Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

TUF 22 - Europe vs USA (McGregor & Faber coaching)**Contains Spoilers**

1568101116

Comments

  • Closed Accounts Posts: 4,480 ✭✭✭Devastator


    TUF is an exhibition tournament, its about time they have brought something like this in because people have been looking to lay n pray since the first series to get through.

    How many seasons have people said tuf is crap because the fights have been crap? Now people don't have that luxury to control their opponent for 2/3 rounds and try to get through without taking any damage. FS they are in the tournament to fight and win.

    Any comparison to wwe is unbelievably ridiculous!


    Seriously, if Conor wasn't a coach this series how many people would be watching? I wouldn't. I might catch the odd episode but not make a point of watching it, haven't done that with last 4/5(maybe more) series of TUF because its been crap. It was dying a very slow drawn out death, at least with this it might spark a little bit of life back into the format


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 7,683 ✭✭✭Subcomandante Marcos


    I'm watching because Ryan Hall is a contestant, I could give a fiddlers who the coaches are.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,053 ✭✭✭cletus


    Devastator wrote: »
    TUF is an exhibition tournament, its about time they have brought something like this in because people have been looking to lay n pray since the first series to get through.

    How many seasons have people said tuf is crap because the fights have been crap? Now people don't have that luxury to control their opponent for 2/3 rounds and try to get through without taking any damage. FS they are in the tournament to fight and win.

    Any comparison to wwe is unbelievably ridiculous!


    Seriously, if Conor wasn't a coach this series how many people would be watching? I wouldn't. I might catch the odd episode but not make a point of watching it, haven't done that with last 4/5(maybe more) series of TUF because its been crap. It was dying a very slow drawn out death, at least with this it might spark a little bit of life back into the format

    Its only an exhibition tournament to get around nsac rules on frequency of fights etc. To put control of a win in the hands of somebody external to the competition is analogous to having somebody standing on the sideline at a club championship quarter final in football, and then deciding that a winning team don't get to go through to the semis because their match wasn't exciting enough.

    I don't know about you, but that's a damn sight closer to Vince McMahon's way of thinking than I want the sport I love to be


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 4,480 ✭✭✭Devastator


    cletus wrote: »
    I don't know about you, but that's a damn sight closer to Vince McMahon's way of thinking than I want the sport I love to be

    Its been 20 odd years since I watched wrestling so Im presuming thats someone involved in it. That statement is utter nonsense!


    In TUF is the outcome of a fight is determined by the fighters or the judges, it is not pre-determined before they set foot in the octagon, therefore IT IS NOT like professional wrestling.


  • Business & Finance Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 32,387 Mod ✭✭✭✭DeVore


    plus TUF != UFC != MMA

    TUF is a reality TV show... you might as well say "I don't want UFC fighters to be fighting every two weeks"... they do it in the house but not in the UFC.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 28,710 ✭✭✭✭Paully D


    I know the show is heavily edited, but we can only go on what we've seen and I have to say I was very disappointed in Conor during that episode.

    Firstly I will say I thought the advice he was giving to Sasha was very good and obviously he'll be extremely frustrated he wasn't taking any of it on board, but once it became clear that it wasn't going to be followed through on I thought he made himself look like a complete arse. Calling him a pussy was ridiculous, but not quite as ridiculous as his little speech in the dressing room afterwards. Sharma has just lost out on his dream of reaching the UFC and is already feeling like crap, yet Conor somehow succeeds in making him feel ever worse. I kind of wish he had let rip at Conor and told him to shut the **** up to be honest.

    The episode was unique also as the only time I've ever seen Conor speechless since he blew up was when Faber told him he should start turning up to the morning sessions in the aftermath of that fight. It was probably edited that way, but again that's all we have to go on. Conor absolutely had Faber wound up regarding Dillashaw too.

    A good episode overall.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,053 ✭✭✭cletus


    Devastator wrote: »
    In TUF is the outcome of a fight is determined by the fighters or the judges, it is not pre-determined before they set foot in the octagon, therefore IT IS NOT like professional wrestling.


