Do any of these circumstances *justify* ducking?

[wwkirk]

Accusing a fighter of ducking is literally a daily pastime on The Dog. [←Is that cool? I'm not sure if it's accepted usage.]
Anyway, I just want see see if you think ducking can actually be justified, meaning in the context you are alright with it. (A couple of the examples might be pertinent to current events.) Here are the contexts:

Fighter is almost 40 or older. - Free pass to duck?

Fighter intends on retiring soon. - Free pass to duck?

Semi-retired fighter or retired fighter coming back wants exclusively fun fights. - He's earned it; he can duck?

The prospective cash for a certain fight is significantly more than the alternative. - You're not mad if he (or she) ducks the alternative?

Two fighters just want to bang versus each other. - Cool if they duck everybody else?

A proposed opponent is several notches (how many might be relevant) lower. - It would be dumb not to duck?

A prospect is out there killing it, but hasn't faced a "name" yet. I'm a name. - You cool with me ducking?

A champ prefers not to fight the interim belt holder. - By virtue of his stature, it's the champs prerogative to duck?

What thinkest ye, Shermanos?


Oops! Before I forget; one more option.

ANY proposed fight where the parties are healthy. - Ducking is ALWAYS wrong; NEVER justified?

 

[markg171]

When it justifies your narrative.

 

[Guy LeDouche]

The term “Ducking” gets thrown around as a joke too liberally. People will say a guy who doesn’t respond to a internet comment these days is ducking.

 

[PaddyO'malley]

6ixdog*

 

[IloveTHIS]

Maybe only if one fighter is truly a life long clean athlete and the other is a blatant roid abuser

 

[Duke Kensington]

Ducking is only problem if you have number attached to your name. If you’re unranked and/or don’t have title aspirations fight who you want.

It’s only frustrating to have to wait to watch exciting prospects like shavkat, etc. because people don’t want to fight them

 

[wwkirk]

Maybe only if one fighter is truly a life long clean athlete and the other is a blatant roid abuser

Interesting. That's the situation GDR saw herself in when she vacated.

 

[Levi_]

I think ducking should only apply to a fight that has to be made where the two fighters absolutely have to fight each other and one fighter noticeably backs away or finds an excuse to not fight that opponent.

The perfect example of true ducking is Tito before the first Chuck fight. Tito kept saying repeatedly that him and Chuck had too deep of a friendship to fight; hilariously, Chuck publicly disagreed about their friendship, saying Tito was exaggerating their friendship to duck him. oops.

 

[Arm Barbarian]

If it doesn't clog up a divisions top 5-10, and its belt, then I don't really care if a fighter turns down certain matches or tries to lobby for a specific match.

Some of these guys are in the journeyman phase and kind of on their way out, but just looking for another payday or two.

It's mainly when you get a possible future contender whose ranked in say, the 5-10 area, who sits out for a year or more demanding a shot, or a champ that doesn't defend against the top 1-5 that is fairly annoying.

 

[Paolo Delutis]

I think alot of people dont even fully understand what ducking truly is ..

Everytime a fight falls apart it doesn't mean anyone ducked .

These are professional fighters there not worried about fighting each other. .. that's their jobs.

That said .

The true definition of a duck is when a fighter refuses to fight a VALID opponent ..and goes out of their way to face less then competitive opponents or considers other match ups instead of his rightful challengers ( if champion) ..

Outside of this .. its not really a duck , everyone doesnt have to fight everyone .. thats why there are contracts and agreements

 

[theleerygoose]

The problem is I think people say shit like “Fighter A” is ducking “Fighter B” without even a small clue about what’s really going on. The fighters take the fights the UFC offers, unless your someone special like Conor who has his own rules.

 

[Tweak896]

It's ducking when UFC hands the fighters fights and they don't sign. Point blank. Everyone is supposedly given 3 fights a year and most fight less. I assume anyone less is most likely ducking or being ducked. Too bad the UFC can't reveal the truth.

 

[wwkirk]

It's ducking when UFC hands the fighters fights and they don't sign. Point blank. Everyone is supposedly given 3 fights a year and most fight less. I assume anyone less is most likely ducking or being ducked. Too bad the UFC can't reveal the truth.

So, you're in the last category?: Ducking is always wrong.

 

[JayPettryMMA]

The Dog. [←Is that cool? I'm not sure if it's accepted usage.]

It's not.

