SB Nation User Blog: BlueberryMuffin

"Scoring the Struve-Buentello-fight" (or "What constitutes a 10-8 round?")

BlueberryMuffin — Mon, 14 Dec 2009 14:26:29 -0000

Somewhat obscured by BJ Penn`s deconstruction of Diego, KenFlo`s hammering of the Carpenter and Mir`s grip of Cheick`s neck, two middling heavuweights battled it out.

I found the fight fairly enjoyable, especially the first round. And since I was rooting for Struve, I was quite pleased with the result...

But.. While I was pleased by the result and completely agree with it, I was somewhat suprised by the scoring. I, and two of the judges, scored it 10-9 Struve, 10-9 Buentello and 10-9 Struve, thus giving a victory for Struve 29-28.

But one judge scored it 28-28. How did that happen? The first round was Struve`s. The second round was Buentello`s. So...

Did that lone judge give the 10-8 to Struve? Possibly. Struve did spend almost the entire round on Buentello`s back, trying to apply choke`s. Or did he think that Buentello`s knockdown rendered a 10-8 round in the second stanza?

Merely out of curiosity. Would you rather give Struve a 10-8 for his complete domination on the ground and constant submission-attempts, (but very little significant damage)? Or would you give Buentello a 10-8 for his knockdown?

I, for one, believe both were 10-9 rounds... But if you HAD to score one of them 10-8?

Poll

Which round was a 10-8?

Is this the time for "UFC challengers?" (long read)

BlueberryMuffin — Fri, 13 Nov 2009 22:11:23 -0000

Not so long ago, Joe Silva announced that they would down-size their roster to somewhere around 250 fighters. Soon thereafter fighters like Thales Leites and Jason McDonald were cut. But still… 250 fighters? That`s a lot.

Let`s do some quick 6th grade math here. There are about twelve numbered events a year, each hosting 9 fights in average. Add about six(?) Fight Nights to that and two TUF-finale`s a year, each with about nine fights. That`s 12+6+2 = 20 events. 20 x 9 = 180 fights. 180x2 = 360 fighter-slots a year. 360/250 = 1.44 That`s less than one and a half fight per fighter a year. Not a lot.

And in reality it is probably even less than that. A lot of the fight-slots are filled with newcomers slotted in through TUF, I`d say probably around 8-10 fighters a year (conservatively) getting in average two fights each. That`s another 20 fight-slots lost. Then another 5-10 fighters are externally recruited, taking another 20 slots. Which leaves us with 320/250 = 1.3 fights/fighter/year. 1.3!!! And that`s not including that many of the stars fight 2-4 times a year…

This might not seem as a problem for UFC, since they can cut and recruit fighters as they wish, but that is in the short term. It takes a while to build a fighter and that makes it very hard to motivate giving slots on a main-card or even on the undercard to up-and-comers or even to old-timers that have no relevance in the title picture. I think the severe shortage of main-eventers is due to this.

Another issue that I haven`t seen addressed as of yet is the age of the current main- or co-main-eventers. Randy Couture 46, Dan Henderson 39, Matt Hughes 36, Rich Franklin 35, Anderson Silva 35 just to mention a few of the old-timers… Secondly, a lot of the current generation of main-eventers are actually left-overs from the Pride-era, such as Fedor Emelianenko, Minotauro Nogueira, Wanderlei Silva, Rampage Jackson, Dan Henderson (again), Shogun Rua, or were created in the old-school era of UFC such as Rich Franklin (again), Vitor Belfort, Randy Couture (again).

Then what`s the solution to this problem? More UFC`s? More Fight Night`s? Maybe... But probably not. The risk by doing that would be to water-down the brand, creating sub-par UFC-fighters. You really want a UFC-fighter to be a force in any other organization if and when he`s cut. Besides, televising to many events would probably saturate the PPV-market.

I would instead suggest that they start, like Strikeforce has done, their feeding organization, the UFC Challengers. I would even go so far as to suggest that these events should NOT be televised, except for perhaps streaming it for 10 bucks or so, making it available for us hard-cores.

It seems such a waste by the UFC to give away guys like Gurgel, Leites and McDonald. What they do by releasing guys no longer competitive in UFC, but still better than most MMA-fighters out there is legitimize other organizations.

