NSAC approves of ‘Special’ Five Round Non-Title Fights

MMAPlayground.com » Community » MMA News Share Forum » NSAC approves of ‘Special’ Five Round Non-Title Fights
jae_1833
8/19/09 8:57:53PM
link

Out of the blue today came news that the NSAC will be meeting on August 19 to vote on a number of proposed rule changes outlined in this document (.pdf). One of the more note worthy proposals in the document is a provision which would allow certain non-title fights to go for five rounds. The changes are italicized.

link 2
kopower
8/19/09 9:07:47PM
Sounds like it's a done deal already. I like the idea but only occasionally. I hope it doesn't get carried away and used to much.
joshryanshepherd
8/19/09 9:59:09PM
i hope Vitor V Franklin is 5 rds.
Twenty20Dollars
8/19/09 10:16:33PM
Dont really like this. But is it only for NSAC?
SmileR
8/19/09 10:16:51PM

Posted by joshryanshepherd

i hope Vitor V Franklin is 5 rds.



This is the only type of fight I think they should be used for!
What is the point of putting 5 round fights in the devisions that are already established unless they are or a title?
The only other time I can see them getting used is maybe if a number 1 contender match is close they could then say fight on for the next two round and see.

That and catch weight fights which tend to be either superfights or just plain awesome!
Khaos
8/19/09 10:18:10PM
That's pretty cool, I think they can make it pretty interesting. maybe have #1 contender fights be that long, as a precurser to the title fights.
Rush
8/19/09 10:25:30PM
In theory I like the idea because we tend to focus on the three round fights where it just doesn't seem right to end them in the judges hands. However, in practice I cringe at the the tought of there being a good chance of having fewer fights on a PPV card because of one or two longer fights.

I think this approval causes as many problems as it solves.
xdanish020
8/19/09 10:39:10PM
Stupid idea, IMO

5 rounds should be for title fights only
seanfu
8/19/09 11:10:12PM
Everyone claims they don't want to see non title 5 rounders. Why? Are you going to seriously tell us you don't wanna see Franklin in a 5 rounder as opposed to a 3 rounder vs Hendo/Wanderlei/whoever else they give him?

I know I would rather see Swick vs Kampman as a 5 rounder for sure.

Same with Rampage Rashad, I can only pray that one becomes a 5 rounder.

And for all the bitching about there being fewer fights on the card, let us remember the Nov. card where Griffin got knocked out in the 3ed round and Nogueira got knocked out in the first round.

So the chances of two 5 rounders going all five are slim.
Sinister
8/19/09 11:24:53PM
They shouldve made this for Liddel v. Silva
postman
8/19/09 11:37:03PM
As long as its not abused I like it. Rashad Page or Battle of the coaches of Tuff all the time. Headliner fights like Nog Coture when no title on the card. I know they are not going to change that fight. Catch weight super fights, Headliners on fight nights maybe. There is a time and a place.
The_Ho_Bag
8/19/09 11:38:07PM

Posted by seanfu

Everyone claims they don't want to see non title 5 rounders. Why? Are you going to seriously tell us you don't wanna see Franklin in a 5 rounder as opposed to a 3 rounder vs Hendo/Wanderlei/whoever else they give him?

I know I would rather see Swick vs Kampman as a 5 rounder for sure.

Same with Rampage Rashad, I can only pray that one becomes a 5 rounder.

And for all the bitching about there being fewer fights on the card, let us remember the Nov. card where Griffin got knocked out in the 3ed round and Nogueira got knocked out in the first round.

So the chances of two 5 rounders going all five are slim.



i thought if franklin had 5 rounds he would of beat Hendo
postman
8/19/09 11:39:32PM

Posted by Rush

In theory I like the idea because we tend to focus on the three round fights where it just doesn't seem right to end them in the judges hands. However, in practice I cringe at the the tought of there being a good chance of having fewer fights on a PPV card because of one or two longer fights.

I think this approval causes as many problems as it solves.



your right because it goes both ways it might save you from 2 boring undercard fights with another Coture v Rizzo or you might miss 2 good undercard fights and get a Anderson Letites. I think if used corectly it will be for the most part a good thing.
telnights
8/20/09 12:49:25AM
I think this is great idea. Unlike some I also want to see instant replay get put in place. If it was in place already Lennox vs Villefort would have been ruled a no contest and not a TKO victory for Lennox because of a headbutt.
rcg916
8/20/09 1:51:53AM
I like the idea of guys being able to go all out, but this rule creates an asterisk type situation (similar to, but not as drastic as baseball).

