FACEBOOK TWITTER RSS APP PODCAST Opinion & Analysis : Reader Reax READER REAX: Thoughts on Amadi's column on MMA's match-making practices - do fighters who draw well move ahead of better fighters who don't?

Mar 13, 2010 - 1:11:32 PM

In response to Amadi's article on matchmaking, he raises valid issues with the tournament model for MMA, but fails to address issues with the matchmaking practices in the UFC.

The prime example of the issues I am talking about is Frankie Edgar recieving a title shot over Gray Maynard, despite having a loss to Maynard. I am aware here recieved his shot for being "more exciting" and "more dominant" in his performances, but he still lost to Maynard.

This is a problem as your sport or organization loses legitimacy as a true sport when you choose not to give a shot to the fighter who has proved in a previous bout to be the superior of the two, instead opting for the more "entertaining" fighters.

Jeff Christiensen

===

I would like to add one thing on this subject. The idea that other "real" sports such as hockey in the NHL and basketball in the NBA don't qualify to me as a sport either; they just do a good job creating that illusion.

Take the NHL for example. They reward teams who finish high in the standings by giving them the worst draft choices. The way they set up the league to create parity is just gross. They create a system that generally makes every team more or less equal for the sake of generating as much revenue for the NHL as they can by giving every single team a chance at beating any other team in the league.

Well, I for one would rather watch the UFC and consider it a sport because at least you get to see a more realistic picture of possibilities where one man can actually be heavily favoured and dominate another fighter where as you will never see that in many sports including hockey in the NHL.

Marc

===

Yes, I disagree with you and, yes, a system of matchmaking that is not determined by a promoter's desire to get the maximum revenue from the fighters is needed.

First of all, I agree that the purpose of MMA is to answer the question: "Who is the best in the world?" However, your analogy to the Lakers is off base. MMA champions have slumps, too. Just because they steamroll through challengers one year doesn't mean they'll do so the next. It happens.

But there needs to be a system of matchmaking (whether tournament style or not) for MMA. Fighters such as Brock Lesnar and Vitor Belfort should not get priority just because of their drawing power. Nog should've fought Randy Couture a soon as he returned to unify the belts.

If your fighters cannot see a solid system of getting to the top and feel they have to be absurd or exciting to draw fans and give the UFC a reason to give them a title shot, then you've lost sporting legitimacy.

Every team in the NFL knows what they need to do to get to the Super Bowl. MMA fighters have to hope they'll be a good enough draw to get a title shot. Its B.S. It pisses fighters off and it confuses fans and media who are trying to paint a legitimate picture around the sport. It makes fantasy teams impossible without knowing who will fight who,.

Jake

ALERT: Every Tuesday night, listen to the MMATorch Livecast from 9-10:30 p.m. ET or listen now to the most recent shows by clicking here. Listen live this coming Tuesday as Jamie Penick, Rich Hansen, and Matt Pelkey discuss the latest MMA happenings. Online listen at http://www.blogtalkradio.com/mmatorch or call into the show at 646-716-8090 to either just listen or participate.