The Mixed Martial Arts Divide

[NHB7]

I feel like we fans continue to have the same debates enough times that there is at least a fairly clear division with nearly defineable archetypes.

To there seems to be the what I'll Call the

Excitment Junky Fan:
-Fights "should" be exciting

-Stand - up brawls are the best fights

-Ground game is okay if they are preceded by a good slam and within 20 seconds lead to aggressive ground - and - pound or very close submissions, otherwise, it's better standing.

-Trash talk/staredowns are awesome even if they are a bit manufactured at times.

-Dana White made this sport what it is and he is awesome and would be fun to have a beer with.

-Rankings are interesting to peruse sometimes, but would rather watch the most interesting fight against the champ than the highest ranked fighter against the champ (unless they are one and the same).

-Almost exclusively watch UFC and consider other organizations nearly completely irrelavent.

-If a figher is not in the UFC, that means he/she is not good.

-A fighter can/should be cut from the UFC if he is not interesting even if he is doing well in the UFC.

-A figher should always try to end a fight. Trying to win a decision isn't fighting.

The Purist Fan:
-If fights are "exciting" that is a positive, but more interested in seeing who is the better fighter so if it has to become slow and technical that is fine.

-All aspects of the fight game can be equally exciting.

-Prefer that fights don't get stood up, even if there is in - activity, because it is the responsibility of the grounded fighter to work his way back to his feet if that is where he wants to be.

-Mostly indifferent to trash/talk, staredowns, etc. In fact it can seem a bit campy and often manufactured.

-Prefer to refer to it as MMA as opposed to UFC. And Dana White is involved in MMA, but is overly credited for it's growth.

-Title fights should be earned. It should be the highest ranked fighter fighting for the title (unless he recently fought for the title and lost, in which case it should be the next highest ranked fighter, and so on).

-Watches at least 2 - 3 organizatins (including the UFC) fairly consistently.

-There are tons of great fighters outside the UFC

-A fighter should never be cut simply due to being boring.

-Trying to win a decision is a legitimate strategy.

 

[jiujitsuforever]

pretty much sums up fans. and then there are always "the dana fans" that want guys to get concussions and then say it was a good performance while bashing someone for using groundgame

 

[Kingfarthur]

Purist, and let me explain. I much prefer stand up brawls, but I like and appreciate great fighters, whether or not they're grapplers or not. I want to see the best vs. the best above all else, even if they're boring.

Also don't like rounds, time limits, standups, or half the ticky tack striking rules.

 

[Shogun Rising]

Sometimes I get in the mode where every takedown and every underhook get me going, no matter who's fighting.

But a lot of times I have other stuff going on, and I barely pay attention to the prelims for more than one or two fights, and I have to sort of train myself to care about the biggest fights of the night.

It's not that I dislike slow/grinding fights with lesser known fighters. It just doesn't always keep my attention compared with other hobbies/responsibilities.

 

[eiyuu]

Ummm . . . no, not gonna be pigeon-holed here.

You can have aspects of both. Since I am a Martial Arts fan first and foremost and the reason why I started watching the UFC, I enjoy the skill involved--both striking and grappling.

BUT, this is supposed to be fighting. If you take someone down, I expect you to do something productive to try to end the fight after that takedown. Not just hold and control for a decision.

 

[Bigj383]

I consider myself a purist fan because I believe MMA is exciting in general.

I also understand that fights can be boring even when technical.

I watch many organizations I know there are good fighters outside the UFC... but I also realize that UFC by far has the deepest roster, with the best overall talent and most those good fighters will eventually wind up in the UFC simply because UFC pays far better than anyone else.

 

[Jblizzle]

Ummm . . . no, not gonna be pigeon-holed here.

You can have aspects of both. Since I am a Martial Arts fan first and foremost and the reason why I started watching the UFC, I enjoy the skill involved--both striking and grappling.

BUT, this is supposed to be fighting. If you take someone down, I expect you to do something productive to try to end the fight after that takedown. Not just hold and control for a decision.

Same here. I think this thread is kind of silly and I also find it weird that Ts thinks in order for you to be an MMA purist you have to consider trying to win a decision is a legitimate strategy when MMA has always discouraged that. Weren't early MMA fights that went to a decision automatically considered draws?

 

[FinBJJ]

More of a purist, but don't agree with everything.

I do enjoy the ground aspect a lot because I train BJJ, but laying in someones guard and throwing weak punches isn't really good grappling. They should make an attempt to advance their position or posture up to land some meaningful strikes. If you're just holding them down, you should eventually be stood up.

Trying to win a decision is a legitimate strategy, but not one that I'm a fan of. Going to a decision is fine, but not even having the intention of finishing is kind of lame. Finishing at a top 5 level is hard though.

