Issue 079
September 2011
Following the announcement that all UFC main-event fights will be over the championship distance, we ask… Are mandatory five-round headliners good for the UFC?
YES
Gray Maynard, UFC lightweight number-one contender
It’s going to change the game for sure. Obviously, there may be a little more injuries simply due to how you train for five rounds: longer camps, harder sparring and longer training. There is also the possibility of there being slower bouts with fighters pacing themselves knowing full well that they have two more rounds to go, they’ll be looking to conserve energy. But for me I love it. I love the challenge of the five rounds and think that’s what fans want. I’d do eight rounds if I could. The three rounds just fly by so quick, if a guy comes out hard for the first two then it’s over. In boxing fighters get six, eight, 10 and 12 rounds to take a fight. But unless there is a belt at stake in the UFC you have just three opportunities to sway the judges.
I know there are a few guys out there that will hate this idea, guys who don’t train hard. But the guys who enjoy the sport will like it. There will be less crazy brawls for sure, but that’s not a bad thing. The main events will just become a lot more technical. This decision will ensure that the very best all-round fighters make it to the top.
NO
Gary Alexander, Fighters Only US Operations Manager
There are a few reasons why I don’t like this decision. I do realize some of the frustration with judging could be remedied with two more rounds rather than the customary three rounds for non-title fights. But most main events do not require a five-round time frame. Five-round main events will reduce the number of televised fights too. On the Rampage vs Hamil card, if the main event was over 25 minutes we could have missed Miguel Torres vs Demetrious Johnson or Jorge Santiago vs Brian Stann – two of the best fights on the card. Did we really need to see another round from Rampage and Matt Hamil? Rampage had that fight handled. Hamill was doing a good job of staying in there, but two more rounds were totally unnecessary. Rashad Evans vs Phil Davis is an intriguing fight but is it worthy of five-rounds? Likewise, Dan Hardy vs Chris Lytle? Both could turn out to be classic battles, but it’s like playing craps at Mandalay Bay, Sometimes you win, sometimes you lose. Is it really worth the gamble?
What you had to say on the matter ...
“Good idea. I think the viewers will see more exciting submissions, KOs and TKOs rather than unwanted or controversial decisions.”
@SoldierHearted
“Fighting for five rounds should be reserved only for champions and contenders, setting them apart from the rest of the division.”
@CFitzm1
“Hell yeah. Shows who has been putting the hard work in and not skipping cardio sessions!”
@niamhmack
“No. They will make the snooze-fest main events go on too long and won’t make title fights seem special anymore.”
@NGrotenhuis_MMA