    Except that this season, for two fighters that WIN their fight, it won't be decided by them, it will be decided by a fat bald hypertensive man who's only real experience of combat is teaching boxercise


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,053 ✭✭✭cletus


    DeVore wrote: »
    plus TUF != UFC != MMA

    TUF is a reality TV show... you might as well say "I don't want UFC fighters to be fighting every two weeks"... they do it in the house but not in the UFC.

    I am well aware that UFC does not equal MMA.

    I am also aware that in a sporting context, an external person judging the quality of a win is only a few steps away from deciding who wins before the bout

    Look at it like this. Ireland play Romania on Sunday with a heavily changed team. They win but its a poor game from a spectator's point of view. As a result, an official external the game decides that Ireland don't receive the points for the win, as the other games were more exciting. It's ridiculous.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 4,402 ✭✭✭nxbyveromdwjpg


    cletus wrote: »
    I really don't. One of the things that distinguish mma from wwe is that it is real, therefore like any sport, the winners and losers are decided by the actual competition. Not acknowledging a win in a tournament format because its not "exciting" enough is dangerously close to crossing that line. There would be uproar in any other sport if that was suggested

    Don't want to be wrestle ****ed to a decision loss? Go work you takedown defence. Otherwise, a fight is a fight, and if a guy beats you cause he can do something you can't stop, then you lose

    But this is the real world, they're fighting for UFC contract and Dana is looking for exciting fights and that's who he wants to sign.

    If they want the job they need to fit the role, same as any other job.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 4,480 ✭✭✭Devastator


    cletus wrote: »
    Except that this season, for two fighters that WIN their fight, it won't be decided by them, it will be decided by a fat bald hypertensive man who's only real experience of combat is teaching boxercise

    Its so simple and straight forward how TUF/UFC/MMA and wrestling are NOT the same I can't even start to understand how you do not get it!!

    TUF/MMA/UFC = NO pre determined fights
    Wrestling = Pre determined fights

    Whether someone is kept in an exhitbition is absolutely FA to do with wrestling. Col. has summed it up perfectly, this situation is like a job interview, 3 people pass the interview but only 1 is offered the contract. Is this pro wrestling to you aswell? Is the ultimate warrior going to run in screaming and shake the boss by the ears? :rolleyes:


    Whoa, so you don't like Dana but that is your 2nd absolute BS statement in your last few posts. Only experience is boxercise? hahaha, did you read that from Wiki and just ignore everything else he has been a part of in moving MMA/UFC forward globally?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 7,683 ✭✭✭Subcomandante Marcos


    The man who decides if you're "good enough" to fight in the UFC, ladies and gentlemen.

    dana_boxercise.jpg


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,739 ✭✭✭ASOT


    The man who decides if you're "good enough" to fight in the UFC, ladies and gentlemen.

    dana_boxercise.jpg

    Also the man who has more money than anyone that posts on this forum to be fair. I know which life I'd rather have haha


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,539 ✭✭✭John_D80


    FFS lads cop on. Even if he did teach boxercise in a past life, i think his 20+ years experience as a promoter and co-owner of the most succesful MMA promotion in history, more than qualify him as an authority on MMA.

    Edit: How old is that picture anyway? 20 years? 25?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,053 ✭✭✭cletus


    I'm not suggesting that ufc=wwe.

    What I am saying is that by Dana deciding what type of win he considers to be good or bad us the first step to affecting the outcome of a fight.

    He is absolutely entitled to like barnstorming brawls over lay and pray. However, he should not be able to decide that somebody who wins a fight did not win in a manner he approves of, and then say that win doesn't count. This does not happen at any other level in any other sport. Ever

    Regarding the boxercise, that was hyperbolic facetiousness (mostly :D)


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 7,683 ✭✭✭Subcomandante Marcos


    cletus wrote: »
    I'm not suggesting that ufc=wwe.

    What I am saying is that by Dana deciding what type of win he considers to be good or bad us the first step to affecting the outcome of a fight.

    He is absolutely entitled to like barnstorming brawls over lay and pray. However, he should not be able to decide that somebody who wins a fight did not win in a manner he approves of, and then say that win doesn't count. This does not happen at any other level in any other sport. Ever

    Regarding the boxercise, that was hyperbolic facetiousness (mostly :D)


    What happens when people start getting cut depsite being on winning streaks, just because Dana doesn't like their style?

    The majority of people find Cathal Pendred fights boring as f*ck, but as long as he's winning he should be there getting fights and making money.