Others that will soon go down that road are fighters like Marcus Davis, Cris Lytle, Matt Serra, Chris Leben, Paul Taylor, James Irvin and so on. All of those could easily headline a local UFC-challengers, but none of those should, at the moment, take up space on one of the major UFC cards. It wouldalsobe the perfect place to grrom the stars of the future, such as Matt Riddle, Nick Ocipzak and Amir Sadollah. It`s likely that Zuffa wouldn`t make any money on these shows in the short-term, but on the other hand, they wouldn`t lose much either. With a fighter cost for an entire card of maybe around 100k, local sponsoring and low production costs, the loss would be less per event than Lesnar makes during his fight-entrance.

Fedor vs the Bloody Elbow

BlueberryMuffin — Tue, 10 Nov 2009 14:09:35 -0000

I was watching the Shields vs Miller fight the other day and was unseemingly annoyed. At first I didn`t know why ( I like grapplers), since the fight was fairly entertaining, but then it hit me. It was all the un-natural positions they got in where they were able to just chill. Every fiber in my body was screaming "Elbow! ELBOW!!!", but of course, that wasn`t allowed. That left Shields sitting in Mayhems lap... and nothing even remotely dangerous was about to happen as long as they stayed in that position.

For some time now I`ve found it odd that the major american MMA organizations have rules that differ. It´s strange, since it`s the same sport and the same country. I could accept it for the dearly departed Affliction and IFL , since they were fighting in a ring, but why Strikeforce (and the late EliteXC) choose not to allow elbows on the ground is beyond me. Are they so afraid of blood? It is after all an american audience that they are catering for and the american public does not seem so squeamish when it comes to a little red leakage?

But on the other hand, may that very rule have influenced Fedor and M-1 Global`s decision to join Strikeforce instead of UFC? I know it`s kinda far fetched (and that it was most likely based on possible co-promotion on M-1`s part), but please hear me out...

When it comes to weaknesses, Fedor has few. I`ve heard it been said that he has a "mediocre chin". Really?? Based on what?? He`s never been KO`d and he`s never even been knocked down (as far as I know). Getting wobbly efter being hit behind the ear by Fujita is, at least in my book, not enough to call his chin "mediocre".

Weaknesses that he does seem to have however is an average takedown-defense, a propensity to get cut (and bleed) and a tendency to break his hands.

Fedors average TD-defense is more than compensated by an excellent ground game, including submissions and switches and it`s hard to do something about brittle bones in your hands. Cut`s on the other hand, is an entirely different matter. Most cuts come from glancing blows, nails, or... elbows! To me, it would seem as a wise strategy to avoid those if you have brittle bones and a propensity to bleed. Especially if your lone loss was due to a cut...

And those very elbows may actually affect another weak-spot of the last emperor; his takedown defense. In an organisation where elbows are not allowed, his opponents options are limited to 1) Strikes or 2) Advance position, both of those actually playing into the Russians strengths. If you are to strike, you need to posture up. And posturing up and striking against Fedor Emilianenko? Well, it seems to be a very good way to get one of your arms stuck in something nasty, which in turn will lead to a submission or a loss of position. If you instead choose to advance your position... Well. That`s once again a good way to either find yourself submitted, on your back, or at the very least, back to standing.

By instead being able to keep both your arms on Fedor, staying in a prone position, and using short elbows, not only will you expose him to a possible fight-ending cut, but you will also in all likelyhood have eliminated a good part of Emilianenko`s excellent submission-game. (See: GSP vs Penn, or any fight with Clay Guida or Sean Sherk for reference)

Finally. While you may believe that Fedor would find a way to submit his opponents anyway, and that may very well be so, consider this: Fedor Emilianenko: Submissions 16 (6 Armbar, 4 RNC, 3 Kimura, 2 Guillotine, 1 Strikes... 0 Triangle`s)

And as far as I know, triangle-choke is not the way most people see Fedor beating a bear...

Poll

Who would benefit from allowing elbows on the ground?:

Fedor Emilianenko

16 votes

Brock Lesnar

45 votes

The Bear

42 votes

103 votes | Poll has closed

May Anderson Silva and Lyoto Machida switch belts?

