When is a win not a win?

The "Yo Quiero Taco Bell" Chihuahua is a rather famous case in the history of advertising. Anyone who was alive in the mid-nineties remembers that diminutive canine. My sister owned a Chihuahua and had "Yo Quiero Taco Bell" screamed at her by more than one excited toddler. The stupid thing was everywhere: on billboards, on radio, and in every other TV commercial. The recognition percentage among the general populace was in the high 90s. As far as advertising campaigns go, it was an unprecedented success.

But when Taco Bell crunched the actual numbers they made an amazing discovery: the campaign was a total failure. All of the recognition that the advertisers were so proud of didn't help sell a single extra taco. Taco Bell has created a pop phenomenon, but had wasted millions of dollars on an ad campaign that hadn't increased sales. They immediately stopped the campaign and the talking dog went into permanent retirement. The executives at Taco Bell learned a costly lesson: ALWAYS keep your eye on the bottom line. If you are in the taco-selling business your livelihood depends on selling tacos, anything that doesn't help you do that, regardless of how successful it might seem, is a waste of valuable resources.

MMA is, like every other sport, essentially part of the entertainment industry. You can wax philosophical all day about the nobility and beauty of athletic competition, but marathon runners are amazing athletes and no one will spend 60$ on a pay-per-view to watch them. For a promoter the bottom line has two simple parts: does a fighter sell pay-per-views (or increase viewership in the case of a free TV show) or put asses in seats? If a promoter pays a fighter X amount, they need to recoup that X amount in some way based on that fighters performance. If they fail to do so they have lost money and, if that trend continues, they will soon go the way of Affliction Fights, the IFL, and Elite XC.

The mantra of the boring fighter is "A win is a win". Keeping the preceding criteria in mind, it becomes clear that they have little understanding of the statement they are making. While its true that win is considerably better in almost every instance than a loss, the entertainment value of a fighter is really what the promoter is keeping his eye on. A person who values the integrity of MMA as a sport may often find himself at odds with promotional logic when it comes to which fighters are kicked out of an organization (or never get there to begin with) and which ones are given a seemingly endless ride. Phil Baroni lost a staggering 4 fights in a row before being released by the UFC in 2005. Chris Leben has the promotion talking about a title shot for him, despite the fact that the Akiyama win put him just one win over.500 in his last 11 fights. Ken Shamrock is still headlining shows despite an ABYSMAL record over the last ten years. All of these fighters share one thing in common: they are popular fighters who win or lose (in the case of Ken, just lose) in spectacular fashion. People will pay money to watch them, and that is ALL promoters care about. They are entertainers in the entertainment business, pure and simple. Watching Chris Leben fight with his face is an amazing spectacle 9 times out of 10 and will mean pay-per-view dollars every single time. Fans love him, and that means promoters love him.

Antonio McKee fought recently on the MFC card in Alberta, Canada. I read some articles leading up to the fight, including one on Sherdog by Tomas Rios that called McKee's absence from the UFC despite a 7-year win streak "puzzling". Its not puzzling at all, he's boring. From 2001 to 2010 Antonio fought 20 times and finished ONE opponent, and that was due to an injury (Gabe Rivas in the IFL). He has finished his last two opponents in 2010 (increasing his finishes by 40%) so there is a chance he can turn things around, but at 40 yrs old it may be too little too late. He has spent his career compiling a fantastic winning percentage and has never gotten into a major promotion.

And why should he? What motivation could a promotion like the UFC or Strikeforce have to sign him? Don't get me wrong, I think Antonio is a FANTASTIC fighter, but that ability to beat anyone in the world makes him a promotional pariah. He could actually beat most, if not all, of the lightweight fighters in both promotions. The problem is that no one will pay to see it. Once someone like Antonio is in your promotion you have a serious problem. He can climb the ladder to the point that you are virtually forced to give him a title shot, but his style is too methodical to appeal to the fans. NOTHING kills a promotion faster than an unpopular champion. Antonio simply isn't worth the risk. He can beat anyone you put in front of him, but he doesn't sell pay-per-views and he doesn't put asses in seats. "But he can beat anyone!!", his supporters cry, sure he can, but everyone knew the chihuahua too and it didn't sell tacos.