    If someone like Thanh Le or Cowboy Cerrone with all their flash and flicks is getting beat up by wrestlers like Mendes or Nunez or grinders like Pendred or Gritz, so ****ing what, learn to stop them from taking you down or learn how to wrestle, the entire point of the UFC is to see how different styles against eachother, people get wound up because grapplers have by and large dominated the sport since it began, well guess what, in a 1 v 1 fight, grappling is the most effective way to immobilise your opponent and save yourself from injury. It's not rocket science.

    There are already rules about refs making them stand up if they aren't active, so what's the problem?

    Dana White is trying to turn it into Glory with a little bit of ground and pound.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,053 ✭✭✭cletus


    But this is the real world, they're fighting for UFC contract and Dana is looking for exciting fights and that's who he wants to sign.

    If they want the job they need to fit the role, same as any other job.

    Except that its not. The show is not billed as "come down to the gym, fight once and if we like what we see we may hire you"

    It is billed as a knockout tournament where if you win, you progress, and the overall winner gets a contract. But now, you can win your fight and not be allowed to progress. That is not how any sport works.

    There are myriad reasons why a fighter might have a poor or slow fight, especially when fighting in quick succession, but the only consideration should be whether they won or lost


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 7,683 ✭✭✭Subcomandante Marcos


    cletus wrote: »
    Except that its not. The show is not billed as "come down to the gym, fight once and if we like what we see we may hire you"

    It is billed as a knockout tournament where if you win, you progress, and the overall winner gets a contract. But now, you can win your fight and not be allowed to progress. That is not how any sport works.

    There are myriad reasons why a fighter might have a poor or slow fight, especially when fighting in quick succession, but the only consideration should be whether they won or lost

    Also, if the winner of the boring fight was just caught in a match with someone who made it boring, then why should they be punished? If someone wants to stand up or throw punches but the other person just keeps pushing them onto the cage and lying on them or walking away or making it awkward, why should the winner be punished?

    Last fight for example was boring as hell because Sascha kept trying to go to the ground, Gritz wasn't shooting for take downs, why the hell should Grtiz be kicked out because the lad he fought spoiled the fight?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 4,480 ✭✭✭Devastator


    cletus wrote: »
    I'm not suggesting that ufc=wwe.

    What I am saying is that by Dana deciding what type of win he considers to be good or bad us the first step to affecting the outcome of a fight.

    No its not!! Its not even close!! Please tell us whatever messed up logic in your head sees this as pre determining a fight outcome???
    What happens when people start getting cut depsite being on winning streaks, just because Dana doesn't like their style?

    Already happens.....Nate Marquart the obvious one.

    grappling is the most effective way to immobilise your opponent and save yourself from injury. It's not rocket science.

    I don't see how immobilizing your opponent so as not to get injured wins a fight! Thats just making it a neutral contest.
    cletus wrote: »
    It is billed as a knockout tournament where if you win, you progress, and the overall winner gets a contract. But now, you can win your fight and not be allowed to progress. That is not how any sport works.

    Billed as a knockout tournament? Wonderful! And I'm sure whoever gets cut will not be a KO winner, rather someone who dry humped their opponent or didn't go all out to win.

    How is it not how any sport works? Lots of sport work off ranking systems, including the UFC where someone(Maybe with boxercise experience :rolleyes:) decides where a fighter should be placed in a list based on their recent fight. This is basically what the new rule is, a ranking system with the lowest not continuing in the competition
    There are myriad reasons why a fighter might have a poor or slow fight, especially when fighting in quick succession, but the only consideration should be whether they won or lost

    Someone argued that exciting fighters should improve against grapplers if they want to succeed, so in the exact same sense you can argue the fighter must do better against a boring opponent so he is not in that position.


    My head is about to explode with the wrestling comparisons, pathetic boxercise comments and the general craziness of what some of you are trying to argue in this thread.

    I'm out.


  • Registered Users Posts: 302 ✭✭jjdonegal


    Devastator wrote: »
    No its not!! Its not even close!! Please tell us whatever messed up logic in your head sees this as pre determining a fight outcome???



    Already happens.....Nate Marquart the obvious one.




    I don't see how immobilizing your opponent so as not to get injured wins a fight! Thats just making it a neutral contest.



