No, I've heard many post fight interviews that had the victorious fighters claim that they wanted to keep things standing, and wanted to go for the knock out, and got what they wanted. I've even heard fighters claim that they kept things standing because they "wanted to give the fans a show" so I know that either going to the ground or trying to keep on your feet give their own advantages and disadvantages, and I know that there are fighters who try to win big and win and lose trying.
The answer to my question would be more along the lines of "Yes/No, many fighters do/don't realize the potential publicity of a big knockout these days, and they are/aren't willing to risk it for these reasons."
I've got a couple of answers that seem to try, but few seem to have hit the mark.
G-Off, I never said that a submission specialist couldn't nor wouldn't get a fan base. But comparatively, it seems to me that there is more marketability around a successful striker, whether or not he/she is a solid fighter. But I do have this question for you, have you ever seen an over hyped ground fighter get a big match that you know they didn't deserve?
Furthermore, have you ever seen someone so undeserving as Kimbo Slice, the somewhat decent striker who made his name off of knocking the crap out of any somewhat intimidating thug off of the streets get such a big purse? He is the point incarnate, if you will, having his only loss coming in a fight in which a policeman guillotined him (which did not slow the momentum of his hype at all), his fans (who I imagine are generally anything but mma fans) still support him in his ongoing quest to be a washed up almost halfway-decent but still afraid to get his own ass beaten fighter. Where's the policeman who guillotined him? Eating donuts talking **** about him on the television, that's where.
And there is a striking similarity between a stolen base and a good submission, if you will. They both use the elements of speed, awareness, agility and surprise to sneak past an opening in the opponents defense, where as home runs/knock outs are loud cracks that anyone can and likely will get (at least once) in there career.
You know, I can see that a lot of my posts are controversial, but seeing as how my question was not "if" the concept of a ko was more enticing to fans outside of the sport (which is where a companies economic growth comes from), it was what kind of effect might it have on a fighters strategy, I realize that a lot of you out there who cast me off as an idiot are only doing so because you know that I have no established credibility on this board. Many of you seem to miss my point entirely.
Last edited by Iphaltuus; 6/25/2008 10:39pm at .
No way am I going to read all that.
Thank you for proving my point Raz.
Frank Mir getting a title shot after beating Brock.
Originally Posted by Iphaltuus
You've got to be kidding me. I can sorta see what you mean, but man is that a stupid analogy. I'll meet you this far: slick transitions to a sub do indeed use agility and quickness and stuff, and knockouts are sudden, spectacular and often loud. But guess what? Anderson Silva is slippery and elusive in delivering knockout blows. GSP is overpowering and controlling in locking in submissions (and his dominant sub over Hughes gained him plenty of fans). Your analogy might sort of make sense if a stolen base won you the game, but no, you fail.
Originally Posted by Iphaltuus
So your point basically is that fighters feel pressured to be good stand-up artists because of an uneducated fanbase? This is only true in most of North America, and even then only partly. BJ Penn does not have tons of fans because of his striking, great though it may be. They like him because he's the fucking BJJ prodigy. GSP gets lots of fans for taking Matt Serra down and controlling him because it's so dominant. Tim Sylvia gets booed because he's a striker turned boring, and people wanted to see an exciting grappler (Nog) beat him. Diego Sanchez has a fanbase because of his aggressive BJJ, and his standup is improving so he can be a better fighter since he's already exciting on the ground. Karo Parisyan has a fanbase despite being an arrogant prick with mediocre standup because he pull off crazy-ass throws.
Final proof? Look at Lyoto Machida. Personally, I find him very exciting because I love his technical approach. I don't mind waiting for him to engage because he's so quick and accurate when he does. But many, many fans find him boring, especially since he wins mostly decisions. By most accounts, he's next in line for a title shot (or at least 2nd) after Forrest-Rampage. Lots of fighters care more about winning than being exciting, lots of fighters try to be exciting on the ground rather than striking when they suck at it.
PS For god's sake, please get better at getting your point across coherently before you stir up a shitstorm with an apparently idiotic point. Your point is about marketability for the fighters themselves and uneducated fanbases, which has nothing to do with Zuffa or any other organizations. By bringing them in you imply the rules are encouraging stand-up fighting and by calling your thread "Stand Up Central" you imply that (again, given your Zuffa mention) the UFC is intentionally standing more fights up more quickly to appeal to that uneducated fanbase.
[Nutshell]Your stolen base/home run analogy still sucks. Also, stop making misleading posts/threads and learn how to write.[/Nutshell]
Originally Posted by G-Off
I didn't mean to mislead, I just mentioned Zuffa because all the fights I cited were from either the WEC or UFC. But thank you for the reassuring counter-point. I have more comfort in knowing that the ground game is well supported, and that mma can breathe more as a sport apart from the traditionally dominant market of stand up fighting.