The Issues of Referee and Judge Certification
July 1, 2009
‘Showdown’ Joe Ferraro has an excellent piece up at Rogers Sportsnet that details his experience with ‘Big’ John McCarthy’s referee certification seminar, C.O.M.M.A.N.D. (Certification of Officials for Mixed Martial Arts National Development).
The course is broken down into three areas and participants require a passing grade of 90 percent (at minimum in all three) to be certified. As it stands today, the course has a 75 percent failure rate, as participants simply do not make the grade to officiate or judge in MMA.
Would-be referees must know and identify over 25 takedowns, 35 submissions, 25 positions and seven sweeps, reversals and transitions. They also must know the Unified Rules of Mixed Martial Arts inside and out.
After the identification of the aforementioned moves and keen knowledge of the unified rules, participants are also trained and tested on in ring / cage mechanics. This is comprised of what is required by an official before, during and after a bout. It’s not just about positioning (which is HUGE when refereeing) but dozens of other variables that are key to the safety of the athletes who put it all on the line.
All of this knowledge is paramount for one to be proficient in officiating and without it I do not understand how commissions around the world allow men and women to step into the cage/ring and ref without proving they have this type of knowledge.
If the four major sports leagues — the NFL, MLB, NBA and NHL — mandate that officials are properly trained before being allowed to step onto the playing surface, why doesn’t MMA do the same? If this sport is expected to be taken seriously then this type of certification must be the bare minimum an athletic commission requires from an applicant prior to receiving their license to ref or judge.
Payout Opinion:
It would seem as though we’re finally starting to see the issues of officiating, judging, and bout scoring come to the front of the MMA hot topic list.
Just ask yourself: what good are the rules and regulations that MMA has put into place – those designed to protect the health and integrity of the sport and its fighters – if the individuals enforcing them are incompetent or unqualified?
Yes, the sport is growing – and that’s great for a lot of reasons – but the flip side of that growth is the increasing complexity of the issues surrounding governance, regulation, officiating, and judging.
MMA cannot afford to rest on its laurels; it must adapt to the many new challenges that it faces, including the issues of consistent officiating and judging.
And, believe me, as MMA ventures more and more into the mainstream, the quality of officiating and judging WILL become an issue. Look no further than the MMA competitions of the last week: the awful officiating displays at Strikeforce; the late stoppage in the Rizzo-Yvel fight; or the controversy of Tibau-Guillard, Guida-Sanchez, and Blackburn-Garcia.
While I’m not yet prepared to advocate that ‘Big’ John’s COMMAND is the answer – not that his course probably isn’t the best out there right now - I will say that a universal testing and certification program for both officials and judges is something of a no-brainer. It would afford the sport, its fighters, and its fans the consistency that they’ve all been longing for. It would also help to further cement the legitimacy of the sport in the eyes of its critics.
UFC Announces Chinese TV Deal
June 29, 2009
Today the UFC announced that it has signed an agreement with China’s Inner Mongolia Television to distribute its mixed martial arts content:
“Obviously China is a huge market and the Chinese understand the martial arts probably better than anyone else in the world. It’s a no brainer that UFC programming will be appreciated in China, and will become a big hit for the NMTV network,” said Dana White, UFC President.
Inner Mongolia Television, known as NMTV, is a network broadcast station available in 80 million households, with the potential to reach 240 million viewers throughout all the provinces of China. Starting this month, NMTV will air up to 16 hours of UFC programming per month, including the trademark shows The Ultimate Fighter®, UFC® Unleashed™ and UFC® All Access™, with an option to air recent UFC pay-per-view event telecasts.
With this deal, NMTV will air between one to four hours of UFC programming each week on Saturday and Sundays between 1:30-5:30 pm local time, broadcast in languages specific to each province.
UFC television programming can be seen in over 100 countries and territories worldwide in 17 different languages. UFC is the largest pay-per-view content provider in the world and is the fastest growing sports organization in history.
Payout Opinion:
The recent TV deals in countries like South Korea, Japan, and now China indicate that the UFC is going about its international expansion the correct way: they’re trying to build a foundation before moving in with live shows. It would be ridiculous to think that just because martial arts originated in the Far East that the UFC would be an immediate live-show and PPV success in the region. Thus, they’ve got to start slowly.
This all reminds me of the discussion we had last year, as a community, when Lorenzo Fertitta revealed that even countries like India were on the list for future live events. I reminded everyone then, as I will now, that despite the massive size and economic potential of nations like China and India, these are still areas with massive discrepancies in living standards – not to mention, general interest in the sport of MMA.