    Billed as a knockout tournament? Wonderful! And I'm sure whoever gets cut will not be a KO winner, rather someone who dry humped their opponent or didn't go all out to win.

    How is it not how any sport works? Lots of sport work off ranking systems, including the UFC where someone(Maybe with boxercise experience :rolleyes:) decides where a fighter should be placed in a list based on their recent fight. This is basically what the new rule is, a ranking system with the lowest not continuing in the competition



    Someone argued that exciting fighters should improve against grapplers if they want to succeed, so in the exact same sense you can argue the fighter must do better against a boring opponent so he is not in that position.


    My head is about to explode with the wrestling comparisons, pathetic boxercise comments and the general craziness of what some of you are trying to argue in this thread.

    I'm out.

    Very good points but im opposed to the new format. For me id say may the best martial artist win. If that means Fighter A takes down Fighter B and grinds out a victory over 2 rounds then he deserves to go through in my eyes.
    Jon Fitch on his run up to the GSP title fight was an extremely effective martial artist and although he might not have been everyone's cup of tea I loved watching him beat fighters through his effective style.
    I might be old school but I want the best martial artist to get through not the most exciting.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,053 ✭✭✭cletus


    Devastator wrote: »
    No its not!! Its not even close!! Please tell us whatever messed up logic in your head sees this as pre determining a fight outcome???



    Already happens.....Nate Marquart the obvious one.




    I don't see how immobilizing your opponent so as not to get injured wins a fight! Thats just making it a neutral contest.



    Billed as a knockout tournament? Wonderful! And I'm sure whoever gets cut will not be a KO winner, rather someone who dry humped their opponent or didn't go all out to win.

    How is it not how any sport works? Lots of sport work off ranking systems, including the UFC where someone(Maybe with boxercise experience :rolleyes:) decides where a fighter should be placed in a list based on their recent fight. This is basically what the new rule is, a ranking system with the lowest not continuing in the competition



    Someone argued that exciting fighters should improve against grapplers if they want to succeed, so in the exact same sense you can argue the fighter must do better against a boring opponent so he is not in that position.


    My head is about to explode with the wrestling comparisons, pathetic boxercise comments and the general craziness of what some of you are trying to argue in this thread.

    I'm out.


    OK let me try and answer the above.

    If Dana White says that "boring" wins will not be considered wins, he is attempting to affect the outcome of the fight, ie he is influencing how a fighter will fight in the octagon. This means that a fighter who is perhaps injured, or trying to conserve himself for the next round, or may simply Jon Fitch type fighter, will fight differently than if it was a simple case of win your fight.

    I don't agree with cutting a fighter on a winning streak.

    I'm not sure if you are intentionally misunderstanding the term knockout tournament. It has nothing to do with ko'ing somebody, rather it means that the winner of each fight/match etc, advances to the next round, and the loser goes no further, or is "knocked out" of the tournament


    This new rule has nothing to do with rankings. Very specifically, a fighter can win a fight, and then that win is not counted. This is even more important in the knockout format this competition uses. It means that despite winning the first round, the fighter does not get a place in the quarter finals. Again, this does not happen in any other sport. I would challenge you to give an example where a team or individual won a match, and the governing body / organisers of the event ruled that the win would not stand or be counted based on the method of victory being too boring.

    I'm not sure what your last point means, but essentially, I believe that the best fighter is the one that wins. If Jon Fitch takes you down, and you can't get up, land strikes or reverse position, that's on you not Jon Fitch. He deserves to win.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 302 ✭✭jjdonegal


    cletus wrote: »
    OK let me try and answer the above.

    If Dana White says that "boring" wins will not be considered wins, he is attempting to affect the outcome of the fight, ie he is influencing how a fighter will fight in the octagon. This means that a fighter who is perhaps injured, or trying to conserve himself for the next round, or may simply Jon Fitch type fighter, will fight differently than if it was a simple case of win your fight.

    I don't agree with cutting a fighter on a winning streak.