There are some great fighters who are stuck in this holding pattern. John Fitch can beat anyone in the UFC not named St. Pierre and his current streak should have landed him a rematch with the champ a long time ago. Unfortunately he is a methodical fighter who relies on his outstanding wrestling to grind out decisions and doesn't have a ton of charisma. Anderson Silva got a shot at UFC gold after ONE fight, Yushin Okami won 4 fights in a row against solid competition and you could almost hear the sighs of relief from UFC brass when he was beaten by Rich Franklin and Chael Sonnen. Matt Lindland was cut from the UFC in 2005, despite being on a 4 fight win streak (2 in the UFC) and never losing consecutive fights. The question is: do these fighters make an impact on the UFC's bottom line? Does anyone buy a pay-per-view to see another solid, if underwhelming, decision win by John Fitch or Yushin Okami?

Jake Shields was another fighter who seemed doomed to middle-of-the-road status. Contrary to what most people might think, he is a solid finisher (his has stopped just over half of his opponents) and has taken on some big names in his career. His weakness is that he is soft spoken and relies heavily on his grappling, not a great combination for a fan favorite. I was cageside for his win over Jason Miller, and while I thought he taught a grappling CLINIC that night, the fans didn't appreciate it and boos rained down the whole time. The best thing he ever did for his career was put himself in a position to screw Strikeforce, an opportunity Dana White was not about to pass up. Now Dana has to wait and see if he can put on exciting performances in a stacked division, or whether he bought himself another John Fitch.

There is certainly a middle ground between Phil Baroni and Antonio McKee that every successful fighter has to walk. You have to win and be entertaining at the same time. But its important to keep in mind the lesson of the talking dog: a win is almost never just a win...

Joe Warren vs. Joe Soto

At the beginning of the season 2 tournament I said that tournaments favor finishers. The guy who can get through fights without wearing himself down is in a better position to succeed in the next round. BOY was I wrong!!

Joe Warren and Ben Askren both made their championship runs on the strength on their takedown and top control. Warren went 15 minutes in every fight and Askren probably would have done the same if not for an awful stoppage in his first fight. They blew more complete MMA fighters out of the water with their world-class wrestling and now will fight for the championship in their respective divisions.

It's this dominant wrestling that Joe Soto will have to overcome in order to retain his featherweight belt on Sept 2nd. Warren is like a dog with a Frisbee when it comes to his wrestling game in the cage. He goes after it from beginning to end and once he gets it, he never lets it go. He has a seemingly inexhaustible heart, he beat an amazingly talented Patricio Pitbull while sicker than a dog. His submission defense rivals Houdini and he has gas for days. These attributes seem to make up for his lack of offensive weapons, he simply doesn't have the boxing or submission skills to finish an opponent at the level he is competing in.

The X-factor that Warren is going to have to deal with is the fact that his championship run was conspicuously short on top-level wrestlers. As the tournament progressed, he took on more and more well-rounded fighters with dangerous submission games, NONE of those fighters had outstanding wrestling pedigrees. Warren could follow his ground and pound strategy without worrying too much about his takedown getting stuffed.

Joe Soto does have a solid wrestling background. He was a California State Wrestling Champion and wrestled with John "Bones" Jones and Cain Velasquez at Iowa Central Community College. He has used his wrestling with great success both offensively and defensively in his MMA career. Against Wilson Reis, he used his sprawl to keep the fight on the feet, and against Yahir Reyes, he used destructive takedowns and punches to seal a dominant victory.

Now there are many levels of elite wrestling, and Soto's experience doesn't put him on the top level with Joe Warren. Joe Warren was a division 1 all-American at Michigan and a world champ at Greco-Roman. The key to the fight is whether or not Joe Soto can use his wrestling defense to keep the fight standing where he has proven to be technically sound and has KO power.

