MMA News Forums » MMA Forums » General MMA Forum

[alfin]

i like the extras the cage bring. i think it gives grapplers a chance against some strikers.

[Punk Ass]

I like the ring better. Just seems more professional and I do like that fact that they start you in the middle of the ring. The cage becomes to much of a facter to me. That's how tank won most of his matches and I think it's just a hinderance when a person is trying to use his subs.

[Ubermensch]

I prefer the ring because too many fighters use the ring as a crutch because they are not that good of fighters. You see them hold on so they wont get taken down you see them pin people because they don't have good enough ground skill. Sure the cage looks cool and makes it seem tougher but lets get real it is a crutch for alot of fighters. Lets let the fighters fight mono ah mono without the ability to use things besides their skill. Wow what a great Idea...then we can see who truely has the best FIGHTING SKILL.

[ronin]

Originally Posted by Luis Cruz

Ok, here's the real poll for me to send back to Gary Shaw and let him know what everyone thinks. They're still up in the air about a cage or ring, so here's your chance to be heard. Just pick one and then give your reasons why and i'll pass it on to him after i get enough feedback. I'll be posting this on other forums as well but my main feedback i'll be looking at is here first.

For the record i like the ring better for view purposes and i'm not a big fan of pinning someone up against a cage plus it's harder for someone to use to prevent a takedown since it's not as sturdy as the cage. I'd rather watch them restart it in the middle if they start going out of the ring. That's just my thoughts, i'm sure they'll be a lot of people with their own thoughts. Please don't make this a debate thread and start going back and forth, i don't want to have to dig through a bunch of posts to get to what i need. This poll will be open for a week. Thanks.

Again I agree with you 100%,I think IFL proves Americans will watch MMA in a ring.

[subman]

Originally Posted by dagreat1

For me it's certainly a ring. I prefer Pride to UFC for the fighters and the ring.

I also recomend that Gary Shaw strongly considder the yellow card rule for whatever he chooses, be it a cage or a ring, nothing like taking 10% of someones purse to get them to engauge eachother and fight.

UFC.

Yellow card and 10% purse deduction will never happen in the U.S., unless the laws get changed. Completely against the law in (I am nearly positive) EVERY state.

I like the Ring because I get a better view of the action. If they could make a cage that doesn't interrupt viewing lines, then the cage it is.

[dagreat1]

Originally Posted by subman

Yellow card and 10% purse deduction will never happen in the U.S., unless the laws get changed. Completely against the law in (I am nearly positive) EVERY state.

I like the Ring because I get a better view of the action. If they could make a cage that doesn't interrupt viewing lines, then the cage it is.

Yes that is a problem, a new law needs to be passed allowing these orgs to deduct fighter purses or just setup the contracts with a loop hole allocating 10% of the fighters earnigs to the organization for stalling a fight.

It would be like any other sport that fines players and coaches for a laundry list of offenses.

[subman]

Originally Posted by dagreat1

Yes that is a problem, a new law needs to be passed allowing these orgs to deduct fighter purses or just setup the contracts with a loop hole allocating 10% of the fighters earnigs to the organization for stalling a fight.

It would be like any other sport that fines players and coaches for a laundry list of offenses.

It works GREAT in Pride Japan. They break out the yellow card, and it is on. I don't see UFC looking for a loophole, unless PPV buys drop due to boring fights. Pride wasn't allowed to use it for the Real Deal PPV.

It is interesting to me to go back and watch the early Pride DVD's, pre and post allowing knees on the ground. There were some really boring fights in the eraly days. Then they modified the rules, and BANG. I wish the U.S. governing bodies would reconsider allowing knees while on the ground. In Pride Japan, when a guy is getting hit and dives to hold an ankle and survive, he pays with knees, forcing him back up or OUT.

[startrak]

Ring.

I like the authenticity of the cage, but the ring allows for a better viewing experience. There's also less stalling and I think restarting in the middle is OK. Fights in the cage often tend to be really boring, as they are often pinned up against the cage.

However, when considering a ring, perhaps you could add like 1 or 2 more ropes than the standard, just as a safety precaution.

[Kewl144]

Originally Posted by ronin

Again I agree with you 100%,I think IFL proves Americans will watch MMA in a ring.

Has the IFL had a PPV?

Originally Posted by subman

Yellow card and 10% purse deduction will never happen in the U.S., unless the laws get changed. Completely against the law in (I am nearly positive) EVERY state.

I like the Ring because I get a better view of the action. If they could make a cage that doesn't interrupt viewing lines, then the cage it is.

It happens in Kickboxing. Fighters can lose part of their fight purse for not being aggressive enough or stalling the action. So why would it be against the law regarding MMA?

[Dan0]

Okay, without debating one over the other, and although there are certainly some VERY GOOD arguments for the ring, (I, too, dislike pinning against the cage) I prefer a CAGE.

As others have stated I REALLY dislike the restarts and scooting towards the center of the ring.

How about a six sided cage, a hexagon, I think it even sounds cool, but what do I know???

I like the idea of the yellow card INTENT (keep the action going), and if there can’t be a 10% pay reduction (which I STRONGLY DISAPPROVE of anyway) there could be some other consequence.