Discussion in 'UFC Discussion' started by Legendary, Dec 1, 2019.
is it 2008 again?
you tell 'em TS
Not this shit again.
This will only lead to more cheating, more fights falling apart and more CTE (because dehydration).
They hasd same fay weigh in in boxing and then changed it cause they realised folk still cut the same amount of weight and since they couldn't change behaviour they went for moving it back so they could at leats have more time to rehydrate.
That's what I'd like to see with a corresponding increase/re-distribution of weight classes. Fighters should be hydrated at all times during fight week and within 5% of their weight a week out.
Same day weigh-ins would just lead to fighters being more tired during the fight which is bad.
This. I hate this kind of rhetoric. "Ah, they won't fight well, they will die, blah blah blah...", fuck these people. They need to maintain their weight or be cut if they don't perform. If they want to die the problem is on them, fuck it.
Same day weigh-ins right now. Fuck 5, 10, 15lb of difference between fighters on the same division, this must stop.
The point is to limit/eliminate weight cutting... Fighters will not do that on their own so regulation is the only way to do it.. For me personally i don't agree with huge cuts and I would not do it but I don't care if a guy wants to cut 100lbs..It is his body..His life..His risk...
Yeah, I understand that part.
THere are times where the difference is extreme, but isn't that rare to happen?
And is that difference, that...advantage in weight really that much better compared to not having to cut at all, be healthy and fight as the weight you're used to?
I'm genuinely asking, not saying how it is, btw.
Maybe I should rephrase my question.
Let's say I'm a fighter, walking weight 170.
A) I cut 15 lbs, regain X amount back and fight around 170, having 5 lbs weight advantage, but had to de and rehydrate.
B) I don't cut at all, maybe like a pound or two, just to be sure, I don't have a 5lbs advantage, but I didn't have to dehydrate and rehydrate at all.
Is the situation A *that* much better for me, as a fighter? *scratches his head*
Why intefere at all ?
It's the same rules for everyone, I say it's fair.
As for handholding (i.e. you should not weightcut, that's bad for you), they're grown man. Let them make their own decision.
The main problem with weight cutting is not the weight cutting itself (though if its too dangerous it needs to be banned).
The problem is that people cut very different amounts of weight depending on weight cutting technology/secrets they know, and also frame (some frames can cut more weight than others). Result is you have very different weights in the same division, and usually the division is dominated by the heavier man (ie: Khabib at LW, Conor at FW).
When they banned IVs, notice that many former champions and top contenders had to move weight classes and lost badly. It also happens as fighters age (and ageing into 30s and 40s means inevitable weight gain unless you follow extreme nutrition).
Its cheating. Period. They are literally fighting smaller weaker men.
If you've been in a gym sparring, and spar heavier or smaller guys, you notice a huge difference.
Against a smaller guy, you feel much more powerful because his hits dont hurt as much and you can bully him (with pushing/wrestling).
Thats not to say that lighter guys cant win against heavier guys. Those are the true gangsters of the game, and its all about skill. I remember during a muay thai spar with an "expert" who was 10-15kg lighter than me, the expert was still able to light me up simply with experience. Even if his hits did not hurt too much, they still accumulated and hurt, and he would have KOed me eventually.
Banning weight cutting entirely would cause enormous changes in the entire UFC roster.
Most champs would not be champs anymore, etc.
ONE FC seems to have reduced ( i think it cant be actually 100% eliminated) the weight cut issues with their system, my guess is that a fighter, lets say a WW which is 185lbs there, most likely walks in the 185-190 range, that watching their weight, then on weigh-in day they just sweat those final 5 or so pounds and make weight, no need for same day weigh-ins, the only "issue" that i see here is that you miss on superfights, if there is such thing, because fighters simply wont make it to a division above theirs, boxers have been moving up their whole career since forever, but their divisions are a lot closer to each other, some of this could benefit the UFC imo.
It would be healthier to end weight cutting.
In most cases, yes.
But in many cases, no. One fighter has cut massively more weight than the other.
It comes down to one fighter for some reason (technology/team & frame) being able to cut more weight than others.
The highest level UFC fighters are pros at cutting an enormous amount of weight and being still functional.
To be honest with you it can really vary depending on the fighter and circumstances. Before with IVs guys could rehydrate more quickly, so being the guy that could cut the most water weight was a big advantage.
But now with the IV ban, it seems like cutting a huge amount isn't as much of an advantage as it used to be. And some guys can do big cuts their entire career just fine, then others start to have a hard time as they get older. Most notably Ian McCall got to the point that he couldn't make weight without some mysterious illness or injury.
Another option would simply to get rid of weight division. Almost every major combat sport started without them (boxing, wrestling, judo, BJJ, MMA), and no non-combat sports have them, though size is as least as important in many of them (basketball, football, hockey) as combat sports.
Weight divisions were added for marketing reasons (ie have more title belts). Yes, bigger fighters have an advantage. So do taller basketball players, bigger football players etc. Yet there's no weight or height divisions in those sports.
I think it’s a great idea but it will never happen.
The rules of the sport were authored by a wrestler FOR wrestlers to have something to do after college.
Including weigh-in regulations and judging standards.
Just do hydration tests.
So, essentially, we added a "layer" to a fight, one that occurs outside the ring.
We both risk doing the same thing, but one of us should, in theory, endure it better, thus be more rested after such a body shock, thus providing a certain advantage.
I still somehow feel that's pretty pointless and still not sure if all that make me a better fighter than if both of us didn't cut and fought fully rested and in optimal shape.
Perhaps I should have just asked:
"Am I really more optimal fighter if I cut so much weight compared to fighting fully rested?"
THnx for the answer, though
Weight cutting boils down to the fact that some guys can do it real well and others can't so pussy MMA fans cry about it. Boo-fucking-hoo. What's next, weight classes by reach because that's an unfair physical advantage too? How about fighters who have to travel farther much than their opponents, it's a huge physical advantage to sleep in your own bed instead of flying half way across the world. Fighting somebody who's a different race than you could also mean evolutionary advantages. Why stop at cutting weight when we can measure bone density, muscle mass, lung capacity, and anything else that might give somebody the smallest of advantages.
One's weight cutting policy is bullshit. Their fighters still cut weight. '
The favoured ones are allowed to cut, their opponents arnt.
Heres Colbey Northcutt, a featherweight who cut to 135 fighting a fucking strawweight who walks around at 130
Sage has already said he's moving to 155 from 170 for his next fight
Separate names with a comma.