    I'm not sure if you are intentionally misunderstanding the term knockout tournament. It has nothing to do with ko'ing somebody, rather it means that the winner of each fight/match etc, advances to the next round, and the loser goes no further, or is "knocked out" of the tournament


    This new rule has nothing to do with rankings. Very specifically, a fighter can win a fight, and then that win is not counted. This is even more important in the knockout format this competition uses. It means that despite winning the first round, the fighter does not get a place in the quarter finals. Again, this does not happen in any other sport. I would challenge you to give an example where a team or individual won a match, and the governing body / organisers of the event ruled that the win would not stand or be counted based on the method of victory being too boring.

    I'm not sure what your last point means, but essentially, I believe that the best fighter is the one that wins. If Jon Fitch takes you down, and you can't get up, land strikes or reverse position, that's on you not Jon Fitch. He deserves to win.

    Pretty much sums up my thinking. Well said.


  • Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 4,386 Mod ✭✭✭✭TherapyBoy


    I think it's important to remember that they are filming a reality-type tv show that has previously had problems with 'boring' fights or fighters seemingly not wanting to take risks. For this type of UFC tv programming I've no problem with them trying to maintain viewers or even attract new ones by attempting to light a fire under these fighters to give us exciting fights.

    They're not saying if your fight is dull it doesn't count, they saying we'll have 9 fight winners, the 8 most impressive winners will proceed so give 110% and don't leave anything in there.

    If they start telling a fighter he won't win the belt with a win in his title fight unless the audience is all on their feet when the fight ends, well that's a different story.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,494 ✭✭✭✭martyos121


    I'm absolutely fine with this rule. Last thing we need is more Pendreds in the UFC.

    (No offence to him at all, he's a sound lad to talk to)


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,053 ✭✭✭cletus


    TherapyBoy wrote: »
    I think it's important to remember that they are filming a reality-type tv show that has previously had problems with 'boring' fights or fighters seemingly not wanting to take risks. For this type of UFC tv programming I've no problem with them trying to maintain viewers or even attract new ones by attempting to light a fire under these fighters to give us exciting fights.

    They're not saying if your fight is dull it doesn't count, they saying we'll have 9 fight winners, the 8 most impressive winners will proceed so give 110% and don't leave anything in there.

    If they start telling a fighter he won't win the belt with a win in his title fight unless the audience is all on their feet when the fight ends, well that's a different story.


    I understand that the programme itself is reality based TV, I'm just concerned that the fights, which up to this point have been legit (boredom not withstanding), will become viewed in the same vein.

    And they are saying that two of the wins this season won't count. Everybody who agrees with this new "rule" seem to think that the net effect will be preventing the two most boring fighters progressing in the competition. But what happens if every fighter takes Dana's words to heart. What if every single fight is two guys whaling on each other, every fight is "exciting", what then? Two of those " exciting" fighters will STILL be told that their win doesn't count, and they don't get to progress because of some arbitrary notions around what makes a good or bad fight


  • Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 4,386 Mod ✭✭✭✭TherapyBoy


    I have no problem with it, as long as it is only happening on the TUF TV show. I don't consider these fights with the same weight as when they are fighting in the UFC afterwards.

    To me, the Ultimate Fighter is just an audition for the UFC. Show us what you can do & if you impress us we'll let you do it on the big stage.


  • Registered Users Posts: 11,156 ✭✭✭✭Foxtrol


    cletus wrote: »
    OK let me try and answer the above.

    If Dana White says that "boring" wins will not be considered wins, he is attempting to affect the outcome of the fight, ie he is influencing how a fighter will fight in the octagon. This means that a fighter who is perhaps injured, or trying to conserve himself for the next round, or may simply Jon Fitch type fighter, will fight differently than if it was a simple case of win your fight.

    I don't agree with cutting a fighter on a winning streak.

    I'm not sure if you are intentionally misunderstanding the term knockout tournament. It has nothing to do with ko'ing somebody, rather it means that the winner of each fight/match etc, advances to the next round, and the loser goes no further, or is "knocked out" of the tournament


    This new rule has nothing to do with rankings. Very specifically, a fighter can win a fight, and then that win is not counted. This is even more important in the knockout format this competition uses. It means that despite winning the first round, the fighter does not get a place in the quarter finals. Again, this does not happen in any other sport. I would challenge you to give an example where a team or individual won a match, and the governing body / organisers of the event ruled that the win would not stand or be counted based on the method of victory being too boring.

