Weight divisions aren't necessary to ensure fair fights

[johncola]

Kinda cool idea but belts really wouldnt work with that structure.

I actually prefer the belt system in my structure. Theyre less rigid. Thered be a variable number of champs and i like that. The UFc would be able to manage how many titles they have more easily. These interim title and "held up" division problems would be a thing of the past. Why do you think it wouldnt work?

 

[Oooxente]

It just doesn't work.
PRIDE used a system pretty similar with what are trying to suggest.
The main complaint we always had here was that "mismatches"were made ending with the winner being discredited for beating a "little"guy.

It happened everitime someone fought a japanese fighter or someone who didn't want to cut that extra weight.

 

[johncola]

in your OP you keep talking about this arbitrary "similar size". no 2 bodies are built equally. fat weighs less than muscle for example. by your logic a fight between George Roop and Rashad Evans could take place. Checks and balances exist in sports for a reason. Your logic on this thread is flawed.

Checks and balances would still exist. If 45 lbs or whatever it is, is deemed too much, then no it wouldnt happen.

 

[dudefacemcghee]

I'd have no issue with this, honestly.

I don't know if I totally agree but using weight as the only measure completely forgets about body types and stuff like that

 

[johncola]

I just don't understand how it doesn't create an obscene amount of titles.

Let's say there's A, B, and C. All champs, all close in size. Now let's say A beats B and C. A now has 3 titles. There's no point in him having 3 belts, because then there would just be continuous triple champions. So no the belts previously owned by B and C don't exist. But you can't have fewer belts, because why would anyone of a different size from the champ continue to fight. So now you have to give out new belts. Do B and C get to fight for one of those because they were former champs? If so, what was the point of them fighting A?

The 3 titles get unified. Fighter A would only have 1 title. For there to have been 3 champs of a similar size, champ size must have shifted over time. That means there's probably a size gap somewhere between titles. During that aforementioned time, contenders at that size will likely exist. If they do, they fight for a new title. If they dont exist, no title is created until they DO exist. Fighters B and C probably arent the right size for that title. They're a similar size to A, and they lost to him, so they dont get titles. Unless theyre close enough to a different champ, then they get a crack at him instead if theyre considered the top contender.

 

[ItsTimeToShrekYouUp]

Weight classes are simply the best option by being the least stupid

 

[johncola]

There are problems here you guys never address with these things:


1. Any new system will disrupt all these metrics fans enjoy following, that are used for promotion. Number of title defenses, having a champ at every weight to help promote cards.


2. Any attempt to stop weight cutting will require a system in place to avoid cheating/non compliance. With 500 fighters on the roster, you'll need to employ at least 100 people to follow fighters around to weigh them, and chase them around when they're hiding under cages, and across towns in saunas on weigh in days.


3. That's all very expensive, so you have to sell the organization on how massively reshuffling all their championships, disrupting their marketing, and taking all these new expenses on will help them. Keep in mind the ufc was just purchased by a company that is now in massive debt and looking to cut costs everywhere.


4. Zero upside for the promotion. They give zero fucks if weight cuts are unhealthy for fighters. Appeasing a tiny fraction of the fanbase at great personal cost for zero return on investment.

I want you to point out one of these posters who's similar to me. You say "you guys" but I dont see anyone around here whose posts resemble mine.

Anyway, on topic,

1. You'll have to give an example. I mentioned earlier in this thread about rankings. Number of title defenses would still exist; i dont see why it wouldnt. Dunno what you mean about your last sentence for #1.

2. In my system there wouldn't be weigh-ins like there are now. Fights taking place wouldnt hinge on fighters making weight. Fighters wouldnt be booked in the first place if theyre not of a similar size. Weigh-ins would be done close to the fight just to create a historical fighter record. Like I suggested in the main post, id like to see random year-round weigh-ins done to supplement those weight records. Yeah, thatd come at a cost, no doubt. Itd be very little in comparison to the expensive drug testing that the UFC currently employs.

3. This isnt a problem with my system in particular. Any new system would require convincing those in power to use it. Id explain the same things im explaining in this thread.