Time is on Soto's side in this fight for a couple of reasons. First off, Warren has never been in a 5 round fight before. His gas has been terrific thus far, but fatigue may make eat away at the wrestling advantage he possesses in the later rounds. As his takedown slows, Soto might find more and more success in keeping the fight standing, and that's bad news for Warren. Also, long fights favor finishers. Warren needs to get to the final bell in this fight in order to win, while Soto has finished 8 of 9 opponents. He has the fists to put Warren away if Warren's guard drops for a second, a more likely scenario in a five-round affair. Just ask Chael Sonnen how it feels to be a strong wrestler with 4 rounds in the bank and let your guard down against a dangerous fighter.

On the flip side, Joe Warren is the best fighter that Soto has ever faced. He's a fantastic wrestler who knows how to stick to the script. He's also been fighting at a high level for his ENTIRE career and knows how to win big fights. He loves the spotlight and seems to perform at his best when the most is on the line.

It's hard to make a prediction in this fight, but NO ONE who saw his performance against Pitbull can doubt the ability of Joe Warren to pull out a fight. In order to win this fight Joe Soto is going to have to reach just as deep. I think I'll wait till the interviews are done to make my prediction, so stay tuned...

Sh*t Fighters Say

Ive done commentary for something like 500 fights in my career with Bellator, Affliction, Strikeforce, and M1. That means about a thousand fighter interviews in well-over a dozen countries. I thought I'd share some universal responses that Sean and I CONSTANTLY hear to certain question we routinely ask:

Sean: "What separates you from other fighters?"

Fighter: "My heart"

Sean always asks this question and 9 out of 10 times, that is the response he gets. I understand why most people say this, you wouldn't be a fighter in the first place if you didn't have heart. Getting hit in the face for money is not an easy job and most people will do whatever it take to avoid it. Fighters have to have heart to get in there at all. The problem is that he asks what "separates" you from other fighters. While some fighters have had their heart routinely questioned (BJ Penn, Vitor Belfort, Tito Ortiz etc.) none of them would say in an interview that they dont have it. Its something like a sprinter in an interview saying his love of running sets him apart from the other runners.

Sean: "What gives you an advantage over your opponent in this fight?"

Fighter: "I've been training really hard."

This is another standard response and it falls into the same category as the last answer. I was training for a fight once in the striking area of my old gym with my conditioning coach. He was yelling his head off and I was going through plyo drills like a madman. It was 2 weeks out, so I was firing on all cylinders and people were outside the room gawking at me as I worked my butt off. After the session one of my teammates came up to me and commented on how hard I was working, I said "Yeah, good thing my opponent is at home eating Cheetos."The look on his face totally changed as he realized what I was saying. All fighters train hard, sure some (Rich Franklin, Forrest Griffin, Sean Sherk) are known for their insane workouts, but training hard is a pre-requisite for competing and I dont know if very many fighters know how hard of a workout their opponent is doing. Only if you know that, can you truly know if yours "gives you an advantage"

Me: "How long was your camp for this fight?"

Fighter: "I only had a week notice, but it doesn't matter because I'm always training."

This is the stock answer of the "late notice" fighter. A training cycle is roughly 6-8 weeks. Any shorter than that and you're cutting it close, any longer and injuries become an increased factor. Training for a fight is not the same as the training a fighter does on a daily basis, it is more intense and considerably more focused. An athlete simply cant maintain a "fight" training schedule full-time, their body would break down and their career would be severely shortened. All wrestling fans know about the legendary training regimen of Dan Gable, one of the greatest wrestlers in U.S. history. He pushed himself to the limit 7 days a week from high school to the 1972 Olympics, where he didn't concede a single point. What people forget is that Gable had a comparativly short career. He only competed in one Olympic games and has had countless surgeries to repair damage to his back, legs, and hips. The routine he imposed on himself took a horendous toll on his body. Training for a fight is a science unto itself . A fighter can win on short notice, but they are at a serious disadvantage. The understanding of that disadvantage can mean the difference between success and failure. A fighter cannot afford to confuse the daily training they do to maintain their skills with the intense training required for a fight.

Voodoo MMA

There is a good book called "Voodoo Histories: The Role of the Conspiracy Theory in Shaping Modern History" by David Aaronovitch. It basically goes over various conspiracy theories and debunks them. It also goes over the psychology of why it is so appealing to believe in conspiracy theories and why our society generates them so easily.