    I'm not sure what your last point means, but essentially, I believe that the best fighter is the one that wins. If Jon Fitch takes you down, and you can't get up, land strikes or reverse position, that's on you not Jon Fitch. He deserves to win.

    Numerous sports give the team with the more decisive victory the chance to progress over a more boring side. For example the rugby world cup, you get an extra point for scoring more than 4 tries so you could win the same number of games as another team in your group but get knocked out if you’ve only scraped by opponents kicking penalties. Many other sports rely on points scored or points difference which has a similar effect of punishing teams who are boring and only do the minimal to win.

    I agree that it’s no longer a straight knockout competition but the first round is more of a group phase but thereafter it is. The comparison to wrestling is just silly.


  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 18,219 Mod ✭✭✭✭CatFromHue


    So is your man Hall in a bit of danger as he's a submission specialist?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 7,683 ✭✭✭Subcomandante Marcos


    CatFromHue wrote: »
    So is your man Hall in a bit of danger as he's a submission specialist?

    Submissions aren't boring, halls fights haven't been boring, they're just quick.

    Boring is People like pendred grinding their way to wins by literally just exhausting their opponents.

    Jiu Jitsu ain't boring, those heel hooks be a thing of beauty.


  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 18,219 Mod ✭✭✭✭CatFromHue


    Yeah I know.

    I was just thinking if everyone else ups there games to go for interesting fights and Hall ends up getting really quick submissions could he then, in theory, be in danger.


  • Registered Users Posts: 11,156 ✭✭✭✭Foxtrol


    CatFromHue wrote: »
    Yeah I know.

    I was just thinking if everyone else ups there games to go for interesting fights and Hall ends up getting really quick submissions could he then, in theory, be in danger.

    Of course not, decisive finishes will be top of the list of the fighters who will go through.


  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 18,219 Mod ✭✭✭✭CatFromHue


    Fair enough but it would be funny, though very remote, if Hall did get eliminated by these new rules.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,739 ✭✭✭ASOT


    CatFromHue wrote: »
    Fair enough but it would be funny, though very remote, if Hall did get eliminated by these new rules.

    But he won't so there's not reason to worry about that.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,053 ✭✭✭cletus


    Foxtrol wrote: »
    Numerous sports give the team with the more decisive victory the chance to progress over a more boring side. For example the rugby world cup, you get an extra point for scoring more than 4 tries so you could win the same number of games as another team in your group but get knocked out if you’ve only scraped by opponents kicking penalties. Many other sports rely on points scored or points difference which has a similar effect of punishing teams who are boring and only do the minimal to win.

    I agree that it’s no longer a straight knockout competition but the first round is more of a group phase but thereafter it is. The comparison to wrestling is just silly.

    I dont think we're really getting anywhere with this argument, but I'll give it one last go. The above examples incentivise a win. If Ireland can score the fourth try in a game they receive the bodus point. If they don't get four tries, no bonus point.

    However, and this is the point I've been making all along; they will not be told the win without a bonus point doesn't count because the match was boring. The points they scored from winning the match will still count towards moving out of a group, and if it happens st a knockout stage, they will not be told that even thought they won, they won't be progressing to the next round because the match was bad/boring/ not scoring bonus point etc. In every sport a win stands as a win, good match or bad


  • Registered Users Posts: 11,156 ✭✭✭✭Foxtrol


    cletus wrote: »
    I dont think we're really getting anywhere with this argument, but I'll give it one last go. The above examples incentivise a win. If Ireland can score the fourth try in a game they receive the bodus point. If they don't get four tries, no bonus point.

    However, and this is the point I've been making all along; they will not be told the win without a bonus point doesn't count because the match was boring. The points they scored from winning the match will still count towards moving out of a group, and if it happens st a knockout stage, they will not be told that even thought they won, they won't be progressing to the next round because the match was bad/boring/ not scoring bonus point etc. In every sport a win stands as a win, good match or bad

    You asked for examples of sports with similar incentives to be exciting with repercussions of being eliminated despite a win and I’ve provided them.

    The win in the house still counts as a win but they just don’t advance to the next round (even if none of this goes on the fight record). Similarly, Ireland could win the same number of games as Italy but not advance to the next round because they didn’t secure as many bonus points or have worse points difference or have worse trys scored. It doesn’t mean their win didn’t count, they simply don’t advance in the competition.