4. Happier fighters, more exciting fights, more active fighters, longer fighter careers, fewer fight cancellations, more fight possibilities, more title flexibility, less possibility for controversy due to fighter deaths. Off the top of my head

 

[johncola]

Weight classes are simply the best option by being the least stupid

/thread i guess

 

[Sega30]

The 3 titles get unified. Fighter A would only have 1 title. For there to have been 3 champs of a similar size, champ size must have shifted over time. That means there's probably a size gap somewhere between titles. During that aforementioned time, contenders at that size will likely exist. If they do, they fight for a new title. If they dont exist, no title is created until they DO exist. Fighters B and C probably arent the right size for that title. They're a similar size to A, and they lost to him, so they dont get titles. Unless theyre close enough to a different champ, then they get a crack at him instead if theyre considered the top contender.

But then you're creating titles just for the sake of filling a gap, then once B and C lose there's no reason for the two belts that were created to exist. Also, how do we determine who are contenders and whether or not a new title gets made? If a guy wins 5 in a row against smaller competition, you can say he doesn't deserve a title because he's just beating smaller guys, but his streak makes him the most worthy. You can make the argument for quality of competition, but since everyone is fighting at whatever weight, you can have multiple scenarios were there's no common opponents or even the same size grouping. There's just no way to decide contenders and champions without having them divided into groups of some sort, and there's still no better way of doing that than weight classes.

 

[johncola]

It just doesn't work.
PRIDE used a system pretty similar with what are trying to suggest.
The main complaint we always had here was that "mismatches"were made ending with the winner being discredited for beating a "little"guy.

It happened everitime someone fought a japanese fighter or someone who didn't want to cut that extra weight.

I plead ignorance on PRIDE.

But my system wouldnt involve weight cutting, so im not sure we're talking about the same thing

 

[Kowboy On Sherdog]

I wouldn't mind seeing a wmma 125 division and a mens 225 division catch weight fights!!!

 

[johncola]

But then you're creating titles just for the sake of filling a gap, then once B and C lose there's no reason for the two belts that were created to exist. Also, how do we determine who are contenders and whether or not a new title gets made? If a guy wins 5 in a row against smaller competition, you can say he doesn't deserve a title because he's just beating smaller guys, but his streak makes him the most worthy. You can make the argument for quality of competition, but since everyone is fighting at whatever weight, you can have multiple scenarios were there's no common opponents or even the same size grouping. There's just no way to decide contenders and champions without having them divided into groups of some sort, and there's still no better way of doing that than weight classes.

We're creating titles for the sake of crowning the best fighters. That's the way it should be. Im not sure youre understanding my idea. Why are you saying there's no reason for the titles to exist? Which titles are you referring to?

If my system is working correctly, and the matchmakers are doing their jobs, there shouldnt be any fighters exclusively fighting smaller guys. Essentially, contenders would be selected the same way they are now. Khabib and Ferg are fighting for a title because we think theyre the best. It's no different. "No common opponents" is unlikely. And not that important anyway. Judge skills, not records.

 

[johncola]

I wouldn't mind seeing a wmma 125 division and a mens 225 division catch weight fights!!!

I dont know what that gold belt thing means. Does it give you the ability to delete your post?

 

[Sega30]

I wouldn't mind seeing a wmma 125 division and a mens 225 division catch weight fights!!!

125 is the best division in WMMA, and it's ridiculous the UFC doesn't have it. 225 works for catchweight fights and makes sense in theory for an actual division, but when you look at everyone who would go to 225, LHW and HW would be barren wastelands

 

[Kowboy On Sherdog]

125 is the best division in WMMA, and it's ridiculous the UFC doesn't have it. 225 works for catchweight fights and makes sense in theory for an actual division, but when you look at everyone who would go to 225, LHW and HW would be barren wastelands

Yeah. They had a 225 catchweight fight on Legacy a couple of weeks ago. Guys who were to small for heavy. I was impressed and think it could work in the UFC if they did it right.

 

[Sega30]

We're creating titles for the sake of crowning the best fighters. That's the way it should be. Im not sure youre understanding my idea. Why are you saying there's no reason for the titles to exist? Which titles are you referring to?