The UFC has enough on its hands just trying to get a foot hold in America and Western Europe, nevermind conquering Asian oddities like communist China or turbulent India.
However, by slowly planting the seeds in Asia, the UFC is preparing those countries in advance; and, without a great deal of effort, either.
The TUF series and Fight Nights, if marketed correctly, will build their own following and that may open the door to local/regional promotions to begin with live events to further bolster support for MMA in the country.
MMAPayout on Toronto's FAN 590 – Thursday, June 25th
June 24, 2009
I’ll be on to discuss the issues surrounding MMA’s current battle to be legalized in key areas of the world, including Ontario and New York.
Be sure to tune in to The Showdown at 11 EST on Thursday night! The taping will also be available Friday morning on FAN’s website.
The Case for Legalization: Quantifying Economic Windfalls
June 19, 2009
While I may have argued for a fundamental shift in MMA’s approach to seeking legalization, I’m not naive enough to believe that the economics of the sport do not have a role in the legalization process.
The fact of the matter is it’s simply not enough to preach the virtues of MMA as a sport and expound its comparable safety record to all the public naysayers and fence-sitters. It’s now time to broach the topic of economic windfalls – MMA’s veritable ace in the hole.
We’ve all heard it countless times, “UFC events mean millions for their host communities, governments, and regulatory bodies.” But what does that really mean in layman’s terms and what about non-UFC events?
In order to understand the true economic potential of MMA, you’ve first got to understand the root of MMA’s commercial success: its appeal to the male 18-34 demographic.
It’s a demographic characterized by young people that are just coming into significant quantities of disposable cash. They don’t yet have the types of cash burdens (mortgages, children, retirement plans) that will accompany them later on in life and thus, as a group, their purchasing power is literally unmatched.
And on the strength of this demographic and its purchasing power, MMA has become much more than a sport; it’s become a lifestyle complete with its own vernacular and way of dress. MMA has been able to branch out well beyond its fighting roots and into various other industries – clothing, collectibles, entertainment, and nutrition – to form what is collectively referred to as the MMA industry.
While the UFC may be the only promotion raking in hundreds of millions in yearly revenue, but it’s not the only company within the industry to do so. Tapout, for example, earned nearly $120 million in revenue last year and hopes to make it $250 million this year.
But how do you quantify what all of that means to MMA’s host communities?
You first have to acknowledge that the size of the economic windfall to any host community isn’t just going to depend on the size and calibre of the event, but also the size of the community itself. In other words, a UFC event in Toronto is going to create a much greater windfall than a regional show in London, Ontario.
In regards to windfalls, the greatest strength of the UFC is that its shows have the ability to increase tourism for a certain community: anywhere between 40% and 70% of the patrons at UFC events are from out of town. If you consider that the UFC could easily sell-out either of the 20,000 seat arenas in Toronto or New York City, for example, that means anywhere from 8,000 to 14,000 in attendance would be using local public transportation, local restaurants, local hotels, local shopping malls, and local nightclubs for an average of two days during that UFC event.
If the average amount that each individual spends during that weekend is $500, the economic windfall from that one UFC event is likely to be in between $4 million and $7 million. If you bump that average up to $1,000 over two days – which is certainly possible given the natural inflation seen in bigger markets like T.O. and NYC or the sheer number of things to do in both cities - the economic spinoff fits into the range of $8 to $14 million.
Further consider the percentage of the crowd (30%-60%) that consists of local fans – all of whom are also spending money on public transport, restaurants, and bars – and the economic windfall to surrounding business and local governments becomes even larger.
However, MMA is much greater than its flagship promotion and there are countless other organizations out there just chomping at the bit to get into areas like Ontario or New York – all of whom would also make significant contributions to local economies.
I know that Canada’s largest promotion, the Maximum Fighting Championship, is already in talks with several Ontario-based casinos – in cities like Windsor, Hamilton, and London – about the prospects of hosting MMA events in the province should the sport be legalized. Mark Pavelich runs a tight ship in Edmonton and has a great deal of experience that he could quite easily parlay into a successful Ontario venture if given the opportunity. I’d also expect a slew of start-ups in Ontario the minute they open for business.
The same can also be said for any number of promotions in the US that would all take a hard look at the state of New York – cities like Buffalo, Albany, Rochester, and Syracuse, in addition to the Big Apple – as locations for their shows.
In cases such as these, the windfalls to local communities are smaller but not insignificant. Some of the venues at these proposed sites could hold anywhere from 5,000 to 10,000 people and that’s a legitimate amount of money (even if each person only spends $50 that evening).
