8/24/2007 2:58pm, #1
Why are there no "Rubber Matches" in MMA?
In boxing generally if the champion loses there is a mandatory rematch. I haven't seen this in the UFC. Is there a particular reason ?
8/24/2007 3:10pm, #2
- Join Date
- Mar 2006
- Rochester, NY
I thought rubber matches referred to a third match when the opponents are tied at 1-1 in a series? As for the OP, uh, I dunno, maybe The Dana? I've heard that Hughes did not want an immediate rematch with GSP, but opted for a tune-up fight against Lytle first. It seems that the UFC drops you down the list immediately after you lose the championship.
8/24/2007 3:38pm, #3
It's because UFC fights are matched up by The UFC, wheras in boxing, matches are made by individual fighters' camps and negotiated out with mandatory rematch clauses.
In Dana's house, he makes the fights. Fighters can say "yes" or "no," but the particulars are determined by the UFC. Dana likes to make deposed champs fight some lower-tier fighters to build suspense; plus it gives the other contenders a crack at the title sooner.And lo, Kano looked down upon the field and saw the multitudes. Amongst them were the disciples of Uesheba who were greatly vexed at his sayings. And Kano spake: "Do not be concerned with the mote in thy neighbor's eye, when verily thou hast a massive stick in thine ass".
--Scrolls of Bujutsu: Chapter 5 vs 10-14.
8/24/2007 3:52pm, #4
There are in fact several examples of rubber matches as you're defining them. Arlovski for one. Several guys that renegotiate while holding the belt put in such clauses.