    MMA is already different to most sports, as the judges subjectively decide who wins if there’s no finish in the allotted time limit. Because of this there isn’t another sport that specifically removes teams from a competition for subjectively being boring but there are many examples where the tournament rules are designed to make sure the more exciting team progresses over the boring conservative one. This does not mean the likes of the rugby world cup or the champions league are suddenly turned into the WWE.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,053 ✭✭✭cletus


    Foxtrol wrote: »
    You asked for examples of sports with similar incentives to be exciting with repercussions of being eliminated despite a win and I’ve provided them.

    The win in the house still counts as a win but they just don’t advance to the next round (even if none of this goes on the fight record). Similarly, Ireland could win the same number of games as Italy but not advance to the next round because they didn’t secure as many bonus points or have worse points difference or have worse trys scored. It doesn’t mean their win didn’t count, they simply don’t advance in the competition.

    MMA is already different to most sports, as the judges subjectively decide who wins if there’s no finish in the allotted time limit. Because of this there isn’t another sport that specifically removes teams from a competition for subjectively being boring but there are many examples where the tournament rules are designed to make sure the more exciting team progresses over the boring conservative one. This does not mean the likes of the rugby world cup or the champions league are suddenly turned into the WWE.

    The above is what happens in group stage, or round robin. Neither of these are a factor in TUF. Its straightforward knockout. Win, you go forward, lose, your out. Its not a case of winning by a certain number of points but the team above won by more. Its simply you won, but we didn't like the fight, so it doesn't count. Anyway I think I'm done with this argument


  • Registered Users Posts: 11,156 ✭✭✭✭Foxtrol


    cletus wrote: »
    The above is what happens in group stage, or round robin. Neither of these are a factor in TUF. Its straightforward knockout. Win, you go forward, lose, your out. Its not a case of winning by a certain number of points but the team above won by more. Its simply you won, but we didn't like the fight, so it doesn't count. Anyway I think I'm done with this argument

    You’re pining for how TUF used to run, that day is gone for this season (hopefully for good). I already said in my initial response to you that it’s no longer a straightforward knockout competition, the first set of fights is now more like a group phase. If the fighters were informed the first day and if they didn’t want to compete they could have walked away.

    I can’t see how this can be seen as a negative aside some purist view that it needs to remain a straight knockout competition or people who have a fundamental issue with the UFC trying to get fighters to be more exciting. All it means is if you leave the fight in the subjective hands of the judges, you’re now also going to leave it in the subjective hands of the UFC with the least exciting fighter leaving the competition.


  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 18,219 Mod ✭✭✭✭CatFromHue


    ASOT wrote: »
    But he won't so there's not reason to worry about that.

    There is a chance though

    giphy.gif

    :pac:


  • Registered Users Posts: 437 ✭✭reganreggie


    I'm in favour of the rule. Hopefully it will stop the likes of big country getting a crucifix and gently tap his opponent's face while counting out the strikes till the ref has to step in. Really hope Hall wins tuf. Fantastic on the ground


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 7,683 ✭✭✭Subcomandante Marcos


    ASOT wrote: »
    But he won't so there's not reason to worry about that.

    If hall goes out it will because someone with good standup manages to shrug off his takedowns and kicks him in the head a few times.

    Once it's on the ground there are very few people in MMA who are anywhere near his level. Cyborg, Maia, Edger, he's on that level.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 7,683 ✭✭✭Subcomandante Marcos


    I'm in favour of the rule. Hopefully it will stop the likes of big country getting a crucifix and gently tap his opponent's face while counting out the strikes till the ref has to step in. Really hope Hall wins tuf. Fantastic on the ground

    Weirdly enough, it's so that there are more like LIKE Nelson that White bright in this rule, "spectacular" strikers who can light someone up on their feet rather than smart fighters who can grind their opponents down.

    In fairness to Nelson, he's known for making fights fun to watch with that overhand right.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,739 ✭✭✭ASOT


    If hall goes out it will because someone with good standup manages to shrug off his takedowns and kicks him in the head a few times.

    Once it's on the ground there are very few people in MMA who are anywhere near his level. Cyborg, Maia, Edger, he's on that level.