(I encourage anyone interested in further exploring the economic potential of MMA events to check out this detailed impact study.)
The Argument from Community Development
MMA events, big and small, also do their part to help stir up the demand for infrastructure necessary to revitalize local communities.
It’s simply a numbers issue whereby venue managers have an additional booking option at their disposal in order to increase patronage. Those booking options can then create further demand and community support for re-investment in infrastructure that can go a long way towards propping up local businesses. I’ve seen this type of development in many places, including my hometown of Winnipeg, Manitoba.
In Winnipeg, the demand for a new entertainment facility was so great that the Province of Manitoba and City of Winnipeg combined to build the new MTS Centre downtown. It’s a state of the art facility that’s now host to several world class events on a monthly basis – Coldplay and The Offspring this week alone.
And the effect the MTS Centre has had on the surrounding restaurants, bars, and shopping malls has been tremendous. It’s helped to pick up a previously forgotten and very much downtrodden area of Winnipeg, while also fighting back against a bit of the urban sprawl that has plagued the city for years.
The Argument from Competition
And it’s not just that Ontario and New York are currently going without these economic windfalls and development stimulants, but also that they’re passing them onto their competitors.
Toronto and New York consider themselves legitimate players on the international stage, yet they’re ceding these tremendous opportunities to other world-class cities like Los Angeles, London, Dublin, and Tokyo that have all legalized the sport.
Knowing the international stage as the very cut throat and competitive environment that it is, neither city can afford to fall behind the rest of the world. The same argument could also easily be made from a national perspective.
Conclusion on the Case for Legalization
It’s very important for the MMA community to establish the sport’s legitimacy and safety record before further arguing its case with economic incentives.
I say this because no one likes to feel as though they’ve been bought or forced to sacrifice their morality. Feelings of this nature are certainly a breeding ground for the resentment, negativity, and the perpetuation of falsehoods that MMA fights on a daily basis.
Moreover, why should MMA have to buy its way into any state, province, or country? The integrity of the sport should demand acceptance, not a purchased tolerance.
However, as I’ve illustrated, there is a definite place for arguments based upon the economic windfalls in the case for MMA’s legalization. These are arguments that need to be better explained and quantified before they can be exploited to their full use.
The Case for Legalization: Debunking MMA's Safety Myths
June 10, 2009
The issue of safety is often raised when people start to discuss the merits of mixed martial arts and probably rightfully so. After all the sport can appear, to the uninitiated, quite dangerous if it’s given only a cursory glance.
It’s also hard to fault those individuals: the speed and ferocity of the sport is pretty startling when you add in the perception of the 4 oz. gloves and bevy of elbows, knees, and head kicks. Moreover, consider that most of those that have never seen an MMA fight before have still almost certainly heard something negative about the sport from a biased news report – their opinion and judgement of MMA is almost predetermined.
Needless to say, changing public opinion about the safety and legitimacy of MMA is going to require a much greater effort than simply plunking down all the naysayers and fence-sitters in front of a UFC PPV for an evening.
When I talk about MMA and its safety record, I often cite a 2006 research article published in the Journal of Sports Science and Medicine on the incidence of injury in professional mixed martial arts competitions. The conclusion of the study, performed by the prestigious John Hopkins University School of Medicine, was as follows:
“Mixed Martial Arts competitions have changed dramatically since the first Ultimate Fighting Championship in 1993. The overall injury rate in MMA competitions is now similar to other combat sports, including boxing. Knockout rates are lower in MMA competitions than in boxing. This suggestsa reduced risk of TBI in MMA competitions when compared to other events involving striking.”
The study is nearly three years old, but I’ve elected to bring it up for two reasons: 1.) the study is MMA’s biggest ally in fighting the safety stereotypes that plague legalization discussions, and 2.) I believe that some people within the industry have grossly misinterpreted the results of the study and therefore MMA proponents must be cautious as to what they claim the study proves.
So, what does this study really tell us about MMA and its safety record?
It tells us that with respect to TBI – traumatic brain injury – MMA is probably safer than boxing and other combat sports.
The result of the study is also quite timely in the sense that TBI is a hot-button issue in all contact sports right now; head shots, concussions, and concerns for an athletes’ post-career quality of life are very much at the forefront of league meetings in the NFL and NHL. It would be quite interesting to see a study comparing the rates of TBI between MMA and football, because I have a hunch that MMA compares quite favourably to America’s most popular and accepted sport.
