Do any of these circumstances *justify* ducking?

[g*r*b]

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.

The three fights offered a year thing is not true. This is per John Nash (of Bloody Elbow) who has read a lot of contracts. It's just a stated amount of fights over the entirety of the contract.

 

[djacobox372]

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

It's never a duck to go for the bigger $$ fight.. a duck is when a fighter takes less $$ to avoid a dangerous opponent.

 

[Tweak896]

The three fights offered a year thing is not true. This is per John Nash (of Bloody Elbow) who has read a lot of contracts. It's just a stated amount of fights over the entirety of the contract.

So it's like an "average" of 3 a year? Where they can wait it out then pile it all and offer at the end?

 

[Alpha_T83]

To answer your question, yes Jon Jones is ducking Aspinall and yes Stipe Miocic is ducking any fight other than the Jon Jones fight. It's wrong, but it's up to the UFC to prevent it and penalize it. If the UFC are going to allow Jon Jones and Stipe to do this, then you can't blame them for doing it.

 

[blaseblase]

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.

Bisping wanting a rematch against a guy not in the top 10 doesn't change the fact that he was ducking the top contenders in his division.

That would be like if Strickland had demanded to fight Zaleski dos Santos stead of DDP.

 

[jeff7b9]

Generally speaking, no.

And if there is a title being held up then definitely no.

 

[Mmmmmmma1234]

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?

At the end of the day everything is ducking. And everything can be justified by the fighter why he/she isn't interested.
Take Colby Covington's example, he's the king of ducking. For years and years every top ten ww has been looking to fight him since winning is a guaranteed title shot.
But it's easily justified for him to not take the hard fights when he can beat up Woodley and talk his way into a title fight. It's easy to get masvidal fight and wait for the title fight. Can't argue with the results he got the best opportunities and paydays by ducking so it's justified and that's what prize fighting is about.

Where imagine if Colby never ducked instead of Woodley he answered Edwards callouts, they have a true number one contender match and he takes an L, he'd be in an awful place.

 

[Luthien]

Just keep ducking until you get a TS

 

[g*r*b]

So it's like an "average" of 3 a year? Where they can wait it out then pile it all and offer at the end?

Yes. And that "average" is for the usual middling sort of agreement, IF everything goes off perfectly. But there are apparently all sorts of happenings that can automatically extend a contract. Ngannou was very lucky that he signed when he did, at a time when the UFC, worried about the lawsuits pending against it, was offering a "sunset clause" that gave a hard and fast ending to contracts.

 

[RockyLockridge]

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:


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?

Fighter is almost 40 or older. - Free pass to duck? Not sure what you mean. but if you mean stipe is 40 and wont fight Aspinall, but WILL fight Jones, yes he's ducking

Fighter intends on retiring soon. - Free pass to duck? if they are looking for only a specific match up and retire if they can't get it? Nah not a duck

Semi-retired fighter or retired fighter coming back wants exclusively fun fights. - He's earned it; he can duck? Yes, he can seek matchups he wants as long as he's not demanding title shots and contender fights

The prospective cash for a certain fight is significantly more than the alternative. - You're not mad if he (or she) ducks the alternative? I always expect a fighter to take the route that pays more. It's not ducking.

Two fighters just want to bang versus each other. - Cool if they duck everybody else? If they are the only fights each other want then it's fine.

A proposed opponent is several notches (how many might be relevant) lower. - It would be dumb not to duck? Yes, this is a special kind of ducking called rank squatting

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

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

 

[dipstickjimmy]

Bisping wanting a rematch against a guy not in the top 10 doesn't change the fact that he was ducking the top contenders in his division.

That would be like if Strickland had demanded to fight Zaleski dos Santos stead of DDP.

Yeah I can see that. Not really an equal comparison however. Zaleski is not remotely in Dan Henderson's category. First off he is a WW and has never fought at MW in the UFC, Dan Henderson is former PRIDE WW & MW champion & Strikeforce LHW title holder (titles equal to the UFC's at the time). It would be more along the lines of him wanting a rematch with Alex Pereira if it had been 7 years of trying to get it and having Alex refuse. I am just OK with him and the UFC making that fight since they made it ASAP.

 

[Iroh]

Depends on what you mean with "okay with ducking", but I'm basically always okay with it, because you shouldn't force anybody to fight someone. It's also illegal. Danathatsfuckinillegal.gif

It's funny that I still see comments on here by people who think fighters should actually be forced to fight certain opponents. I wonder if these people understand they are basically advocating for slavery.