Issue 043

November 2008

As time ticks on, so do the biological clocks of fighters. MMA is a fairly young sport and we have only recently started to see legends calling it quits. Some do it because of the physical toll on their aging bodies, others because they simply feel that the fight game has passed them by. The next generation of mixed martial artists have matured, and they’re bigger, stronger, faster and younger. Where this last trait once meant these warriors were too green to truly challenge those at the top of the sport, that is no longer always the case.

One event that highlighted this growing trend was UFC 88: Breakthrough. The three top fights featured old guard versus new. Chuck Liddell against Rashad Evans, Rich Franklin versus Matt Hamill, Dan Henderson facing Rousimar Palhares. Ten years of age separated Chuck and Dan from their respective opponents, and Rich Franklin had 22 fights before Matt Hamill had even faced his first.

Experience won out over youth two times out of three - Rich Franklin and Dan Henderson proved too well rounded for their opponents to best. But Chuck Liddell fell victim to a brutal knockout at the hands of Rashad Evans and has seen his record slip to 1-3 since the start of 2007. With this loss, there reignited a debate which had largely gone away since the ‘Iceman’ defeated Wanderlei Silva in a bout many declared fight of the year. Are Liddell’s best years behind him? And more importantly, was it time for him to hang up his gloves?  

Those paying attention to the hype building towards the event would have also noticed the same questions being asked pre-emptively towards Henderson and Franklin. If these fighters were to lose, what then for their careers? Sports Illustrated went so far as to say a loss would leave them with “a choice between retirement and a steady fall into mediocrity. Neither road is appealing, but at least one is more dignified.”  

Personally, this attitude towards a fighter’s career drives me nuts. Why is it that when you’ve achieved greatness, anything less is grounds for retirement? We’ve seen this attitude on display towards many fighters over the years: Randy Couture, Chuck Liddell, Matt Hughes, Tito Ortiz. They go from being the ‘greatest’ to simply ‘great’ and all of a sudden everyone starts talking about how they should retire to save themselves the ‘embarrassment’ of being outclassed by the next generation.  

No one has suffered this scourge worse than Tito Ortiz. Tito carried the UFC through some dark days, and is possibly the highest grossing star to go through the organisation. His past two years in the fight game involved a second loss to Chuck Liddell, a controversial draw with Rashad Evans, and a judges’ decision loss against Lyoto Machida. Aided and abetted by hostile UFC management, the general consensus of the MMA populous is that Ortiz is now washed-up. Excuse me?

Perhaps a draw against Rashad Evans seemed unimpressive before Evans flattened Chuck Liddell early into the second round of their fight. But now it doesn’t seem so bad, especially considering Tito would have beaten Rashad on the judges’ scorecards if not for a referee’s point deduction. And Lyoto Machida is considered by some to be a king without a crown – no-one of any worth wants to fight him. When did losing to some of the top fighters in the world become such a shameful affair, to the point where retirement is being shoved down their throats by the fans and media? 

I say screw that. I don’t give a damn if Matt Hughes is no longer the most dominant welterweight out there. I still want to see him fight Diego Sanchez and Karo Parisyan, Jon Fitch and Josh Koscheck.  

I still want Rich Franklin versus Dan Henderson sooner or later. Yes, one of them will lose but I will still want to see that fighter continue to compete, regardless. Simply put, there is plenty of room for these guys in the fight game after they’re no longer the top dogs. They have so much to offer us that it is simply foolish to try and put them out to pasture on account of their past accomplishments.

MMA is growing and changing very quickly, and many title reigns are measured in months as opposed to years. Are fans really only interested in the fighters who are on top or on their way up to the top? Personally, I don’t care all that much if a fighter is going up or down. If the matchup is solid, I want to see that fight.

There are indeed cases where you can say retirement is a more ‘dignified’ route. If you’re naught but a shadow of your former ass-kicking self and you’re getting absolutely mauled in the cage time after time, then it may be more dignified to stand down and call it quits. But considering the constant bombardment of retirement calls being made, very few of the athletes being singled out fit into that category. Most of them are just competitors that love competition and want to keep challenging themselves.

Personally, I find the idea of a fighter who stays to test themselves against increasingly difficult competition to be much more noble than 

one where a fighter quits because the going has become too tough.