MMA vs Pro Wrestling

[sek69]

Wrestling fans have always had options when it came to what show they wanted to watch. Whether it was WWFE, NWA/WCW, ECW, AWA, or if you were lucky, a regional promotion like World Class or Memphis, there was always an alternative if you didn't like one company's style of product.

 

With everyone but WWE folding and TNA just now beginning to emerge as a viable second option, a lot of the IWC (led by Meltz) are pimping MMA as an alternative for wrestling fans. Meltz even tries to make it sound like you have to be a MMA fan to be a complete fan of wrestling. I'm wondering if the blending of MMA and pro wrestling isn't like forcing together cats and dogs.

 

On paper it doesn't seem like too much of a stretch, since both are presented as athletic contests, and both undoubtedly require skill to excel at. The problem lies in how each side's fanbase views their sport and how the public at large views both sides.

 

Most longtime MMA fans (I don't know if MMA has an equivalent term to "smarks") look down at wrestling as "that fake stuff" and resent being lumped in with wrestling fans. A lot of pro wrestling fans don't like wrestling to be compared with MMA since it tends to expose a lot of the worked side of the business. I mean, you watch a guy work an armbar as a resthold in WWE, then in the "real stuff" someone taps to the same armbar in seconds.

 

There's also the view of the mainstream, non-fan, public. Most non-fans think MMA is barbaric and all wrestling fans are inbred retarded rednecks. Lumping those together doesn't help anyone in the public eye. Wrestling journalists like Meltzer seem to think covering MMA will give them some mainstream cred, but those people he's trying to impress think MMA is nothing more than contained barroom brawling.

 

Personally, I don't mind MMA but I can't sit down and watch it like I can with wrestling. I think part of it is that when I watch MMA I always have a twinge in the back of my mind that someone could seriously get hurt doing this. I don't have that in wrestling since there's usually a low risk of someone getting f'ed up unless something gets botched.

 

I think what it comes from is that I used to watch boxing a lot growing up, but then I started seeing guys I watched growing up who ended up brain damaged and punch drunk. It made it hard to enjoy boxing knowing that these guys getting knocked out are probably going to suffer long term effects. When I watch wrestling, I don't worry that the guys I enjoy watching are going to end up vegetables. At least not from wrestling. They may fuck themselves up with their personal demons, but most guys retire from wrestling with scarred foreheads and bad knees at the worst unless they had some kind of drug problem.

 

I know a lot of people here are MMA fans, I wondered what you guys think of the breeding together of MMA and pro wrestling.

[World's Worst Man]

They're totally different, and just because someone is a fan of one, doesn't mean they somehow have to be tied to the other. MMA just provides a totally different product. Even most of the worked-shoot style pro-wrestling matches don't look like convincing MMA matches. Pro-wrestling is for people who can either lose their disbelief while watching, or if they appreciate the work that goes into producing good pro-wrestling matches. MMA is just a sporting event, while wrestling is entertainment.

 

I actually got into MMA after I "grew up" and stopped being able to get emotionally involved with wrestling angles. I even stopped watching wrestling all together at one point, and became a really big MMA fan. Ironically, after I started watching wrestling again, my MMA interest fell off. I couldn't ever tell you why, it just happened.

[Guest Cam Chaos]

watch MMA I always have a twinge in the back of my mind that someone could seriously get hurt doing this. I don't have that in wrestling since there's usually a low risk of someone getting f'ed up unless something gets botched

Not one single person has ever died as a result of competing in a sanctioned MMA event. The same cannot be said for pro boxing or pro wrestling (3 deaths in pro boxing this year alone, let's not count amatuer boxing). No one has even been crippled permanently, unlike pro wrestling (see Hayabusa). Unlike boxing, in MMA one good shot that puts someone down will end a fight, there is no eight count to allow them to stand up to absorb more abuse. Hell, many fans argue that some fights should go longer because the ref stopped them too soon, UFC's recent Sinosic/Griffin and PRIDE's Chonen/Henderson fights being examples.

 

Compare the mental faculties of someone like Gene LeBell or Helio Gracie to those of former boxing vets like Ali. It's not even a fair comparison as one has permanent shakes and takes minutes to finish sentences while Helio, 90+ years old, is still an eloquent and competent personality and grappler and LeBell is apparently an excellent teacher, grappler and has a great sense of humour. Hell, look at Sammartino these days, the guy is barely able to do more than scream "WWE sucks!" at public appearances.

 

MMA is a sport. WWE these days is a soap opera with some piss poor brawling and the occasional stunt thrown in. It's not even really comparable. It's like trying to compare The Real World with the Olympics.

[sek69]

Well to be fair, Stu Hart was stretching people in the Dungeon up almost to the end.

 

I know MMA is a relatively safe sport, but the object is still to knock out your opponent or make him tap (or pound him until the ref stops the match). Crippling injuries in wrestling like Hayabusa or Droz were the result of botched spots.

 

Boxing is definately the most brutal sport, and why it gets treated with respect and MMA is considered barbaric is beyond me.

