Issue 058

January 2010

We are in danger of becoming spoiled children, and the fight promoters parents who shovel treats into our lap in order to shut us up. The MMA explosion continues to grow, and keeping track of the many events that are available is becoming a full-time job in itself, yet we still feel the need to complain. Criticisms range from that there aren’t enough fights, to the fights that we do have are not good enough. ‘Why is X fighting Y?’ ‘So and so should be fighting more often, not once or twice a year!’ Etc, etc…  

It’s easy to point fingers and criticize. It’s so easy, in fact, that people make entire careers out of it. It also seems to be the preferred method of many writers when reporting on events: Slate the event, provoke a reaction, generate interest in your blog / website / newspaper. It’s easy to imagine them sitting back with a smug grin as their readers get all hot and bothered. Objective achieved? Most likely, but at what cost?  

Criticism is a legitimate form of reporting, and occasionally events do require a stern critic’s eye. If we, the media, were to venerate every single happening in the MMA world, you would become sick to your stomachs in no time at all. You want objective reporting and honest opinion, not the sycophantic spewing of a paid shill.  

But what’s wrong with a bit of positivity?  It’s too easy to pick up on one or two negative things about a fight and amplify them into a talking point or a hook on which to hang the whole event. One dull main event fight does not make for a bad event – look at the case of UFC 97, where Anderson Silva frustrated the Montreal fans with his bizarre performance against Thales Leites. The five-round title fight was disappointing, but writers and fans alike allowed it to overshadow an otherwise solid and entertaining event.  

Much like in life, we need to look for the good where we can. If we focus entirely on the bad things, it benefits nobody. Instead, we should awaken to the fact that we’re not just watching another MMA event. Because of the young age of the sport, the rapid growth and development of the industry and the unpredictable nature of the game, we’re lucky enough to be witnesses to history in the making.  

If this sounds dramatic, consider the following. An event doesn’t have to be of the epic magnitude of UFC 100 for it to contain what will undoubtedly become historical moments in the sport. Sometimes it can be a small, under-the-radar event. It could be one in your backyard, a local show with no star names on – but you could be there for the beginning of something special.  

I only have to look back a few years at some of the events I was present for, and a list of moments that I will remember forever stand out. Michael Bisping was a complete unknown to me when he made his MMA debut in 2004, but he stood out from his peers that night, and I am lucky enough to say I was there for the beginning of the career of one of the UK’s brightest stars. Likewise a young Paul Daley, who blasted through his opponent with trademark ferocity back in 2003 aged only 20 – I say with no small amount of pride that I have been able to follow his career since the very beginning. Mike Tyson’s 60-second stint as an MMA referee, Anderson Silva’s daring elbow KO of Tony Fryklund… I could go on.  

If I wanted to, I could pass over these moments and instead focus on other aspects of the events in question – anything from the poor quality of the lighting to the crooked judging or the warm beer – and allow these factors to color what could otherwise be a standout memory.  

I know what you’re thinking: if you choose to focus only on the bits you feel are ‘worth’ something, there is a danger of rewriting events to distort the truth, and revisionist history is a very dangerous thing indeed. But consider this: When you go to innumerable events, or you’ve watched a dozen MMA events in as many weeks, you need to be able to filter out certain elements. What I’m proposing is a change in attitude, a paradigm shift if you will. To paraphrase Bruce Lee, throw out the useless and absorb what is useful.  

Here is an example: We all saw Cro Cop get thoroughly dismantled by the young and hungry heavyweight from Brazil, Junior Dos Santos. One way of looking at it would be that we saw the utter humiliation of an MMA legend, the sad crumbling of a once-titanic force who should have retired years ago. Another way would be that the fight was the coming-out party for an exciting young prospect who, with time, could become a major player in the heavyweight division. It’s not untrue, and it does not ignore facts, but it allows you to remember an event for the good it was worth rather than the bad.  

More importantly, it allows us to enjoy the making of history as it happens. And if we don’t enjoy it, then why should we bother?