At any rate, the fact that MMA compares favourably to other combat sports is a real positive for the sport because it at least helps to debunk the myth that the 4 oz. gloves and interdisciplinary nature of the competition push MMA beyond the boundary of acceptability when it comes to safety.
The results make sense, too.
A boxer only has two striking options available to him: the body or the head – and the repeated blunt-force trauma caused by the average 200-400 head shots in any given match is very hard on brain tissue.
A mixed martial artist, on the other hand, throws considerably less head shots in any given bout (of which the maximum length is 25 minutes compared to 36 or 45 in some cases with boxing). An MMA fighter need not even throw a punch to earn a victory, so long as he chooses to pursue a wrestling or submission strategy to the match. Further, the rule set of MMA is also designed to protected fighters from brain injury by eliminating standing eight counts – if you’re out, you’re out.
What the study does not tell us, however, is that MMA is absolutely safer than boxing or other combat sports. It could very well be that, in regards to lacerations and fractures, MMA is more dangerous than other combat sports.
Who’s to say?
That is the limitation of the John Hopkins study, and MMA needs to be careful when utilizing the study because it only provides a certain level of support for the sport’s safety record. The MMA community also needs to be mindful of the fact that there really aren’t any long term studies that exist to determine the effect of MMA competition on post-career quality of living. The sport simply hasn’t been around long enough to determine the effects and, at this point, the medical community can only hypothesize as to what might be the result of an MMA fighters post-fight career.
Conclusion:
The John Hopkins study should be seen for what it is: a study that supports the legitimacy of the sport through establishing comparable safety records to that of other American past times. It’s also another resource in the education tool box that the MMA community can use to gain public support and help sway legislation towards legalization.
The Case for Legalization: MMA is a Sport
June 7, 2009
I’ve established how and why a fundamental shift in MMA’s approach to seeking legalization is necessary for MMA to progress further. It’s essentially a renewed approach to educating the naysayers and fence-sitters about MMA to correct the misconceptions about the sport. Once MMA is able to clear up any false pretences about its sport and its safety record, it can then move on to preaching the economic spinoff benefits that accompany its events.
The first step in educating the masses about mixed martial arts is to actually teach them how and why MMA is a legitimate, bona fide sport.
It’s certainly strange to write something like this, but it’s necessary because MMA can no longer afford to let assumptions rule the minds of those making decisions. MMA has to state its position outright.
What is a sport? To most it means some sort of activity which requires both skill and physical prowess to compete.
I’d argue that not only does MMA combine several different interdisciplinary fighting styles such as boxing, wrestling, jiu-jitsu, and muay thai – all of which require a tremendous amount of skill and physical prowess - but the requisite level of mastery of these techniques easily parallels that of the mastery required at the highest levels of any other sport.
The sport of MMA and its many different disciplines are also highly regulated under a universal set of rules, procedures, and guidelines – including over 30 different in-cage rules and a strict drug testing policy – that have been designed to protect the health, well-being, and integrity of MMA and its athletes.
It’s foolish to assume that the naysayers or fence-sitters know about the rules and regulations that MMA abides by, because, quite frankly, it seems as though they often don’t. And for as much as the MMA community complains of the ignorance of others, it ought to look in the mirror to realize that not everyone cares to find the right information themselves!
That’s why it needs to be said: an MMA fighter cannot scratch, eye gouge, hair pull, groin kick, hit an opponent to the back of the head, or use steroids, amongst other things.
The diversity of technique and strict regulation of the sport also demand that its athletes be of the highest standard. It’s simply not enough to be a one-dimensional fighter anymore; and, as a result, MMA features some of the most physically-gifted, skilled, hard working, and disciplined athletes on the planet. Further, the professionalism and benevolence that is by-and-large displayed by the entire MMA community only adds to the reputation of its athletes.
Georges St. Pierre is the type of person and athlete that exemplifies what mixed martial arts is all about and the community should take greater strides to use him an ambassadorial role.
Answering MMA’s Critics
MMA is essentially bargaining with mass opinion and in order to win that battle, the sport must meet the interests (i.e., answer the concerns) of the public.
The most common complaint or criticism of MMA that I often hear opponents use is that technique, rules, and athleticism are irrelevant when the objective of MMA is to hurt the person standing across the cage. But is that really the true objective of the sport?
I would argue the true objective of any MMA fighter is to be victorious over his opponent, not to bring real harm to his opponent. More importantly, MMA is the ultimate physical and spiritual test that pits a fighter not just against another person, but against himself.