[Guest EastCoastJ]

Grouping wrestling with MMA has never made any sense to me. If anything MMA should be grouped with boxing, but boxing is never grouped with wrestling or even acknowledged by Meltzer, so I don't know why The UFC should be. No one would have ever decried it a "war" if the finals of The Contender fell on a Monday night, so I don't know how a UFC special is any different.

 

The weird thing is that it is almost a self fulfilling prophecy at this point. I don't even think the UFC knew that they were at war with Vince McMahon, but Vince offered Mike Goldberg in the high eight figures to no-call, no-show the Ultimate Fight Night and show up on Raw like he was a puffy-shirted Lex Luger on the first Nitro or something. McMahon may be buying into the Meltzer hype for all I know, because that it is a weird move for a company he has no history or ill-will with in the past.

[Guest TheShawshankRudotion]

Wrestling is more risky than MMA. Fighters fight maybe 2-6 times a year, while wrestlers usually do that in 2 weeks. Longer matches, more wear and tear. MMA you have cut-men, doctors at ringside, referees looking out for fighters often to a fault. I've always said wrestlings main appeal is guilt-free violence, and as long as the public is willing to be blind to the fact that it is incredibly dangerous, wrestling will be around. MMA is safer, without a doubt. "Safety" is not the issue.

 

Violence, however, is. MMA is tremendously violent. Two guys intending to beat the shit out of each other. That's certainly how it appears. I get a rush from that violence. When I see a knockout, when I see a slam, when I see blood, when I see two guys going balls out - I get pumped. I am not ashamed of that. I am a man. It's within me. It's primal. And every man looks for it in some way - you think Football is watched for the running? That Nascar is watched for the lane switches? People get hurt - people die - more in pretty much every other contact-sport than in MMA. It's not safety.

 

With wrestling, since those two guys are in there with an agreement - that they're partners rather than enemies - that violence is toned down tremendously. The rush lessens. But then again, if I just wanted to see violence, I'd watch various backyard fights and the like. I can't watch those. It lacks the sophistication of MMA. I like watching skilled fighters. I like seeing technique, I like analysing fights, I like seeing progression. MMA is a very intelligent sport - no other sport has evolved like MMA has in the past 10 years for a reason. Fighters have to think of ways to defeat other fighters and their respective styles. There's also heart and will, the struggle. It's the purest form of competition.

 

And that's about the only difference between wrestling and fighting.

 

I don't think it is an absolute that all wrestling fans should be fight fans or vice versa. There are definitely the extremes where a wrestling fan can't watch MMA (usually because they think it's "boring") and a fight fan can't watch wrestling (usually because of the same reason, though that's never actually said). But I think a pretty sizable portion of both wrestling and fight fans can cross-over. Why do people watch wrestling? The personalities. The stories. The action. Why do people watch fighting? The personalities. The stories. The action.

 

The personalities and stories are similar in both. Frank Trigg vs. Matt Hughes had 2 very different personalities, and both their matches told a story and their second match even managed to build from their first match. Watch UFC 43-53 and you will see plenty of stories unfold that are better than ANYTHING the WWE has offered in that time period.

 

The difference comes in the action. You need to be patient in MMA. Some wrestling fans can't be patient. Wrestling is all about instant gratification nowadays. You see spots in every match that gets the crowd popping rather than building towards something. Fans are so used to cheering for over-the-top shit that when they see someone in someone elses guard in MMA, they immediately cry "boring", because the action there is a lot more subtle and they aren't willing to wait and see the pay-off.

 

But MMA is getting better every single year. 2005 has been the best year I've ever seen. I can list off 20 matches off the top of my head that have been action-packed and amazing and could excite the majority of wrestling fans from this year alone. But because someone sees one or two bad matches, they immediately label it as boring. I can tell you this right now, MMA is the most exciting sport in the world. When it's good and going, it's the best. It's a rush. If you saw me during Fedor/Cro Cop... I was going nuts. I don't go nuts like that for ANYTHING. And certainly not wrestling.

 

And Meltzer isn't writing about MMA because he's looking to give them cred. It's the other way around bro.

[sek69]

I don't want to come off as knocking MMA, I respect the sport, I just don't understand how it became to be considered a competitor of pro wrestling when as you said boxing seems a more natural choice.

 

 

And Meltzer isn't writing about MMA because he's looking to give them cred. It's the other way around bro.

 

 

I know, thats why I said that Meltz is trying to gain cred by covering a "real" sport but the people he's trying to gain cred with don't respect MMA.

[Guest Leena]

They're very very different.

 

I know most here pay attention to workrate, and such... but for me, and most WWE fans, we only give a crap who wins, who looks stronger during the match, and whatever cool moves happen.

 

Thus, MMA is usually very boring for me unless there's some amazing knockouts.

[Guest TheShawshankRudotion]

MMA and Boxing are two different animals.

 

Boxing doesn't allow for takedowns, ground work, or submissions. Let alone kicks and knees and elbows.