Wall and stall is generally the most boring part of the game. If it leads to some dirty boxing, knees, takedowns or better yet awesome trips and throws, great. If it's just leaning on the guy to tire him out then I admittedly get a bit bored. In this case I won't complain if the ref splits them up after a good while of leaning.

 

[cade187]

Yeah, this is a pretty dumb assertion in my opinion, and the fact that you're offering it up leads me to believe you place yourself in the second category. Congrats TS; you are among the MMA Elect.

 

[Steveo843]

i picked excitement junky. but im really a mix of both

 

[Shogun Rising]

You gotta be careful with this one. The caveat may be considering other organizations "completely irrelevant" but just because you only follow the UFC doesn't make you one of the just bleed junkies. When I was in my early 20's I had the time and bandwidth to follow MMA as a whole. I just don't anymore. You get older, you take on more and more responsibility and your availability to follow something like this shrinks. I've got very limited play time at this point in my life so when it comes to watching sports, I'm pretty selective.

Yeah, I mean have time to post on Sherdog when I'm waiting for a class or whatever, or when I should be studying, but I just don't have time to follow every organization and rewatch every fight twice to really be consumed with fighting like I used to be.

 

[SCADA]

I don't agree with the descriptions.....

A purest still loves the entertaining fight above all else. Not liking when fighters are holding on the fence and not trying to better the position or holding top position on opponents and not staying busy or improving position, does not mean you are not a purest.

 

[TCE]

I'm the purist fan but if there is no activity, fights should be stood up. I'm fine with that rule.

 

[TCE]

Ummm . . . no, not gonna be pigeon-holed here.

You can have aspects of both. Since I am a Martial Arts fan first and foremost and the reason why I started watching the UFC, I enjoy the skill involved--both striking and grappling.

BUT, this is supposed to be fighting. If you take someone down, I expect you to do something productive to try to end the fight after that takedown. Not just hold and control for a decision.

Pretty much this.

 

[NHB7]

Same here. I think this thread is kind of silly and I also find it weird that Ts thinks in order for you to be an MMA purist you have to consider trying to win a decision is a legitimate strategy when MMA has always discouraged that. Weren't early MMA fights that went to a decision automatically considered draws?

You and Eiyuu can feel free to note that I said which one BETTER defines you, not FULLY defines you. For myself, there is some in each category that fit me, but more in the Purist fan category that define me, so I would say I'm more of a purist fan. That being said, Purist fan vs. Excitment Junky is more of a spectrum. I'm closer to the purist side than to the Excitment Junky side of things.

It's kind of like "Are you democrate or republican"....I'm neither, but if I had only those two choices, I could certainly say I'm closer to one side than the other.

That being said, I should have made options 1 - 10 to provide more middle ground options.

 

[RachelZane**]

im a bit of both

i think ts did a good job of describing sherdog though

 

[Gunny]

Everyone here is an excitement junky fan. Those who claim otherwise are merely deceiving themselves.

 

[mma2013]

i enjoy a good fight regardless if it's a brawl or technique. however, i'll always appreciate a fight more when technique wins over power/brute strength.

 

[Goodfella86]

i'm closer to a purist, but I respect dana white's passion and relevance (it's "cool" to hate him). I love bloody wars, but I prefer to see submissions to knockouts in general just because I LOVE SUBMISSIONS!!!

I don't think fighters should be compromised by incentives, fame-wise and financially, to fight like careless animals (DHK may regret his recent transformation down the road). SHIELDS, OKAMI, FITCH should all be in the UFC. that's a good indicator for whether or not someone respects the SPORT. having said that, I am a true capitalist and respect the UFC's business decision to cut them.

I LIKE trash-talk. most of it is manufactured animosity, but I am more excited for a fight that has some animosity.

i'm into other organizations.... i ABSOLUTELY KNEW pettis, cerrone, and bendo were going to be top 10 fighters in the UFC. chandler/alvarez was my "big fight" this month.



i said this the other day, but i think that a good measuring stick for true fans is/was maia/shields. right off the bat, it weeds out the bloodthirsty exclusively-striking fans. secondly, the fight itself was very competitive but not the most exciting fight ever. it certainly wasn't boring, but it wasn't a fight with even one 10-8 round and many near-finishes. it was just a battle of two grappling-GREATS who met in cage for 25 minutes, and it was (as is the case with most fights) the only time these two top-10 fighters would meet in competition. if that didn't have your full attention, then you're not a true fan.

i personally thought the fight was amazing, but i enjoy the methodical bjj battles. clearly, not everybody does. i thought it was the Machida/shogun on the mat. a lot of snobby sherdoggers use that fight when demonstrating their superior appreciation for the sport, and i guess i'm trying to use that dick move but in an even more elitist fashion.

 

[Unbreakabull]

I'm here for the hugging