Is the anguish two fighters put themselves through any different than the strife two competing marathon runners experience when pushing each other towards the finish line in the dying minutes of a race? The sport of MMA is as much about conquering oneself as it is conquering others. And that explains why the sport exhibits the level of class and sportsmanship that it does.
MMA is further criticized for perpetuating violence, particularly amongst youth, in our society. I suppose this isn’t really a huge surprise considering that just about everything associated with Generation Y is certain to be responsible for the world going to hell – television, videogames, cell phones, facebook, etc.
It might surprise critics to know, however, that the fact of the matter is quite the opposite. I’ve seen far more evidence of MMA pulling troubled teens off the street and giving them a healthy and controlled way to channel their aggression. Furthermore, I think you’ll find that if you surveyed the incidence of illegal, underground fighting – something that occured well before MMA began - in areas where MMA is sanctioned to areas where MMA is not, you’d find even more correlating evidence to support this position.
Lastly, and this is probably my favourite, there exists this notion out there that MMA somehow compromises the morality of our society; in other words, it’s simply wrong. It’s certainly closely related to the earlier criticisms and misconceptions of the sport and is something I feel will disappear if MMA can manage to do a better job of educating people about the sport.
There will, however, undoubtedly remain some people that still disagree with the idea of MMA and in this regard, I’m not sure there is much MMA can do. Therefore, why worry about it?
The issue of morality itself opens a whole other can of worms: it’s not only highly subjective but also greatly influenced by one’s surrounding environment (again we broach the subject of cultural relativism). I’m not about to tell anyone what’s right or wrong - apart from the obvious – and MMA certainly doesn’t encroaches upon that obvious line. The sport does not infringe upon any fundamental human rights; it features willing, competent combatants duelling in a controlled setting; and it does not further perpetuate that combat outside of the proper channels.
What more is there to say? Difference exist, I respect those of others, but I’m not about to force MMA on anyone that doesn’t like it. Nor am I about to let them tell me what I should or should not be doing.
Payout Conclusion
The bottom line, here, is the public perception that MMA is a violent, bloodlust akin to human cockfighting could not be further from the truth. Everyone in MMA understands this, and it’s about time the public did too.
MMA is a legitimate sport and deserves to be legalized.
The Case for Legalization: A Fundamental Shift
June 5, 2009
The recent developments in New York and Ontario would seem to bring about the proper timing for yet another discussion about legalizing mixed martial arts.
In lieu of my recent debut television appearance for Rogers Sportsnet’s MMA: Connected, speaking on this very subject (in addition to a host of other business-related MMA issues), I’ve also decided to comment in print.
I’ll say this much: the legalization scale seems to be slowly tipping in MMA’s favour. The ball is now rolling so to speak – despite the enormous amount of work still left to be done – but, in order for MMA to move any further, I believe that a fundamental shift in the sport’s approach to seeking legislation needs to occur.
In the past few years I’ve observed a bit of an unnerving trend in the way in which the sport has gone about trying to get itself sanctioned. For a time, educating the naysayers and the unfamiliar about the sport was very much at the forefront of MMA’s agenda. But as MMA began to grow and experience some degree of success, education was put on the back burner in favour of arguments based upon the economic contributions that MMA events make to their host communities.
It truly seemed as though the sport had been waging a media campaign for the legalization and sanctioning of mixed martial arts based almost solely upon financial posturing. Any debate about the legalization or sanctioning of MMA was quickly dominated by revenue figures and profit potentials.
Did it work? To an extent, but I also feel it’s been the cause of some the heel digging we’re now seeing in areas like Ontario and New York (although I’m not about to ignore some of the unique issues in either area that have played a role in shaping their respective landscapes – we’ll save those intricacies for another day).
The argument based upon economic spinoffs is a bit misguided in the sense that although money does make the world go-round, but people also want to know that MMA is an activity which isn’t morally reprehensible or a negative influence within their community.
What’s more is that we live in a society of cultural relativism; where the definition of good and bad is often influenced by the powerful and motivated. It’s not about right or wrong in absolute form, but who can shout the loudest and appeal to the ignorant or indifferent masses sitting on the fence.
And who can blame the fence-sitters? Being anything other than ignorant or indifferent, these days, is truly an effort. Individuals are inundated with thousands of pieces of information on a weekly basis – a great deal of which are biased by government or corporations – and they need some way to process everything. Hence, they stereotype.
That’s why education is so important. MMA has a very important message that isn’t going to be distributed or explained on its own. It’s up to the MMA community as a whole to distribute and explain that message – to cure the ignorant or indifferent of their false stereotypes.