I think it should be required reading for MMA fans considering the reactions I read after Imada-Curran fight. A lot of people were cursing Bellator and Bjorn Rebney after that fight, accusing the promotion of fixing the fight to allow Pat Curran to get to the finals for a showdown with lightweight champ Eddie Alvarez. That scenario might sound plausible in an Oliver Stone movie but, like most conspiracy theories, it breaks down under scrutiny.

I thought Imada won that fight fairly convincingly and said so on-air. When Bjorn and I went into the cage for the check presentation we congratulated Imada and waited for the inevitable unanimous decision we thought would come after the commercial break. When they said it was a split decision I was shocked, when they announced that Curran was the winner my jaw hit the floor. It led to perhaps the worst interview of my career for a variety of reasons. Foremost among them was the fact that I didnt have any questions in my head for Curran. I dont get the decision any sooner than the audience does and I had assumed that Imada would get the nod and had prepared to talk to him, not Curran. Another reason was the fact that as I was about to ask Curran how it felt to win in front of his hometown crowd, they started booing, which necessitated me switching questions just as the words were coming out. Maybe I'm being hard on myself, but I think I ended up sounding like a total idiot.

So I was surprised, but if there was a conspiracy it certainly didnt have to involve me, but what would it have to entail? The casual fan might not know this, but organizations are not allowed to supply their own judges, they are entirely under the discretion of the state athletic commission (Florida in this case). The judges are not beholden to Bellator in any way, they are paid by the state and trying to influence them in any way means you probably won't be promoting a show for the rest of your natural life.

And why would Bjorn take the risk in the first place? Pat Curran had been the Cinderella story of season 2, but it wasn't as though fans were lighting up the chat rooms in anticipation of a fight between him and Alvarez. Its true that it would have been difficult for Bellator to sell fans on a fight between Imada and Alvarez, a rematch of a fight that wasn't that competitive the first time around, but a match featuring a deserving Imada is a lot more appealing than one featuring a fighter that the fans believed rode in on a bad decision. For Bjorn Rebney and the powers that be at Bellator to risk their livelihoods over putting that match together would have been suicidally stupid.

If Bellator were in the fight-fixing business, Curran would not have even been in the finals at all. Roger Huerta was clearly the favorite at the outset of the lightweight tournament and was the most marketable fighter in Bellator's roster. I thought he won his semi-final match against Curran, it wasn't a robbery by any stretch of the imagination, but I thought Huerta won the last 2 rounds. Bellator clearly didnt have any hand in that decision, so why would they take a bigger risk on a lesser name?

Fans often point to some of the horrendous and corrupt decisions that have plagued boxing over the years and argue that if it could happen there, it can happen in MMA. It may be true that a big organization MIGHT be able to pull some strings and get a fight fixed (my lawyers have advised me to add that I am in NO way accusing the UFC or any other organization of ever fixing a fight to my knowledge;), but MMA works along very different lines than boxing. Boxing relies heavily on the "superfight" between (usually) undefeated stars. A fight like Mayweather-Hatton can generate tens of MILLIONS of dollars for Vegas, bookmakers, promoters, etc. Everyone in the industry is under a lot of pressure to make sure that both of those stars stay unblemished as they head toward their showdown. MMA, as a sport, is much more forgiving. One loss can certainly delay a mega-fight, but an undefeated fighter is virtually unknown in the big promotions and there is almost no matchup that cant be made after a few victories.

Take Rua-Rampage for example. Rashad Evans beat Rampage and earned the right to be the next fighter to take on light-heavyweight champion Mauricio "Shogun" Rua. Lets say it was Dana's fondest desire to see Rampage take on Rua, he could risk the future of his company by using his considerable influence to fix the fight, or he could wait a year, give Rampage a couple of decent fights and have him fight for the title anyway. It isn't rocket science, any of the top 5 guys in a division are only 2 or 3 fights away from a title shot at the most, there's no need to have someone on the grassy knoll to make sure things work out a certain way.

There will always be doubters out there, but they should still read the book, might give them some perspective on things...