If my system is working correctly, and the matchmakers are doing their jobs, there shouldnt be any fighters exclusively fighting smaller guys. Essentially, contenders would be selected the same way they are now. Khabib and Ferg are fighting for a title because we think theyre the best. It's no different. "No common opponents" is unlikely. And not that important anyway. Judge skills, not records.

But we're not crowing the best fighters. We're crowning guys at an indeterminate size because the best fighters are a different size than them. And if the whole point is everyone can fight people at a similar size then them because weightclasses don't matter, why can't they fight smaller guys? if those are the more exciting fights, wouldn't those be the fights this whole system is campaigning for? Or are you saying that the fact they've only beaten smaller opponents lessens their winning streak, in essence pointing out the reason for weight classes?

And how are we judging skill? If there's multiple titles in a similar size pool, can't you just pick the fighter that you match up best against?

You've mentioned in other posts that we could still have rankings, and that everyone who fights would still have to be generally the same size. Isn't that just calling for expanded weight classes? That I can get behind, but don't feed me shit and tell me it's chocolate. They're still weight classes.

 

[Rondas Pillow]

I'm not going to lie. I started reading the initial post and thought it was fucking dumb. I didn't want to stop and not give ts a fair shot.

I continued reading and realized ts suffers from Down syndrome. We should all congratulate ts for making it here and making a thread.

 

[Draxton]

Only book fights and accept fights between fighters of a similar size.

If only we had a way to match fighters up based on similar size..... like their weight???

 

[Mike]

I want you to point out one of these posters who's similar to me. You say "you guys" but I dont see anyone around here whose posts resemble mine.

Anyway, on topic,

1. You'll have to give an example. I mentioned earlier in this thread about rankings. Number of title defenses would still exist; i dont see why it wouldnt. Dunno what you mean about your last sentence for #1.

2. In my system there wouldn't be weigh-ins like there are now. Fights taking place wouldnt hinge on fighters making weight. Fighters wouldnt be booked in the first place if theyre not of a similar size. Weigh-ins would be done close to the fight just to create a historical fighter record. Like I suggested in the main post, id like to see random year-round weigh-ins done to supplement those weight records. Yeah, thatd come at a cost, no doubt. Itd be very little in comparison to the expensive drug testing that the UFC currently employs.

3. This isnt a problem with my system in particular. Any new system would require convincing those in power to use it. Id explain the same things im explaining in this thread.

4. Happier fighters, more exciting fights, more active fighters, longer fighter careers, fewer fight cancellations, more fight possibilities, more title flexibility, less possibility for controversy due to fighter deaths. Off the top of my head

You guys meaning everyone that makes these weight cut threads. None of you ever address that changing the system involves more costs. Why would an org incur more costs with no increase in revenue? It's a business first.


1. A champ for each weight division. If you're using some nebulous "guys of roughly comparable weight" system, it's much less direct than here's our ww champ with 7 defenses, mw champ with 9 defenses etc.


2. This is so vague as to be useless. Who decides what's "similar enough in size", without using weigh ins? Weight is the closest way to tel who is equal size. Is george roop a similar size to donald cerrone, because both are tall? Should Cormier be fighting wws because he's short? Obviously not. Any weigh in system you use, guys will figure out when you're weighing them. And then they will cut weight to try to fight smaller guys.


3. Paying for drug testing has a benefit though. The casual fan cares about keeping peds out of competition. This is true across all sports. There's a direct benefit to at least having the appearance you don't support cheating. The average fan DOES NOT care about weight cutting. You don't have to eliminate it to appear to be a legit sport, in fact all combat sports involve weight cutting. So fans are used to it.


4. The ufc doesn't give a shit about fighter health. Fighter death is a red herring. No fighter has ever died cutting weight. More exciting fights isn't a given. More fight cancellations is a more likely outcome than less of them, as fighters WILL try to game/cheat any attempt to ban cutting. More possible fights, why? Fighters will still know which fighters are bigger than they are, and avoid fighting them. There's a reason 99.9% of fighters cut to the lowest weight possible. They don't want to fight larger fighters.


Weight classes don't stop fights from happening, fighters can move up whenever they want. They know better than anyone the disadvantage they're at fighting larger fighters.

 

[Vegesus44]

I think everyone should have a belt - TS