Let me give you an example: I’m Canadian and I know NOTHING about basketball. Take me to a basketball game and give me floor seats and I’ll still know next to NOTHING about basketball. But, if you give me floor seats and put me next to Stan Van Gundy for a game, chances are I’m going to pick up a few things about the sport – at least the basics.
It’s just not enough to call these people ignorant and demand that they go “watch some MMA;” or, worse, throw money at them in hoping they’ll give in or give up. The MMA community has no choice but to take these ignorant or indifferent individuals by the hand and show them how and why MMA is one of the greatest sports in the world.
And what if some, like Bob Reilly, don’t want to listen? There are 20 other members of the Tourism Committee in New York that might. In other words, “coalition build” with the majority and give the minority little choice.
To accomplish this, the MMA community has to return to an approach based upon educating those ignorant naysayers about the true nature of mixed martial arts:
Only afterwards is it time to broach the subject of economic spinoffs because, again, quite simply, no one likes to feel as though they’ve been bought – like they’ve sacrificed their morality for a few bucks and a t-shirt.
The greatest minds in negotiation will tell you that you’re best served in finding the common interests between all parties at the table and working to meet them equitably. If MMA wants global acceptance, it must realize that the interests of the world are far greater than simply money.
Therefore, MMA needs more Marc Ratners preaching the virtues of the sport to congress or parliament, more Ken Hayashi’s visiting UFC events, more websites like MMAfacts.com, and more people within the community, other than the UFC, stepping up to truly inform the misinformed.
UFC 2009 Undisputed: Sponsor List Revealed
March 30, 2009
As a follow-up to last week’s piece on in-game advertising, MMAPayout has obtained the full list of sponsors that have been approved for the UFC’s latest video game: UFC 2009 Undisputed.
While in-game advertising should be considered a potentially viable source of future ancillary revenue for the UFC, the consideration that in-game advertising could also provide the fighters with additional sources of revenue is equally intriguing.
Sources have intimated to MMAPayout that fighters have been given permission by THQ to select three or four sponsors from this list to appear on their fight gear and that some fighters are actively trying to sell these placements.
How much might each placement be worth? An estimated $20,000 to $75,000, depending on the popularity of the fighter.
So, I guess the better question might be: what represents fair value?
These things are always tough to gauge because it’s not an exact science – many intangibles must be considered to properly value fighter sponsorships, both in real life and within video games.
However, it seems to me that when you factor in the potential reach of this video game and the high rates of repeat exposure due to multiple playing sessions by any, one user, a $20k-$75k fee is reasonable.
Certainly the level of exposure through the video game is equal to that, or possibly even superior to, the level of exposure companies receive from fighters at live UFC events; and in this case, fighters on the main card (again depending on their popularity) are receiving at least $20k per placement.
Having said all of that, there are probably three things standing in the way as a fighter trying to sell placements on his in-game gear:
1.) Are a fighter’s sponsors on this approved short-list (one that only represents a fraction of the total number of UFC approved sponsors)?
2.) What impact might exclusivity agreements with a fighter’s current, real-life sponsors have on his ability to attract other sponsors on the approved list?
3.) Finally, have some or all of these potential sponsors already reached paid agreements with the UFC or THQ in order to appear in the game and under what conditions?
Camps (17)
10th Planet Jiu-Jitsu
Alliance MMA
American Top Team
Black House
Brazilian Top Team
Cesar Gracie Jiu-Jitsu
Extreme MMA
Greg Jackson’s Gym
HIT Squad
Minnesota Martial Arts Academy
Serra Jiu-Jitsu
Sityodtong USA
Team Nogueria
Team Penn
Team Quest
Team Takedown
The Pit
Commercial Sponsors (33)
American Fighter
And 1
Clinch Gear
Conquest
Death Clutch
Fairtex
FYT
Hayabusa Fight Wear
Harley-Davidson
Headblade
HITMAN Fight Gear
Hostility
Metabolic Adaptation
Microtech
MMA Warehouse
Nuvasive
NOGI
One More Round
On The Mat
Pain Athletics Inc.
Premier Fighter
RVCA
Sinister Brand
Skin Industries
Sprawl
Sucker Punch
Take A Nap Fight Gear
Tapout
Toe 2 Toe
Warrior International
Xyience
THQ
Yuke’s
There are several head-scratching additions and omissions within the list, but upon further investigation it appears as though the list of camps and sponsors reflects the UFC’s state of business as it was some months ago, prior to THQ’s programming freeze (a point in the game’s development where programming shifts from new additions to bug and game play tweaks).
