Should the fighter be protected or given the chance to go out like a warrior ?

flowoftruth

Black Belt
@Black
Joined
Jun 17, 2018
Messages
5,086
Reaction score
5,595
We're getting mixed signals here . A referee tries to let the fighters fight to the end and he is shunned then has his license stripped. Another referee protects a fighter from taking too much damage and he is getting attacked .

I wanted to see the snake go to sleep saturday night, that official robbed us. now we have to hear captain salt complain like we didn't just watch him get tossed around and beat down. Bring back yamasaki and let's let them all be warriors from now on!!

tenor.gif


Mario-Yamasaki-696x399.jpg
 
I don’t know what the correct answer is but it needs to be consistent. The mentality that because it’s a title fight someone should have to be beaten unconscious doesn’t sit well with me. As the champ you shouldnt earn the requirement of potential brain damage in the future in order to lose.

In other words I don’t think someone should have to take an extra heavy ass beating just because they are champ. That’s fucked up.
To me the answer is to use the same one or two referees for all title fights.
 
If they are working to improve their position, they should be allowed to continue.
 
It was a real toss up. TJ was about to perform a textbook single leg and submit Henry with it. Glad we are still talking about it.
 
It's one of the hardest sports to be a ref. A split second is all it takes to be considered a late or early stoppage. Its the clear bullshit like Herb letting Conor get away with everything that needs to be stamped.
 
I think I recall Mario taking that comment back, but don't care enough to google it for you
 
If they are working to improve their position, they should be allowed to continue.

What may appear as “improving” by one ref may be perceived as “holding on for dear life” by another.
 
My least favourite stoppages are when guys cover up during flurries, and the ref yells "improve position!"

mutherfucker, protecting my face till this flurries ends is the best thing to do. This guy will tire out before me.

But instead your forced to move your hands, take shots and "improve" when covering up is the safest/best option.
 
Doesn’t matter people with bitch either way. This is basically politics
 
Protect fighters to a further extent when they are taking prolonged damage. If one fighter dominates round 1 and 2 and then scores a knockdown in round 3 the fight should be stopped easier than after a flash knockdown in round one. (in my dumb opinion)
 
Normally protected but in some cases like this loud mouth sore losers you need to let them take a bit of a pounding so you don't have to deal with this bullshit.
 
In important fights number 1 contender, tile fight, I want both fighters to be given a chance even if it means them going stiff. So yea I want the fight left with no doubt who won. But if it's a hooker/barboza type situation it needs to be stopped.
 
Protect fighters to a further extent when they are taking prolonged damage. If one fighter dominates round 1 and 2 and then scores a knockdown in round 3 the fight should be stopped easier than after a flash knockdown in round one. (in my dumb opinion)
3 knockdowns in the span of 10 seconds and tj was still eating big shots. stick a fork in that boy cuz he was done
 
All stoppages should be like this, strictly for my entertainment.

iu
 
I don’t know what the correct answer is but it needs to be consistent. The mentality that because it’s a title fight someone should have to be beaten unconscious doesn’t sit well with me. As the champ you shouldnt earn the requirement of potential brain damage in the future in order to lose.

In other words I don’t think someone should have to take an extra heavy ass beating just because they are champ. That’s fucked up.
To me the answer is to use the same one or two referees for all title fights.

I agree with this to an extent. Being a champ should not change anything.

I do think a ref could and should give certain fighters more or less time to recover. I'm okay with them pulling the plug early on older/chinny fighters (current Reem, Chuck at one point) and giving fighters that are notoriously durable and havn't been stopped by strikes a bunch a little extra time (Edgar, Hendo for a long time)
 
If by go out like a warrior you mean take extra brain damage then your silly
People who go out like warriors are the guys who are punch drunk at 50(Stephen bonnar says hi)
 
Unpopular opinion:

I think fights should be stopped sooner than later. Fighters with the "warrior mentality" (myself included) are not thinking about consequences and are ready to fight to the death. However, this is a sport, a sport where the athletes take arguably the most damage and risk to their health.

It is the only combat sport where you can legally land strikes on an unconscious opponent.
krObWVX.gif

I think it is better to err on the side of caution. Sure, you MIGHT be able to withstand the storm and recover, but if you were losing that bad in the first place, maybe the other guy is a better fighter. Call it a day, go back to the gym and make adjustments for the rematch. Fighters have longer careers and less layoff time which means more fights.
giphy.gif
 
Last edited:
protect the fighter.

I feel guilty enough as it is just watching MMA- let's minimize risk of CTE.
 
I always watch the replays to see if the ref is in a position to see their eyes. If the ref could then I assume that what people bitch about being early is justified. If a fighters eyes roll back or are crossed, then the ref is right to stop it. Unfortunately that often is not seen by others so the bitching commences.
 
I agree with this to an extent. Being a champ should not change anything.

I do think a ref could and should give certain fighters more or less time to recover. I'm okay with them pulling the plug early on older/chinny fighters (current Reem, Chuck at one point) and giving fighters that are notoriously durable and havn't been stopped by strikes a bunch a little extra time (Edgar, Hendo for a long time)

Nah, that is discrimination. One set of rules for everybody.
 
Back
Top