UFC introduce 5 round non-title fights!

MrStuffins

VANCOUVER, British Columbia – Five-round non-title fights are officially making their way to the UFC.

UFC president Dana White today told a small group of reporters that the promotion has decided that all main-event non-title bouts – whether on pay-per-view, Spike TV or Versus – will now be scheduled as five-rounders.

However, the adjustment will not apply to any currently scheduled bouts, such as UFC 133's Rashad Evans vs. Phil Davis tilt, or UFC on Versus 5's Dan Hardy vs. Chris Lytle contest.

"From this day forward, as we speak right here, right now today, every fight that is a main event that is not a title fight will be a five-round fight," White said following a UFC 131 pre-fight press conference in Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.

When immediately asked if that applied to Evans vs. Davis, White corrected himself.

"Except that one," White said with a laugh. "It should be, but what I don't want to do to guys is fights that we've already made and they've signed the bout agreement, you're mentally training for a three-round fight. To come back and say, 'Oh, it's five rounds now,' you can't do that to a guy.

"So all the fights that will be made from this day forward will be five rounds."

In a special Q&A session in conjunction with April's UFC 129 event, White revealed UFC 131's originally scheduled main event of Brock Lesnar vs. Junior Dos Santos nearly took the honors of the promotion's first five-round non-title matchup.

"I'm in to that," White said when asked by a fan about five-round non-title fights. "I like it. I think there's some fights that aren't title fights that are main events, and it ends up being three (rounds), and it should have been five. I'm a big fan of it, and we're working on that right now.

"We were actually going to start it with Brock Lesnar and Junior Dos Santos, but we had already made the fight, so it's kind of hard to go back to those guys after you've already made the fight and say, 'You know what? This is going to be five (rounds) instead of three.'"

And now it's done.

White doesn't yet know who will be featured in the UFC's first five-round non-title fight, but potential main-eventers might want to start upping their cardio sessions because the change is coming.

"From this day forward, any main-event fight that is signed after right now today will be five rounds instead of three," White said.

http://mmajunkie.com/news/23945/ufc-implements-five-round-non-title-fights-for-all-future-main-events-evans-vs-davis-exempt.mma

Holy cow! This is a big move! Thoughts?

Zero-Cool

I'm 50-50 about it. Certain fighters/fights deserve 5 rounds and some don't. I know Mir v Nelson was just co-main event but imagine if that was a 5 rounder, would have been embarrassing. But then if a fight is dragging for 3 rounds with not much happening, I would prefer to see a good fight from the undercard instead of 2 more boring rounds. UFC will have to pick these fights carefully to pull it off.

riffmongous

I'm not sure how exactly its going to work, I think they've caused themselves a lot of hassle by using main event fights as the criteria rather than say top 5 or top 10 fights or something like that. How many times will Fitch be booked to go 5 rounds?

MrStuffins

there will be other problems like inconsistancy. There's no way EVERY Main-Event can be 5 rounds because how many times have we seen the need to change around a Main-Event? Fighters get injured and a Co-Main is promoted?

Also, it will make it MUCH harder to find short notice fighters. Can you imagine there's 2 weeks to a fight, a Main Eventer pulls out and you've to look for a guy who's ready to step into a 5-Round non-Title fight on short notice?

But these are just a couple of negatives, there are a lot of positives too!

MrStuffins

riffmongous wrote: »

I'm not sure how exactly its going to work, I think they've caused themselves a lot of hassle by using main event fights as the criteria rather than say top 5 or top 10 fights or something like that. How many times will Fitch be booked to go 5 rounds?

True!

I also bet Jake Shields is happy about his impending fight v BJ Penn!

Mellor

This has been in the rules for some time. Surprised it took so long to be used.


I think Dana was just being descriptive about the all main events. I'm pretty sure the wording by NSAC and NJAC is quite specific. Its only allowed for championship title "level" fights. so a lot of fights that replace main-events wouldn't qualify and on top of this, it wouldn't be fair to do this to guys at short notice. THe round length will be set at the time the figt is agreed and not changed.

I imagine it will be one 5 rounder per card max (unless two belts are on the line obviously)

scudzilla

How many main event fights in the past can ya think of that would have gone the other way if it'd been a 5 rounder.

Hendo v Rich at 93 springs to mind, i think Rich would have taken it over the 5 rounds

helimachoptor

Would have loved to see Forrest vs Bonnar as a 5 rounder!

cowzerp

5 rounds suck anyway, better lads go for it than pace themselves for 5 round fights, or see 2 lads hanging through last 2 rounds is not great for spectators-

I don't know what people's fascination with 5 rd fights are, I'd rather see if it been a draw after 3 they'd do 4th round to get winner in title fights been honest.