BlueberryMuffin — Tue, 27 Oct 2009 20:28:15 -0000

I read a reply in a different post where it was suggested that Machida should go down a weight-class. The suggestion was, as should be, not taken very kindly by most other BloodyElbowers and I must admit that I chuckled somewhat when I read about it. But... then I thought about it some more...If Machida wins against Shogun, the disussion is moot. He is then the reigning LHW-champ and will likely remain so for quite some time. But if Machida loses he is stuck in limbo.

The logical challengers to Shogun would be Rashad Evans (if he wins against Thiago SIlva), Little Nog (if he beats Cane). Rampage is out and Tito Ortiz would need a couple of wins before he can be passed off as a challenger.

However. The most likely challenger of them all would be Anderson Silva. Shogun would have beaten the "pupil", time for the master to step forward. Anderson wouldn`t fight for the title since it was MAchida`s, but if MAchida is out, Anderson Silva would probably step in.

Machida could in the meantime drop down to middleweight, which he probably could do tomorrow and would soon be fighting for and very likely winning the middleweight title that Anderson Silva would vacate as soon as he had won the LHW-title. As soon as Anderson Silva lost the LHW-title, or retired, Machida could once again move back up a weight-class.

All this depends of course on a lot of "if"s and "maybe"s but if:

a) Shogun beats Machida in the rematch

b) Anderson SIlva gets the next title-shot (not unlikely)

c) Anderson Silva beats Shogun and then vacates the MW-title.

...Machida may drop down to MW.

I actually think that some of Anderson`s posturing regarding the Shogun-Machida fight is partly to put himself in the limelight and position himself where he can legitimately challenge Shogun.

That being said, I will still be rooting for Machida on January 2.

What`s your favorite CroCop-memory?

BlueberryMuffin — Sun, 20 Sep 2009 21:45:37 -0000

I`ve just read poudngrounds post about CroCops interview.

Reading that, I feel fairly certain that he won`t return to the Octagon. So, since he won`t be around anymore, I´ll take this opportunity to thank him for all the memories.

After some soul-searching I realised that my favorite CroCop-memory is actually not from any "real" MMA-fight,it was from when he destroyed Sapp`s jaw with one punch. And at that point in time, I actually believed *coughs* the hype surrounding The Beast.

What`s your favorite CroCopian memory?

Top 5 reasons to why George St Pierre should NOT fight Anderson Silva

BlueberryMuffin — Sat, 05 Sep 2009 00:12:40 -0000

As contenders in the welterweight-division continues to dwindle, the call to arms for a Silva vs St Pierre superfight are getting louder. I`ll admit that at the moment there are no real contenders for the Canadian.

That, on the other hand, does not necessarily mean that`s it`s a good idea to put him up against a fellow contestant for the P4P-title, who just happens to be 30 pounds heavier and 3 inches taller.

So, I`m just gonna give a couple of reasons as to why they shouldn`t fight.

1) It could destroy a division. If GSP wins, he`ll have to stay at the division. What`s the point in ever seeing him fight a smwll WW when he just destroyed a 230 pound potential P4P nr 1? That would leave ww without it`s champ and as a side-effect MW would be even more depleted of challengers than it was before. If you have a guy that destroys Anderson Silva, would it really be that interesting to see him against Nate Marquart?

2) If St Pierre wins, Anderson Silva may leave. I, for one, want him in UFC now, not in three years when he`s done fighting the likes of Roy Jones Jr.

3) It messes with the LHW-division. If GSP wins, how would that make Forrest look? Sure, it`s MMAth, but please remember that Forrest was the champion as little as a year ago.

4) If Silva wins, it will likely be by KO. You don`t want GSP to be developing a glass-jaw at this tender age. And it really doesn`t prove anything. People will say that "Silva was to big for him".

5) You give away a lot of potential match-ups for free.

It would be interesting to see GSP move up in weight though. Let him fight one of the contenders at MW. I would put him against Okami, Sonnen or Marquart.

If he wins, you get more interesting match-ups, if he loses, he`ll move back down having shown how worthy the challengers at MW really are.

I would pit GSP againt a

Poll

Who should GSP fight next?

Nate Marquart

13 votes

Yushin Okami

29 votes

Dan Henderson

23 votes

Chael Sonnen

18 votes

I still think he should fight Anderson Silva

40 votes

Let him stay at welterweight. Contenders will appear.

