It is not terribly uncommon in the sport of MMA for two teammates to both be in the same weight class and often refuse to fight each other. What I don't get is when a champion says he won't defend his belt against a friend...why not? If I had the title (which of course I never will) and I was truly friends with someone and I know they have worked for the past 15 or more years of their life with that very title in mind, that they have poured their blood, sweat and tears just as much as I, that they are in their prime and may never have another opportunity to fight for that title, why would I deny them the opportunity? Why do fighters act like this sport has to be personal. Randy Couture said and lived it best, he called it a business and that is what is. You get in the ring, you do your job, you don't have to like, dislike, or feel any emotions about your opponent before, during or after. If I had a best friend and we fought in the cage, I wouldn't like him any more or less after the fight because i know it isn't personal. Do other people have different opinions about this?
tackling and hard body hits are a lot different then trying to choke a a guy unconscious or punch him until his body shuts down.
The danger with "friends" fighting, is that sometimes both guys hold off and it makes for a boring fight. And it can feed the tinfoil hatters if the outcome is not to their liking.
I think its down to the individuals themselves. If two people don't feel comfortable fighting each other because of their friendship then its up to them to decide how to deal with it, they will be fully aware of the consequences.
I never understood the reluctance of friends fighting each other. I get that you don't want to punch your friends in the face or whatever, but does that mean you are perfectly ok with punching a another guy in the face? You shouldn't want to punch anyone in the face regardless of whether you're friends with the person or not. But in MMA you're both fighters, you know what you signed up for, so do what you're paid to do.
As a champion you fight the #1 contender regardless of who it is or you are stripped of the title. It's really that simple.
I might be able to come up with about 5 - unless you count strikes that causes a fighter to lose control of his brain faculties for a few minutes.
There are several issues with fighting teammates. The one above all else is that your training will hurt. If you're in a position where you're likely to fight your teammate, the exchange between the two of you will suffer. Fighters will hold back in training, not share useful tips or downright avoid training with one another altogether.
A champion should defend ahainst all comers, including friends, unless the contender-friend refuses to fight the champ.
For all the people who whine about this continuously, can you tell me how much damage it has done to MMA? How many divisions are there where the titleholder would be different if friends/training partners fought each other? How many truly epic fights have we missed out on due to friends/training partners refusing to fight each other? People have been drastically overreacting to this for years, as if the legitimacy or entertainment factor of the sport have been ruined, and I have yet to see a shred of evidence for that position.
Ok, first of all i do not post a lot because most of the time i don't have anything intersting to add to a certain discussion. Sometimes i do have to make an exception like now. First of all i think a champion has a moral obligation to defend the belt against whoever is in the number one spot, even if that was his f***ing mother !! Secondly, what's with al the emotions about hurting a friend ?? If he doesn't like to get hurt or won't risk getten injured, i strongly suggest to NOT fight in a freaking cage. Thirdly not letting two friends fight against one another because they could hold back, is easily overcome by confiscating the belt if that is the case. This may seem rash, but let's be honest, how many fights do these guys have and still be considered to be in their primes ? How long can a very good fighter be and wait for another shot at the belt when his friend finally looses it ? It's just isn't fair. Lastly, the top guys earn a lot of money. The guys just under them don't deserve a shot at the big money ? because a friend / stablemate is champion ? Sorry, that's just not fair and should not be able to happen. And i'm just talking about the same weight class..
Fighting friends is NOT the problem. It is fighting training partners. You alienate the whole gym in a fight like that. Who gets the best coach? who gets to train there? who has to move out and go somewhere else? so now that guy is at a dis advantage. Then you just potentially wreck a gym for stuff like that. If they don't train together but used to, i see no problems with that and should fight.
So you wouldn't/didn't want to see: Cain-Cormier JDS-Big Nog Anderson-Machida Fitch-Kos Wand-Shogun GSP-Rory Shields-Nick Diaz Gilbert-Nate Diaz Edgar-Alvarez Faber-Benevidez Hendo-Sonnen GSP-Marquardt ... and the countless other examples I can't think of at the moment?
to me the answers to those questions are easy. Champs get it all. As in "You are a good friend, and I want you to have a shot at the title. That being said I am the champion and I get the perks of being a champion which means I get to have the coaches and they gym. You will have to train somewhere else at least until we after the fight."
Id have no trouble kicking the shit out of a friend for ufc money and a title shit id fight a friend for a few grand in a local mma show. It a competition not a street fight out of anger now that I would not do with a friend.
I think it's more so with guys that train with each other..since they'll know each others tendencies..strengths and game plans easier