Mellor

cowzerp wrote: »

5 rounds suck anyway, better lads go for it than pace themselves for 5 round fights, or see 2 lads hanging through last 2 rounds is not great for spectators-

I don't know what people's fascination with 5 rd fights are, I'd rather see if it been a draw after 3 they'd do 4th round to get winner in title fights been honest.

I know it doesn't apply to every fight, but very often when its going to decision, I think that it could be dodgy and another round would sort it.

How often do we see bull**** decisions, obviously 5 rounds will stop a lot of this.
Shogun Machida would of been different after 5 rds, ditto for Garcia and Pham (i'm aware it was a ME). Thats huge huge benefit I can think of.

Anakin.S

cowzerp wrote: »

5 rounds suck anyway, better lads go for it than pace themselves for 5 round fights, or see 2 lads hanging through last 2 rounds is not great for spectators-

I don't know what people's fascination with 5 rd fights are, I'd rather see if it been a draw after 3 they'd do 4th round to get winner in title fights been honest.

Do you mean stop after three rounds, then wait to get the scores and if it is a draw make the guys fight an extra round? like extra time in soccer?

fightireland

Anakin.S wrote: »

Do you mean stop after three rounds, then wait to get the scores and if it is a draw make the guys fight an extra round? like extra time in soccer?

God no that would be chaotic!

In my opinion that belongs with the wear one glove - karate pants days.

stevemc01

Mellor wrote: »

I know it doesn't apply to every fight, but very often when its going to decision, I think that it could be dodgy and another round would sort it.

How often do we see bull**** decisions, obviously 5 rounds will stop a lot of this.
Shogun Machida would of been different after 5 rds, ditto for Garcia and Pham (i'm aware it was a ME). Thats huge huge benefit I can think of.

Shogun v Machida was over 5 rounds mate. There have been as many bad decisions in 5 round fights as there have been in 3 round fights, its not gonna make the bad judges go away.

I think it has to be handled carefully. I think it should only involve the top guys and if it does it may be a good thing. I think it may make the UFC put on consistently stronger main events with guys who they can rely on to go 5 rounds. The last thing we want to see on a PPV main event is 2 guys completely gassed giving us a fight that looks like something out of The Ultimate Fighter house.

I am not sure about this either, like Cowzerp said , we would rather see fighters go for it then try to last the impending 5 rounds.

Also does this take away from the Title fights, does it make them less special ?

DrPhilG

Don't agree with this move.

Say you have 2 guys chasing a title shot and one fights in a main event of a smaller card while the other fights co-main on a bigger one. Those 2 fighters have different paths to the title because one has had a tougher fight.

Look at people like Carwin, Mir or Nelson? Can be explosive, but cardio maybe not up to scratch. When you're Joe Silva and booking fights, do you have to be aware that by booking them in a main event you're reducing their chances of winning?

Plus be honest, how many recent 3 round mains would you have really needed to go longer?

There are pros and cons but I don't think this needed fixing to be honest.

scudzilla

Sometimes after a 3 round main event i've been left thinking that it would have been much better being a 5 rounder, other times i'm glad that it was only a 3 rounder.
Sure hindsight is a great thing but as they're making it every main event i'm sure we're gonna see some 5 round snoozefests.

The only main pro in introducing it in my eyes is that it will give a contender a good feeling for what the championship rounds are like.

What happens if the main event is broken up like in UFC 130 where Edgar and Maynard dropped out and Rampage and Hamill were pushed up the card. Would their bout be 5 rounds?

DrPhilG

Deleted User wrote: »

What happens if the main event is broken up like in UFC 130 where Edgar and Maynard dropped out and Rampage and Hamill were pushed up the card. Would their bout be 5 rounds?

I would say no, DW said that any fights where a bout agreement is in place won't be changed and I'd imagine that would stay the same.

Mir V Nelson 5 rounds :eek:

MrStuffins

Deleted User wrote: »

What happens if the main event is broken up like in UFC 130 where Edgar and Maynard dropped out and Rampage and Hamill were pushed up the card. Would their bout be 5 rounds?

That's the point I was trying to make in my earlier post. Not all Main Events will be 5 Rounders due to Main Event changes.

it'll be very inconsistant! Eventually they may actually start having Mains AND Co-Mains as 5 rounders (but maybe not as that can be a logistical nightmare as far as PPV goes)

That_Guy

I'm all for this so long as any GSP fight is reduced to 3 rounds. :pac:

dave1982

Rounds 4 and and 5 are known as championship rounds and should stay like that.

If you make it to a title fight this should be an extra challenge for the challenger,you're coming to take the title you have to work for it.