It might explain the absence of prominent sponsors like BSN and Cage Fighter, while also justifying the inclusion of Premier Fighter (a brand distributed at the time through Hitman and TapouT, a relationship that has since been severed).
The omissions of Bud Light and Full Tilt Poker aren’t really any surprise considering the intended audience of this game is quite broad. Both would raise unwanted social issues regarding drinking and gambling; this even aside from the UFC’s current poker sponsor debacle.
One of the sponsors who worked out a deal for inclusion in the game couldn’t be happier with the results.
“We’re very excited to be an official in game partner for UFC 2009 Undisputed,” said MMAWarehouse.com CEO Mika Casey. “Not only is it one of the most unique marketing opportunities we’ve been involved with, but THQ has really put the time and effort into making an authentic, true to life experience with both look and feel. Even if we were not a partner, this is a game that as a gamer, I cannot wait to play.”
UFC 2009: Undisputed is set to hit store shelves on May 19th for the Xbox 360 and PS3 consoles. If you’ve haven’t read the game preview from MMAPayout’s Todd Martin on CBS, you should.
Punitive Decision Making in MMA: How To Handle The Grease
February 5, 2009
This is a subject I’ve wanted to write about for sometime now and as it happens, UFC 94 provided the proper timing and context for me to do so. The following is an article I wrote for maximumfighting.com earlier this week:
The fight between Georges St-Pierre and BJ Penn this past weekend was many things to many people. It was seen as the biggest fight in MMA history; it represented the ultimate showdown between two of the best, ever, still in their primes; and in doing so, it represented another one of MMA’s triumphs over boxing.
Then came the Vaseline and with it some very unfortunate controversy.
With the assumption that the aftermath of rounds one and two were likely the same, let’s take a look at what happened:
- Corner man and muay thai coach, Phil Nurse, applied Vaseline to St-Pierre’s eyebrows, nose, and chin.
- Then, Nurse passed down St-Pierre’s chest with his hands.
- Nurse re-applied a little more Vaseline onto St-Pierre’s face before rubbing his temples, passing over his shoulders, and then rubbing the middle of his back and chest with two-finger point pressure.
As a result, the Penn camp is contemplating whether or not to file an official complaint to the NSAC alleging that St-Pierre’s corner team illegally applied “grease” between early rounds of the fight.
While I’m inclined to believe that any application of Vaseline to the body was purely unintentional, this is none-the-less an unfortunate situation.
The incident casts a shadow over an otherwise brilliant fight, a brilliant performance, and a brilliant night for MMA as a whole. It takes one of the classiest and most well-respected individuals in the sport, Georges St-Pierre, and drags his name through the mud. It also links MMA with some of the under-handed tactics of its sporting cousin – where, to the uninitiated, grease is quite analogous to plaster of Paris.
That’s why the handling of this entire situation is so crucial, regardless of whether an official complaint is filed.
It also begs the question; under what criteria should a decision meet in order to be judged fair and just? Mine are as follows:
- 1. An NSAC decision must take into consideration the severity of the act, the history of the offender, and the overall context of the situation.
- 2. An NSAC decision must establish ample deterrent that will help to ensure that further illegal behaviour, unintentional as it may be, does not re-occur.
- 3. An NSAC decision must fully represent the NSAC’s role as the preeminent watchdog of the sport and fiduciary of public interest in order to produce the fairest outcome for all parties involved.
It would be easy to call the bout a no contest, suspend St-Pierre for six months, and fine him but is that really in the best interest of anyone? Certainly, it would deter even unintentional illegal acts, but there are ways to achieve deterrence without brute force or heavy-handedness.
In my opinion, the best way to handle the situation is to keep things simple: start by revoking the corner license of Phil Nurse (who applied the Vaseline) and then fine St-Pierre $60, 000, which amounts to approximately 15% of his reported base pay.
My reasoning is simple. The fact that this incident happened and is now public knowledge is enough to increase awareness moving forward – it’s enough to send the message that everyone must be more careful.
Similarly, revoking the corner license and fining the fighter serve as additional deterrents to commit illegalities and ample incentives for corner people to pay more attention to exactly what they’re doing.
Lastly, it’s the least disruptive to the sport and takes into consideration the severity of the incident in addition to the upstanding track record of St-Pierre and his corner.
Promoter's Spotlight: Roy Englrebrecht (Part 2)
January 22, 2009
Affliction and M1-Global Endeavours
The transition from boxing into MMA proved to be a great career move for Englebrecht as his promotional experience caught the attention of some rather big players on the MMA scene.