From now on, fights will have to be categorized by length, and some fighters may have an advantage/disadvantage depending on their spot on the card.

You cant tell me that the odds on Couture/Big Nog dont heavily swing Randy's way if this thing is changed to a five rounder. In a 3 round fight, its even, 5 rounds, Randy pulls way ahead right now. Just one example I can think of off the top of my head... My opinion, of course.
mrsmiley
8/20/09 6:43:27AM

Posted by Sinister

They shouldve made this for Liddel v. Silva



I agree.
That's one fight that should have been scheduled for 5.
Rush
8/20/09 7:31:16AM

Posted by seanfu

Everyone claims they don't want to see non title 5 rounders. Why? Are you going to seriously tell us you don't wanna see Franklin in a 5 rounder as opposed to a 3 rounder vs Hendo/Wanderlei/whoever else they give him?

I know I would rather see Swick vs Kampman as a 5 rounder for sure.

Same with Rampage Rashad, I can only pray that one becomes a 5 rounder.

And for all the bitching about there being fewer fights on the card, let us remember the Nov. card where Griffin got knocked out in the 3ed round and Nogueira got knocked out in the first round.

So the chances of two 5 rounders going all five are slim.




You seem to be using circular logic here. First you list a bunch of fights that you think will require 5 rounds to be good and then you say that most fights have a slim chance of going 5 rounds, using title fights as a model. Doesn't make sense to me. If it's a slim chance that any fight goes 5 rounds, then 1) why advocate 5 round fights and 2) as we know there are a number of fights that go the distance, so why would anyone expect there to be a slim chance of a fight going more than 3 rounds?


A few more points
3) using title fights a model for 5 round regular fights is not a good idea in the sense that title fights usually end early because one fighter is typically that much better (in the case with many of our current UFC champs)

4) fighters will train differently knowing it is a 5 round fight and I would bet money that you would not see the same kind of intensity you see in a 3 round fight

5) we do not know for sure which fights would hypothetically make epic 5 round fights. Most of the awesome 3 round fights that I can think of were just as likely to end in the first round so I don't think citing examples using hindsight is very useful. Remember, for every potential 5 rounds of Chuck vs. Wanderlei, you can get 5 rounds of Hughes vs. Lytle (or some other lay and pray victory). Nobody knows how the fight will pan out and like I said, it can go either way.
prozacnation1978
8/20/09 10:38:58AM
i think this is for nevada state only

but yeah main events non title being 5 rounds is cool,
big nog vs couture would be nice 5 rounds

but if in vegas every fight in vegas is title
so it would have to be co main events or something
RNC
8/20/09 4:45:06PM
This is fantastic. I don't know why people complaining. Everytime there's a good five round war in a major fight, which there are many a time, people are always saying, "****, lets see round 4" or "I wish this was a 5 rounder"

Now they actually will be.

Most of these fighters are previous champions anyway, or people who have fought for a belt, so they know what 5 rounds feels like and are capable of putting on a 5 round fight.

Franklin vs Wanderlei - how awesome would that have been as a 5 rounder?


This is a great thing.
Gogoplatapus
8/20/09 5:11:02PM
Pros and cons, no right answer. I like the idea that that guys can stand and bang for an extra two rounds but I hate the idea of a lame 2 extra rounds of lay and pray.
GrandMaster313
8/22/09 12:13:45PM

Posted by joshryanshepherd

i hope Vitor V Franklin is 5 rds.



I dont think this fight will make it out of the 2nd
whardin19
8/22/09 12:18:11PM

Posted by SmileR


Posted by joshryanshepherd

i hope Vitor V Franklin is 5 rds.



This is the only type of fight I think they should be used for!
What is the point of putting 5 round fights in the devisions that are already established unless they are or a title?
The only other time I can see them getting used is maybe if a number 1 contender match is close they could then say fight on for the next two round and see.

That and catch weight fights which tend to be either superfights or just plain awesome!



Belfort vs. Franklin would never go 5 rounds! Someone is getting knocked out!
Related Topics