I think its a honour to fight 5 rounds and you're reward should a title shot

calex71

Not in favor of this at all.

I'm wondering when judging a close fight is there a temptation for the judges to say to themselves "better give it to one of them" ???? because in UFC draws are very rare. Not having a dig or casting conspiracy theories but they are only human at the end of the day and I'm sure there is a certain degree of pressure on them, whether the decision is then right or wrong in the eyes of fans etc.

While not being in favor of it, I'd be willing to see it tried but not set in stone.

Not sure how well an optional 4th round would work, it does work in K1 for example but thats not really comparing like with like.

I say try it and see , I'll keep an open mind in the mean time I suppose.

Xlami

The UFC will now have to be very careful when choosing the main events. Especially for fight nights. The Davis Vs Lil Nog card for example neither the main nor co-main event were particularly exciting nor did either or them warrant two more rounds. One advantage to this may be that if the main event fights end in finished it will give us a chance to see more of the undercard fights.

riffmongous

calex71 wrote: »

Not sure how well an optional 4th round would work, it does work in K1 for example but thats not really comparing like with like.

K1's old mma org, Heros used a system of 2x5 minute rounds with an optional 3rd round if the scores were level and it worked well the times I saw it being used. Would a 3rds +1 system be harder to implement?

dave1982

A independent 4th judge would solve the draw issues,where his score card is only used in event of a draw

DrPhilG

dave1982 wrote: »

A independent 4th judge would solve the draw issues,where his score card is only used in event of a draw

What if he/she scores it a draw?

ScareGilly

Everybody always says they can score a round as a draw, doesn't it say before the UFC starts on tv that the judges must score one fighter a ten with the other receiving 9 or less?

Clive

ScareGilly wrote: »

Everybody always says they can score a round as a draw, doesn't it say before the UFC starts on tv that the judges must score one fighter a ten with the other receiving 9 or less?

No, the winner gets 10, the loser gets 9 or less - that's for a round which has been won. In a drawn round both fighters get 10.

Pride Fighter

Clive wrote: »

No, the winner gets 10, the loser gets 9 or less - that's for a round which has been won. In a drawn round both fighters get 10.

True, I'd also add that the winner of the round can also draw a round if he is deducted a point for accidental striking to the back of the head or holding onto the cage as well. A 10-9 turns into a 9-9.

riffmongous

DrPhilG wrote: »

What if he/she scores it a draw?

Pride style judge maybe? No draws allowed

dave1982

DrPhilG wrote: »

What if he/she scores it a draw?

chances of that are fairly slim,thats why he is there is to break a tie

Clive

A fourth judge doesn't make much sense to be honest - a unanimous draw would become a majority draw, and a majority draw would either stay the same or be an inconclusive result (two drawn scorecards, two with the same winner).

DeVore

we should also consider the higher likelihood of serious injury and things like brain-damage from repetitive blows along the lines of the 12-round boxers.

It perhaps isnt a HUGE concern, but if 5-rounds becomes more like the norm, will championship fights become 7-round?

I wouldnt say I was opposed to this move but I'm not entirely keen on it either...

DeV.

el dude

Awesome. Something that has been long overdue but makes even more sense with WEC folding in and the Strikeforce guys coming over. I'm not sure about the implementation here though. The fights that should be five rounds are obvious, they shouldn't have to be a main event, and likewise, not every main event fight needs to go five rounds.

DrPhilG

dave1982 wrote: »

chances of that are fairly slim,thats why he is there is to break a tie

Not really, if his/her score card is needed, it's because 2 out of 3 have already scored it a draw. Because just maybe... It was a draw!

dave1982

DrPhilG wrote: »

Not really, if his/her score card is needed, it's because 2 out of 3 have already scored it a draw. Because just maybe... It was a draw!

Don't know but i'd assume he/she is there to decide a victor,should there be a draw.Where they will judge from overall performance not rd by rd

Mellor

stevemc01 wrote: »

Shogun v Machida was over 5 rounds mate. There have been as many bad decisions in 5 round fights as there have been in 3 round fights, its not gonna make the bad judges go away.

Sorry, I wasn't thinking at all there.
But you know what I mean

dave1982 wrote: »

A independent 4th judge would solve the draw issues,where his score card is only used in event of a draw

The draw isn't an issue, sometimes a fight is a genuine draw.

cowzerp

My idea of an extra round is not important and would be rare anyway as draws are not common, only reason why a draw should add on a round is for a title aswell, Basically i'm not a fan of 5 round fights and think all fights should be 3 rounders unless the draw scenario happens in the title match.

DrPhilG

Strikeforce to use "sudden death" extra round.

