- Joined
- Oct 4, 2015
- Messages
- 3,886
- Reaction score
- 1,812
If you were a fighter currently fighting for the UFC, what would your mind set be?
Would you rather have a fight anyone at anytime peronsa, aka Donald Cerrone, where you are willing to step in constantly on short notice and fight several times a year. Doing this, especially when it's on short notice, may result in more losses on your record, but you'll take home more money.
Or, would you rather take a more cautious approach, where you almost always avoid short notice calls and instead fight just a few times a year, slowly building up your resume. In this case, your win/lose ratio is very important, but there is no guarantee that you will reach championship level status. Taking this conservative approach may also result in better long term health, but of course at the expense of those precious dollars.
Taking the latter approach, you will live a relatively healthier life, have a better wins to losses ratio (which may result in a better legacy), but the financial gains will be less than that of the former approach, which may not (depending on if you ever do reach that rare championship level status) be enough to support your family in the long run.
However, with the former approach, considering you are well with your money, you will pocket a substantial amount more since you are constantly fighting which could lead to an easier retirement once it's all said and done. But at the expense, you will have suffered more damage, especially to the brain, which could come up to be problematic as you age into the 50s. Also, you will have more losses on your record, which will most likely affect the legacy you leave behind.
Both scenarios has it's ups and downs. What path would you sherdoggers choose and why?
Tldr: fight whenever possible and gain more income, or take a more conservative approach to better long term health and build a greater legacy, but at the expense of money.
Would you rather have a fight anyone at anytime peronsa, aka Donald Cerrone, where you are willing to step in constantly on short notice and fight several times a year. Doing this, especially when it's on short notice, may result in more losses on your record, but you'll take home more money.
Or, would you rather take a more cautious approach, where you almost always avoid short notice calls and instead fight just a few times a year, slowly building up your resume. In this case, your win/lose ratio is very important, but there is no guarantee that you will reach championship level status. Taking this conservative approach may also result in better long term health, but of course at the expense of those precious dollars.
Taking the latter approach, you will live a relatively healthier life, have a better wins to losses ratio (which may result in a better legacy), but the financial gains will be less than that of the former approach, which may not (depending on if you ever do reach that rare championship level status) be enough to support your family in the long run.
However, with the former approach, considering you are well with your money, you will pocket a substantial amount more since you are constantly fighting which could lead to an easier retirement once it's all said and done. But at the expense, you will have suffered more damage, especially to the brain, which could come up to be problematic as you age into the 50s. Also, you will have more losses on your record, which will most likely affect the legacy you leave behind.
Both scenarios has it's ups and downs. What path would you sherdoggers choose and why?
Tldr: fight whenever possible and gain more income, or take a more conservative approach to better long term health and build a greater legacy, but at the expense of money.
Last edited:
![[insert_name_here]](https://sherdog-data.community.forum/avatars/m/9/9323.jpg?1555537662){kind=avatar}
