Are weight classes necessary?

I'm now having images of an open weight fight, mighty mouse vs stefan struve.
 
johncola said:
Would it not be possible to do away with the weight limits, and instead just negotiate required weigh-in weights on a fight-by-fight basis? This would help greatly reduce weight cutting.
Click to expand...
If we had no belts, no rankings, and people just fought, it could work. It would be horrible and destroy MMA though.
 
No, they aren't.

"In warfare size doesn't matter" Kenny Florian
 
NoContest said:
Nice. What a load of bullshit. That neo-darwinist free market garbage you're spewing has nothing to do with evolution or Darwin, who never said "survival of the fittest". Look up bonobos. Look up hunter-gatherers. Look up the research of dr Robert Sapolsky. Look up the essay "the original affluent society". Try studying things instead of swallowing whole the propaganda turd of mass media.
Click to expand...
What exactly did I say that you think is wrong and why? BTW, evolution is change of allele frequency and is a descriptive and not prescriptive theory. If you read that into what I said you're already very confused.
 
EGarrett said:
So we are hardwired to pay attention to the pecking order and who is where in it. Championships are an easy way to keep track of this.

Evolution is an amazing thing. People are fascinating.
Click to expand...
These parts I agree with. Everything else is wrong.
 
I don't think the athletic commissions would go for it. However, I don't see why they couldn't do more catch weight fights. Maybe not doing away with weight classes altogether but have a little flexibility
 
Something like this would run away many fighters. It would just be a company where fights would be made for the sake of making fights and hoping somebody would be watching and making since of it. It's a quirky idea but probably better for an upstart company to do and market it as an alternative. The people who just spent 4B aren't about to tinker with the product and do something as radical as this.
 
I get you trying to help the problem of fighters cutting weight... but no weight classes is nothing more than a fantasy. They will never do away with them.
 
EGarrett said:
It's okay, I knew you wouldn't.
Click to expand...

By all means.

Fighting and other contests demonstrates fitness and group dominance, which is necessary within a functioning social group to determine an efficient distribution of limited resources to help the group survive and to actually reduce violence within it.
Click to expand...
Hunter-gatherers had peaceful societies with no hierarchy or poverty, where all resources were shared equally among all members. This is why I told you to look up information on them. Bonobos, alongside chimps the closest animals to us in evolutionary terms, have no competition or violence and solve all their problems with sex. Robert Sapolsky studies baboons, very violent apes, and he studied one particular group that developed a peaceful culture. Violence is not necessary for a social group to function or survive, is my point.

A good day to you, sir. This conversation may continue when you've read all that I've suggested.
 
Im not reading that..

but they are needed... look what happened to Conor when he fought a guy 5/10lbs heavier. He is still bitching about that.
 
NoContest said:
By all means.


Hunter-gatherers had peaceful societies with no hierarchy or poverty, where all resources were shared equally among all members. This is why I told you to look up information on them. Bonobos, alongside chimps the closest animals to us in evolutionary terms, have no competition or violence and solve all their problems with sex. Robert Sapolsky studies baboons, very violent apes, and he studied one particular group that developed a peaceful culture. Violence is not necessary for a social group to function or survive, is my point.

A good day to you, sir. This conversation may continue when you've read all that I've suggested.
Click to expand...
Too late. Only cowards try to say shit then only back it up when chased down. You're on block now douchey.
 
NoContest said:
Nice. What a load of bullshit. That neo-darwinist free market garbage you're spewing has nothing to do with evolution or Darwin, who never said "survival of the fittest". Look up bonobos. Look up hunter-gatherers. Look up the research of dr Robert Sapolsky. Look up the essay "the original affluent society". Try studying things instead of swallowing whole the propaganda turd of mass media.
Click to expand...

The neolithic era, which pretty much ended hunter-gatherer culture as we understand it, started roughly 10000 years ago. While I agree with you about the various ways humans can co-exist, 10 millenia is enough time for us develop some instinctual habits, like paying attention to rankings and admiring trophies. Environmental conditioning can affect even smaller time frames, in my uneducated opinion.

On topic: As I've mentioned, I would rather have no rules at all, no rounds, no weight classes etc. So I can enjoy your ideas, TS, but with this being a sport and a business, I'm not sure your ideas are anything more than fantasy. The mechanics of it just don't seem viable.
 
Xenon_ said:
The neolithic era, which pretty much ended hunter-gatherer culture as we understand it, started roughly 10000 years ago. While I agree with you about the various ways humans can co-exist, 10 millenia is enough time for us develop some instinctual habits, like paying attention to rankings and admiring trophies. Environmental conditioning can affect even smaller time frames, in my uneducated opinion.
Click to expand...
Hunter-gatherers still exist in parts of the world so the neolithic didn't put an end to it, just started replacing it. And I actually think it was longer ago than 10k years, it's not certain.

Those instinctual habits are probably older than Homo Sapiens since other mammals have them as well. Apes sure have them, for example. You're 100% right about environmental conditioning, that's why I mentioned Sapolsky, who says "you can't study the nature of an animal outside of its environment". If you live in an environment that promotes competition and hierarchy, you'll have a society of competitive individuals. That's what we have now and a lot of people look around themselves and think that's human nature. That's what happened during the industrial revolution when neodarwinism was invented, economists looked around at the world they lived in and thought that's how evolution must work as well.

It's kinda weird discussing anthropology on Sherdog though.
 
NoContest said:
Hunter-gatherers still exist in parts of the world so the neolithic didn't put an end to it, just started replacing it. And I actually think it was longer ago than 10k years, it's not certain.

Those instinctual habits are probably older than Homo Sapiens since other mammals have them as well. Apes sure have them, for example. You're 100% right about environmental conditioning, that's why I mentioned Sapolsky, who says "you can't study the nature of an animal outside of its environment". If you live in an environment that promotes competition and hierarchy, you'll have a society of competitive individuals. That's what we have now and a lot of people look around themselves and think that's human nature. That's what happened during the industrial revolution when neodarwinism was invented, economists looked around at the world they lived in and thought that's how evolution must work as well.

It's kinda weird discussing anthropology on Sherdog though.
Click to expand...

Agreed. And I feel your annoyance at the mainstream media's perpetuation that competition is and always will be the only we thrive. But the other guy who was explaining why we love rankings was not wrong in his theory. Like you say, put us in particular environment and we act accordingly. We've been in a competitive environment for many generations now so it's become this way. I was just defending him.

Now if he stated that social Darwinism is the be all and end all, then I'd understand why you called him out but he simply explained why we appreciate rankings and what he said wasn't wrong. So i thought I'd chime in against you.
 
Xenon_ said:
So i thought I'd chime in against you.
Click to expand...
Yeah cool, it's just that he said:

Fighting and other contests demonstrates fitness and group dominance, which is necessary within a functioning social group to determine an efficient distribution of limited resources to help the group survive and to actually reduce violence within it.
Click to expand...
I just wanted to point out it's not necessary, it's not a law of the universe.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,236,673
Messages
55,433,536
Members
174,775
Latest member
kilgorevontrouty

Share this page

Back
Top