123 votes

246 votes | Poll has closed

The Five Biggest Flaws in MMA Rankings

BlueberryMuffin — Mon, 29 Jun 2009 15:19:30 -0000

I know, I know. BE represents the meta-rankings, which so far are the best rankings available. I do think there are some major flaws involved in the rankings that compile the meta-rankings. The sum of all stupidity does not necessarily add up to genius. Sorry.

1) There`s no expiry-date on wins. A win 10 years ago simply doesn`t count. That`s like saying that Thomas Enquist (who`s that??) is the greatest tennis-player ever cause he has a 3-0 record over Roger Federer. That would however be silly, since those matches were like ten years ago. Enquist quit a long time ago. He has no ranking at all. Where should Tyson be ranked if he made a comeback? He does have a lot of quality wins? Or even better... Lennox Lewis? Is he still ranked nr 1 if he made a comeback? If Fedor retires and makes a comeback in 10 years, would he still be ranked as nr 1?

2) To much / to little stock is put in HOW you win. If you KO a guy in 10 seconds, why is that considered more impressive than a 3-round-decision win? I give you Junior dos Santos as an example. He basically KO`d Werdum with his first shot and was instantly a top 10 HW! Brett Rogers catches Arlovski in the first 10-seconds and he`s the next big thing... Timmay gets caught and then submitted and he`s suddenly a has-been (talkin bout Fedor, not Mercer) Randy was veeery close to doing the exact same thing to Timmay. My point is, they won, which they should get credit for, but they seem to have gotten more credit than was due, just because it was a TV-friendly way to win. AA-vs Fedor? If AA was to win, he would have to win a desicion. Well? He didn`t.

If Lesnar had clipped Herring and then finished the fight, would he have gotten a title-shot? My guess is no. What he did was show us a skill-set that was impressive.

3) People talk about MMAth and how it doesn`t correspond to reality and then they still use it. If you loose against someone, doesn`t mean that they are better than you. It may just have been a bad stylistic match-up (Rampage vs Forrest). If nr 2 fights against nr 3 and nr 2 loses, I can see how that would make them switch places, but how can you drop 3-4 places by such a loss?

4) People completely disregard the term "developing fighter" when they judge a win. Is Brock Lesnar the same fighter today that he was two years ago? I don`t think so. Was Kenny Florian the same fighter three years ago? No. Is Rich Clementi the same fighter as three years ago? Yes. Matt Serra? Hmm. Chubbier, but basically yes.

My point is that fighters develop A LOT in their first couple of years, not so much after that.

5) How do you count a win in a different weightclass? When people talk about the resume`s of the old-timers they tend to forget what weightclass (or no weightclass) that fight was in. Nowadays, a win at catch-weight doesn`t cound at all. None of those ways seem like the golden path to me...

The thin red line: Play-by-Play vs Color

BlueberryMuffin — Mon, 22 Jun 2009 18:02:58 -0000

What I think a lot of people seem to forget is the fact about the noble art of commentating is the importance of silence.

Commentating is supposed to explain simple, yet fairly obvious, things such as X has the ball and passes to Y or Fighter A kicks Fighter B in the head. This might seem like a simple task, but lo and behold, a lot of commentators fail in this area. I would like to make a list of areas in which they may fail...

For the Play-by-Play:

Timing:

Usually cause they talk to much about other things than what`s happening NOW! It`s all about timing. In other words, say something now, or be forever silent. I do not want to hear "20 seconds ago Ronaldo passed the ball to Berbatov I waited a while and checked the replay to be sure." and in the meantime see the oppposing team score. Same thing with fights. It`s now or never.

Choice of words:

This is simple. If you`re p-b-p, use as few and as short ones as possible. Grammar? I don`t care. Using the right words?? Don`t care. Four syllables or more? Please don`t!

Emotions:

I`d much rather hear someone scream "What a SHOT!" or "And he SCOOOOOOORES!!" Thus reflecting the emotions in the moment, than hearing "bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla.....", while I`m jumping up and down like a madman trying to celebrate.

A p-b-p is suppose to enhance the feel of the fight or the game. I want him (or her) to make me more enthused or enraged. I watch sports because I care about what`s happening. Ever tried watching a fight without sound? Not as exciting, is it? Is that because you don´t understand what`s happening??? Or is is something else?