 

[mjfan23]

I should have ducked this thread

 

[Jonny Ninja]

who knows who’s ducking who. It’s generally fighters and they’re teams accusing others of doing it, but why would you believe their version unless you want to (ie you’re a fan of that fighter)

In boxing the best way to test that is resume. Deontay wilder has accused everyone of ducking him, yet in almost 50 fights he’s fought 2 proven HWs, and lost to both. It’s fairly clear hes consistently ducked fighters as the other contenders haven’t had a problem fighting between themselves all these years

In mma it’s a bit more difficult to actually duck other fighters because the organisations can pretty much insist fighter a fights fighter b as they are under a contract. The odd fighter like Colby/mcgregor seems to be able to get away with it but most fighters can’t. Or in jones case getting an easy title fight because you’re gonna retire. It doesn’t happen nearly as much as sherdog fanboys like to claim

 

[Tweak896]

So, you're in the last category?: Ducking is always wrong.

I mean, I honestly don't care until it prevents us from big fights. But no matter the reason, if you refuse to sign you're "ducking". It's kind of smart to pick and choose your fights to get a good resume, but it doesn't impress me.

 

[wwkirk]

It's not.

Noted.

 

[dipstickjimmy]

Accusing a fighter of ducking is literally a daily pastime on The Dog. [←Is that cool? I'm not sure if it's accepted usage.]
Anyway, I just want see see if you think ducking can actually be justified, meaning in the context you are alright with it. (A couple of the examples might be pertinent to current events.) Here are the contexts:

Fighter is almost 40 or older. - Free pass to duck?

Fighter intends on retiring soon. - Free pass to duck?

Semi-retired fighter or retired fighter coming back wants exclusively fun fights. - He's earned it; he can duck?

The prospective cash for a certain fight is significantly more than the alternative. - You're not mad if he (or she) ducks the alternative?

Two fighters just want to bang versus each other. - Cool if they duck everybody else?

A proposed opponent is several notches (how many might be relevant) lower. - It would be dumb not to duck?

A prospect is out there killing it, but hasn't faced a "name" yet. I'm a name. - You cool with me ducking?

A champ prefers not to fight the interim belt holder. - By virtue of his stature, it's the champs prerogative to duck?

What thinkest ye, Shermanos?


Oops! Before I forget; one more option.

ANY proposed fight where the parties are healthy. - Ducking is ALWAYS wrong; NEVER justified?

Fighters are free to pick and choose who they fight as they climb the ranks and try to make money. The only fighters who are capable of "DUCKING" are champions. If you are a title holder in the UFC you are obligated to fight the number 1 contender. Common sense must be applied of course in certain cases:

1) Luke Rockhold fought Bisping who was not the number 1 contender. The Chris got injured and Jacare declined the option to step in. Not sure who else was also offered the fight but when they got to Bisping he accepted.

2) Bisping fought Dan Henderson who was #11? iirc. Dan was always a rematch Bisping wanted but Dan never saw any reason to give Mike a chance to get that one back. Bisping took the fight in Oct 2016 which was in London 4 months after he won the belt. It was his last and only chance to fight Henderson. Yoel fought The Chris in Nov 2016. Whittaker beat Jacare in Nov 2016. Matching them up to determine a #1 contender made sense. Meanwhile GSP had decided to come back and was booked for a MW title fight. Not only does the GOAT WW have every right to move up for an immediate title shot but Bisping would be a fool to take anyone else as nobody was remotely close to a draw on the level of GSP.

3) GSP vacated the MW title. He suffered from ulcerative colitis leading up to the fight with Bisping. Danaher spoke in detail about it on the JRE. GSP ever the gentleman vacated the title within a month so as not to hold up the division. Unlike others who clung to their belts despite having no intention to defend them. Defend or vacate is the mandate of any champion.

In boxing the IBF threatened to strip Jai Opetaia for fighting Ellis Zorro on Dec 23rd for big money instead of their "Mandatory" defense against #1 contender Mairis Briedis, the man Jai took the title from. It was ridiculous as Briedis was injured and not able to fight. Jai vacated/was stripped. They are now fighting in Feb on the undercard of Fury vs Usyk. Possibly for the "Vacant" IBF title and Jai's Ring Magazine belt.

Champions are the only ones that can Duck as they are the only fighters with an obligation to fight anyone.

 

[JayPettryMMA]

Noted.

Valiant effort.