MrStuffins

DrPhilG wrote: »

Strikeforce to use "sudden death" extra round.

Nice one. Although a draw is very very rare, this is a nice opportunity for Zuffa to test the waters with these kinda things and at the same time not have to fiddle with UFC.

Also, it's a good thing as it will see fights decided fairly! Good news all around!

Valmont

riffmongous wrote: »

How many times will Fitch be booked to go 5 rounds?

:eek:
You're right. I think while this decision has the potential to bring us many good fights, it will be spoiled by the inevitable 25 minute snoozefests.

SDTimeout

DeVore wrote: »

we should also consider the higher likelihood of serious injury and things like brain-damage from repetitive blows along the lines of the 12-round boxers.

My Logic on this, and I'm open to the guys who've been doing this for years is. Boxing = shorter rounds and heavier gloves. MMA = longer rounds, lighter gloves but also the ability to be struck to the head on the ground. So yes a 5 round fight could increase the possibility of damage but the downfall of 5 round title fights is it's a big chance, unfamiliar waters and want to avail of all the time they have, where a 5 fight non title may mean , right i don't want to go the full way ( physically ) I'll try finish it early.

DeVore wrote: »

It perhaps isnt a HUGE concern, but if 5-rounds becomes more like the norm, will championship fights become 7-round

Would take a very special athlete to compete at 7 x 5 championship intensity and i think Barry Oglesbys latest blog post about strength and conditioning is a great point. At least, what i think he meant anyway...


I'm looking forward to it, way too much have i been wishing a fight was longer than 3 rounds or even a sudden death 4th which i think is a viable option.

The most viable of all however is READ OUT THE JUDGES SCORES in between rounds. Guys know what the score is, if they're losing, if they have to go for broke, not be lied to by corner men telling them they have the fight ahead.

Mellor

SDTimeoutDrPhilG wrote: »

Would take a very special athlete to compete at 7 x 5 championship intensity and i think Barry Oglesbys latest blog post about strength and conditioning is a great point. At least, what i think he meant anyway...

He made similar comments in one of the fitness logs recently.
And basically, my take from it was, if your reasonably strong and fit and at any level other than top tier, then time spent on technique is far more valuable than time spent on strength and conditioning.

It also echos some GSP said that popped up in "fighters you like/dislike" thread (I think)

SDTimeout

Mellor wrote: »

He made similar comments in one of the fitness logs recently.
And basically, my take from it was, if your reasonably strong and fit and at any level other than top tier, then time spent on technique is far more valuable than time spent on strength and conditioning.

It also echos some GSP said that popped up in "fighters you like/dislike" thread (I think)

I think you misquoted that, unless someone said pretty similar to me.

DrPhilG

SDTimeout wrote: »

I think you misquoted that, unless someone said pretty similar to me.

I was just wondering what happened there, I didn't say that!

Mellor

SDTimeout wrote: »

I think you misquoted that, unless someone said pretty similar to me.

Yeah your right, I was quoting DrPhil also and deleted too much and didn't notice.


@DrPhil, Re: Strikeforce sudden death round.
Good move from Zuffa, SF had made a mistake there. Obviously the GP has to have a fighter go through so a draw is not an option. Imagine if a fight had been a draw, there would of been mayhem, one fighter wants to fight a new round, other fighter thinks he would be better served in a rematch. Neither given notice etc.

Good move to stop the controversy before it happens

Fozzy

Mellor wrote: »

@DrPhil, Re: Strikeforce sudden death round.
Good move from Zuffa, SF had made a mistake there. Obviously the GP has to have a fighter go through so a draw is not an option. Imagine if a fight had been a draw, there would of been mayhem, one fighter wants to fight a new round, other fighter thinks he would be better served in a rematch. Neither given notice etc.

Good move to stop the controversy before it happens

There wouldn't have been any draws, if the scorecard was a draw on the three judges' cards then they had a fourth judge ready who would decide the winner. That's how it was for Fedor/Silva and Kharitonov/Arlovski

unknown13

I don't favour or oppose these types of fights on the grounds that the UFC has now 7 weight classes and the Flyweight division is coming in soon. Every event is nearly going to have a title fight on it. These match ups are rarely going to be used / needed and even if a title fight falls through and a non title fight is bumped up to main event. That will be 3 rounds because it was originally scheduled to be 3 rounds.

Mellor

Fozzy wrote: »

There wouldn't have been any draws, if the scorecard was a draw on the three judges' cards then they had a fourth judge ready who would decide the winner. That's how it was for Fedor/Silva and Kharitonov/Arlovski

Ah ok, sisn't think they were using a 4th judge for the GP
Sudden death is better imo