    Obviously, that's what I'm saying there's no reason to worry about Hall going out for a boring fight, he's either getting a submission win or he's getting knocked out.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 7,683 ✭✭✭Subcomandante Marcos


    ASOT wrote: »
    Obviously, that's what I'm saying there's no reason to worry about Hall going out for a boring fight, he's either getting a submission win or he's getting knocked out.

    I was backing up your position, not questioning it ;).

    Speaking of Hall, he'll be in Dublin next month.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,739 ✭✭✭ASOT


    I was backing up your position, not questioning it ;).

    Speaking of Hall, he'll be in Dublin next month.

    Completely interpretated your point my bad, is he doing a seminar?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 7,683 ✭✭✭Subcomandante Marcos


    ASOT wrote: »
    Completely interpretated your point my bad, is he doing a seminar?

    Yeah doing something with JK somewhere, not sure if it's SBG and affiliate members only or what but worth giving John a shout.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,166 ✭✭✭Stereomaniac


    Is this on 3E at the moment? I can't remember if it was this night last week I watched it there.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 7,683 ✭✭✭Subcomandante Marcos


    Is this on 3E at the moment? I can't remember if it was this night last week I watched it there.

    Last weeks' (Sascha vs Gritz) is on now I'd say, this weeks doesn't air until Thursday in the US.


  • Registered Users Posts: 11,156 ✭✭✭✭Foxtrol


    Last weeks' (Sascha vs Gritz) is on now I'd say, this weeks doesn't air until Thursday in the US.

    It's Wednesday in the US


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 7,683 ✭✭✭Subcomandante Marcos


    Foxtrol wrote: »
    It's Wednesday in the US

    Right ya are Ted.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 39,615 ✭✭✭✭Mellor


    Devastator wrote: »
    No its not!! Its not even close!! Please tell us whatever messed up logic in your head sees this as pre determining a fight outcome???

    3 fighters make it to the final stages (A, B and C).
    C is eliminated as A v B is a more exciting match up. The Finale was determined by somebody other that the fighters performance.

    This is a pretty simply fight. Somebody, with a financial interest in the end result, has control in the outcome. You are taking it to a ridiculous extreme by pretending somebody has suggested the fights are completely pre-determined, they didn't.

    As it stands, I've no issue with the rule, on the provisio that it is used to light a fire under the guys and in the end the decision is obvious (injury, somebody pulls out, clearly not good enough - based on skill).
    But its undeniable that the potential exists for it to be abused, hopefully it won't come to that.

    I don't see how immobilizing your opponent so as not to get injured wins a fight! Thats just making it a neutral contest.
    You don't see how out grappling somebody, dominating them, and landing strikes from side control, mount, etc is winning a fight?
    Come on. This isn't 2002, and you are watching MMA long enough to not believe that's true.

    Billed as a knockout tournament? Wonderful! And I'm sure whoever gets cut will not be a KO winner, rather someone who dry humped their opponent or didn't go all out to win.

    You realist knockout tournaments have nothing to do with knock-outs.
    Submission wins are equally wins, as are decisions.

    Foxtrol wrote: »
    Numerous sports give the team with the more decisive victory the chance to progress over a more boring side. For example the rugby world cup, you get an extra point for scoring more than 4 tries so you could win the same number of games as another team in your group
    The bonus point in ruby is based on the performance of both teams, not how boring the match was.

    A total stalemate match, where nothing happens. One side wins 3-0 = bonus point award to the team that scored nothing, even though they are potentially the most boring side in the most boring match off all times.


  • Business & Finance Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 32,387 Mod ✭✭✭✭DeVore


    What about when a team is unbeaten in a 6 side group but scores no extra points... they get 15 points (5 games x 3 points)
    Another side is beaten by the first team but then goes on to win their 4 remaining games with an extra point each time. They get 16 points. (4 games x 4 points).

    The latter team advances while the unbeaten side doesn't.

    If a win is a win is a win... then why does the team with fewer but "flashier" wins go through?

    The extra point was brought in to encourage teams to go for tries (exciting!) rather than kicking points. Its blatantly messing with the game for the sake of the viewership and I would have MORE of an issue with it because its part of the main sport proper, than some rule on an arbitrary game show. :)


  • Advertisement
Advertisement