Voice:

This is an often overlooked part of commentating. I would compare tone-of-voice to smell. You just "like" or "dislike". Some most agree on, with other`s it varies. If you don´t like the voice your hearing, chances are that you won`t like what it has to say. I like Goldberg`s voice, I like Randy Couture`s voice, I like Forrest Griffin`s voice. I tolerate Kenny Florian`s voice and I tolerate `Dan Henderson´s voice. BJ Penn`s makes my skin crawl and Mauro Ranallo`s make me wanna punch something. I can`t explain it. I.. just.. don`t .. like.. the .. sound.

Color-commentator

A bit different demands on this one.

Timing:

Wait. Wait. Wait. Choose your moments with care. Don`t talk all the time! ( I can see you Jens Pulver!!)

What to say (wording):

Explain what just happened, or even better, make me see something that MAY be about to happen. The further into the future the better. I can see that he may throw elbows, but what I may not see is when he`s baiting someone to pass his guard in order to get a triangle.

Emotions:

Don`t get all analytical in an emotional moment. If I see a great knock-out or a super-submission, please don`t choose that exact moment to tell me that he dropped his right hand or that he should`t have gone to the ground in the first place. Wait until I`m emotionally ready for it.

And last, but not least... for both Color and Play-by-Play...

BALANCE AND HARMONY!

I cannot stress this enough. If you have a p-b-p that talks a lot, the other one has to be quiet, and vice versa. The P-b-P should be loud and semi-stupid, the Color must be at least as clever as yourself. And they have to LIKE eachother. There`s nothing more painful than to listen to a pair of commentators that don`t like or respect eachother.

And now to my point. NEITHER Goldberg or Rogan is perfect, but they are a very enjoyable team. I`m not to fond of Rogan (Say "Gun`s blazing" or "He`s a machine!" one more time and I´ll..) as color, but he`ll do. As a pair though? None is better!

So here was the P-b-P, fell free to Color me Badd.

What a fighter means when he says...

BlueberryMuffin — Tue, 16 Jun 2009 20:57:06 -0000

"Ì`d like to fight him"--- I can whoop him good!

"He`s a legend of the sport"--- He used to be good, but now I can whoop him good!

"I want a title-shot" --- I don`t deserve to fight for the title, but I will publicly whine about getting one to look like I actually do deserve it.

"I like to stand and bang" --- I have no head-movement. I have no ground-game. I can`t hit a moving target. Please stand still so I can hit you!

"I was only trash-talking..."--- Please! I want you to like me!

"I was never out!"--- I was out, but I lost to many braincells to remember it.

"I fight for the fans!"--- I fight for ME! And I love that you love me, cause I want you to love me as much as I love myself!

"I`m prepared to go three hard rounds if I have to!"--- The rumors about me not doing any cardio are not true. NOT true I tell you!

Did Edgar trick Sherk?

BlueberryMuffin — Tue, 26 May 2009 14:04:28 -0000

Sherk vs Edgar was a huge fight. For Sherk that is. My guess is that the whole point of that fight was to cement Sherk as a contender. And what better way to do that than to put Sherk up against a smaller version of himself? There was even an upside to Edgar loosing. A loss would almost certainly have forced Edgar down to featherweight where he would be an immediate contender.

To be able to move Edgar to WEC he would have to loose... and it`s much better to send him off with a loss to the no 1 LW-contender than to Gray Maynard.

But things went wrong... and Edgar won. Or depending how you look at it, Sherk lost.

So far almost everything I`ve seen concerning the fight is focused on Sherk`s idiotic gameplan, or maybe on his non-existing boxing. What I would like to point out that in a way he may have been tricked into that gameplan.

There`s no doubt that Sherk was planning to box, but had he really planned to completely abandon his boxing?

I was kinda surprised when I first saw Edgar threaten with a takedown-attempt. After a couple of them I was more and more impressed. I think that Edgar never really intended to take Sherk down. He used TD-attempts to indicate to Sherk that "Hey man, I can`t box with you Mr T-Rex! I have to take this fight to the ground!" Thus installing a false sense of security into Sherk. I`m guessing that Edgar may have gameplanned on winning by unanimous decision 29-28.

When Sherk finally realised that he was actually loosing the stand-up, it was already to late. And since Sherk`s ground`n pound doesn`t finish fighters off, taking it to the ground wasn´t really an option in the third round, he had to hope for a very unlikely KO. Even if Edgar hadn`t put Sherk in a guillotine at the end, he would still have won the fight.