In 2008, Affliction Entertainment, solicited help from Englebrecht in promoting their first show at the Honda Center in Anaheim, California.
“[Affliction] did not have a California promoter’s license” he said. “So, in fact, they were not allowed to do a show in the state.”
“They came to me as a licensee of the state and asked me if I would assist them with the Affliction: Banned show. Being a promoter, would I bring my expertise in operations and marketing? So, it was just attending weekly meetings, making sure the fights got approved and the fighters got licensed, and just adding my two cents to make the first show successful.”
Now, nearly six months later, Englebrecht has been retained to work on the Affliction card – only this time in a consulting role, as Golden Boy will handle the promotional duties.
There’s been much ado about the Affliction-Golden Boy relationship in recent weeks and months, but no more so than about Golden Boy’s decision to promote two different PPV cards on the same night, in the same state. On January 24th, Affliction: Day of Reckoning will be broadcast live and on PPV from the Honda Center in Anaheim, California while just 30 miles down the highway, Antonio Margarita will take on Sugar Shane Mosely at the Staples Center in Los Angeles.
Many would suggest that the PPVs are likely to cannibalize each other in terms of live-gate and PPV revenue, but that isn’t a concern according to Englebrecht. Instead, Affliction must focus on not being swallowed whole on the media front.
“We have to make sure that we don’t get lost in that week’s media activity, so we’re not a step child that week of the show” he said. “In Southern California, with the media, there are still some high profile fighters like Shane Mosely [that draw attention].”
“I like to think that we can be creative. Have a dual press conference with Shane and Antonio and their fighters and then cut their banner down, put ours up, and have our fighters come in for the media. Keep the media there for both.”
And getting creative is going to be something of a necessity for an organization that is rumoured to have lost anywhere between $2-4 million on their last show. When asked what Affliction needs to do in order to ensure long term success, Englebrecht hinted that they needed to decide what they wanted to be.
“Are they going to be a full-time fight promotions company doing major fights as well as club level fights?” he asked. “Affliction Entertainment, with two shows under their belt, has to figure out ‘Ok, where do we go from here? Are we going to sign young fighters? Are we going to establish a brand and take our brand to small town America?’ and I think that will be decided in 2009 once they get the second show in.”
“I think the first show, everybody does the first show. It’s after the second show where you sit down and say ‘Ok, guys, where do we go from here?”
Affliction isn’t the only MMA endeavour that Englebrecht is pursuing, either.
Most recently, Englebrecht and Steven Bash were awarded an M-1 Challenge Series Franchise for the up-coming M-1 Challenge World Tour – a team-based tournament set to play across various venues in various different countries over the 2009 calendar.
“[M-1 Global] was impressed that I’m a promoter that does successful club shows, because the M-1 Challenge is not a show that would play to an 18,000 seat arena. It’ll be more of a very strong MMA show that plays to a 4,000 to 5,000 seat arena.”
“They awarded us a franchise that will compete maybe four times in 2009. We might compete against Russia in an M-1 Challenge World Tour stop in Sao Paulo, Brazil or we might compete against Korea in Seoul, Korea. And there will be six teams competing at each stop.”
The purpose of the challenge, though, is to help showcase and develop the skills of younger, inexperienced fighters.
“It’s an opportunity for young, MMA fighters that are fairly skilled and haven’t been signed by the UFC to see the world, make a name for themselves, establish themselves by competing at the world-level, and then be in line to be signed by the UFC or WEC.
“Keep in mind they won’t make a lot of money. Each fighter for USA West, when we have a World Stop will probably make $1,500 or $2,000 but they get the chance to compete against another country and fighter and they get to visit a part of the world they’ve never seen before.”
Fight Promoter University
If his roles with Affliction and the M-1 Challenge World Tour weren’t enough, Englebrecht also runs a seminar entitled “Fight Promoter University” once every 6-8 months that teaches the basics of running a fight event to individuals looking to get into the sport.
“It’s an accelerated program on how to become a club-level, minor league fight promoter” he said. “It’s like drinking from a fire hose.”
“We’ve had some graduates that have made that step and been successful, but most of the time people come and they see what’s involved and they say, ‘you know, this isn’t for me’ or ‘there is an investment on my part’ and they’re intimidated by it.”
Not only do they provide their aspiring promoters a standard “club show” template with which they can take home and run their own promotion, they also give them practical experience. Every seminar is held over a five day period that coincides with either a Battle in the Ballroom or MMA Fist Series event, which allows each student to work the event and get some first-hand experience in running a promotion.
More information is available at Roy Englebrecht’s website: www.fightpromoteruniversity.com
