the height of PRIDE I’d guess. Both promotions are/were great in their own way, though.

by Newman24 on Feb 11, 2012 4:05 PM EST reply actions

I’d really love for the UFC- maybe a two years down the line- to adopt a more similar ruleset. There’s no reason legitimate strikes like knees and kicks to the head of a grounded opponent shouldn’t be utilized. I say the UFC should try to adopt the ruleset when its up to the commission, but there’s no way the commissions will pass those changes unless the UFC is lobbying for them.

Also, here is a fantastic Pride highlight. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HoHZpNX9nQc&list=FLwghDiS7hqGzJVm34hxvfPg&index=71&feature=plpp_video

INEPT coming for the season 2 BECW title.
"Believe me I have my own demon in my had. People has no idea how dark I am in my head sometime. Nick Diaz deserves to be beat down."- Georges St Pierre
Follow me on Twitter if you like MMA, baseball, and moderately funny people: @TimBernier31

by Tim Bernier on Feb 11, 2012 5:17 PM EST reply actions

I agree

I could do without stomps (back of the head damage) but there’s no logical reason why the rest shouldn’t be allowed, apart from possibly hurting the UFC’s chances of mainstream approval.

In a few years I’d like to see the Unified Rules redone from top to bottom. The sport has grown so much since the dark ages that it seems crazy we still use the same rules (although the Unified Rules have of course been updates post-Greasegate and in other cases).

Stuff I’d like to see:
- More strikes allowed
- New judging criteria (get rid of aggression, defense and octagon control and rewrite effective striking and grappling)
- An updated 10-point must system (introducing more 10-10s and 10-8s)
- New weight cutting rules, ie. weigh-ins on the same day as the fight – not just to get more natural weight classes but also for the long-term health of the fighters
- Clearer guidelines regarding referee standups and warnings/point deductions (especially when it comes to stalling)
- New PED rules (TRT seems to become more and more widespread; either legalise & regulate steroids or crack down on abusers)

BECW Season 2 Captain of the Intellegent Northern English Picking Team - 80% more INEPT than all of you, 8 times out of 12
Please visit the Daniel James Miller Foundation and donate.

by wonderfulspam on Feb 11, 2012 11:17 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs

Agree with all of this

by MichaelDavidSmith on Feb 12, 2012 7:38 AM EST up reply actions

I fear that the same day weight cutting would not do what we want it to.

Other than that, yes please.

by jebmak on Feb 12, 2012 10:01 AM EST up reply actions

I'd love to see weigh-ins right at the start of the fight

They put a scale right there at the entrance to the cage, you step on it and if you’re on weight you step into the cage. If you’re overweight you lose by disqualification. I know that won’t happen for business reasons (if that happened before a main event there would be rioting) but no fighter would dangerously dehydrate himself if that was the weight-cutting protocol.

by MichaelDavidSmith on Feb 12, 2012 10:06 AM EST up reply actions

Fighters would still probably cut weight to try and get an advantage

Enter the cage dehydrated then die. No one wants that.

I would like if the UFC weighed them the same day, like in boxing just for informational purposes.

Is informational even a word?

Join the BECW Prospects Camp if you want in the game for Season 3!

by discoandherpes on Feb 12, 2012 1:22 PM EST up reply actions

Lets email keith kizer and try to sway him.

Join the BECW Prospects Camp if you want in the game for Season 3!

by discoandherpes on Feb 12, 2012 1:19 PM EST up reply actions

It can’t happen right now. MMA is still trying to break into the mainstream, and adding rules that will easily be thought of as barbaric will not help.

by Tim Bernier on Feb 12, 2012 2:40 PM EST via mobile up reply actions