 

Takedowns. Groundwork. Submissions. Kicks. Knees. Elbows.

 

Hey, you can find those in wrestling.

 

If you look at the history of MMA outside of Brazil, it's been hugely influenced by professional wrestling. Especially in Japan. Ken Shamrock was a professional wrestler first. Dan Severn did works in UWF-i before coming to the UFC. Masakatsu Funaki was a wrestler before he was a fighter and started up Pancrase. Akira Maeda and RINGS. Sayama and SHOOTO. Nobuhiko Takada and PRIDE. You'd be a downright fool not to see the connection between wrestling and MMA. A pro wrestling match can look like an MMA fight and still be considered a pro wrestling match. An MMA fight can look like a pro wrestling match and can still be considered a fight. Can you say the same for Boxing?

[Guest TheShawshankRudotion]

If I showed someone who was unfamiliar with wrestling and MMA, let's say, Takada/Tamura from UWF-i. Which is a professional wrestling match. And if I showed them, say, Frank Trigg vs. Matt Hughes II... or even Nick Diaz vs. Karo Parisyan... You think they would be able to tell the difference. And then let's say I showed them Ali vs. Frasier...

[Coffey]

The biggest difference being that prowrestling is worked....

[sek69]

That was the point I was trying to make, boxing and MMA are legit contests.

 

Well MMA is, I'm not to sure about some boxing matches these days.

 

Stylistically, wrestling and MMA are more closely related since you'll see stuff like powerbombs in MMA and tap outs in wrestling, but in the end the worked factor makes the difference to me.

[Guest TheShawshankRudotion]

Wow. You just completely missed the point. Congratulations.

 

Pro Wrestling at its finest shouldn't looked worked at all. The matches and fights I suggested looked very similar (besides the boxing match, of course) where the pro wrestling match was structured in such a way as to be "realistic" and the fight contained certain dramatics. Any thing that jumps out as "fake" tends to diminish the suspension of disbelief. Just because the WWE looks so outlandishly fake doesn't define pro wrestling as that. Hell, I could make a case that MMA is more pro wrestling than the WWE is now.

[Coffey]

And to me, that's the big difference. It's the reason why I can watch wrestling and enjoy it moreso than I can watch MMA or Boxing. It's because it's worked. It's because you know it's all leading somewhere. If something sucks, you don't always have to blame the wrestlers, sometimes you can blame the writing or the bookers.

 

In MMA, if a fight sucks, it's the fighters' fault.. Look at this season of TUF. There's been AT LEAST two TERRIBLE fights. If it was worked, that wouldn't have happened.

 

Not to say there's not been bad matches in wrestling but you can usually see them coming. Like, if you pit Kamala Vs. The Undertaker, you can't expect a 4-star affair. You can see that shit coming. In MMA, you just never know. It could end in three seconds or it could be a three-round, roll-around-on-the-ground armbar attempt fest.

[Guest TheShawshankRudotion]

So what was the point of this "chat" if you are going to cling to something like "worked" and "shoot" as this huge differential?

[sek69]

Wow.  You just completely missed the point.  Congratulations.

 

Pro Wrestling at its finest shouldn't looked worked at all.  The matches and fights I suggested looked very similar (besides the boxing match, of course) where the pro wrestling match was structured in such a way as to be "realistic" and the fight contained certain dramatics. Any thing that jumps out as "fake" tends to diminish the suspension of disbelief. Just because the WWE looks so outlandishly fake doesn't define pro wrestling as that.  Hell, I could make a case that MMA is more pro wrestling than the WWE is now.

I get the point, no matter how sarcastic and condescending you care to put it.

 

*MY* point is no matter how realistic you can make pro wrestling look, the fact remains it's worked.

 

Of course I'm well aware that WWE doesn't define pro wrestling. I wouldn't have become goodhelmet's man whore if I only was aware of WWE.

 

I know boxing isn't very simliar to MMA in terms of technique and tactics, but they really hit each other in boxing. They really hit each other in MMA. They're not supposed to really hit each other in pro wrestling.

 

I wouldn't consider Sam Waterson capable of handling a real case just because he does an outstanding job playing an assistant DA on Law and Order. He uses the same techniques a real lawyer uses, but his cases are all scripted.

[Guest TheShawshankRudotion]

Eddie Guerrero and Chris Benoit have had awful matches in the past few years against each other. To say that predicting quality wrestling matches is easier than predicting quality MMA matches is just an example of not knowing what you're talking about. As both a wrestling fan and a fight fan, there's been as many -if not more- disappointments with wrestling as there have been with MMA. I think the difference is that wrestling nowadays lends itself so much to disappointment that expectations are kept at a minimum, so the excitement leading into a match or an event is lower than it would be in MMA. The best show I've ever seen happened last month and guess what? Going into that show, on paper, it was a fantastic line-up. Fedor vs. Cro Cop? One of the biggest matches in MMA history - DELIVERED.

 

On paper, the theory that a worked fight is more guaranteed to deliver than a shoot fight because things can be planned and arranged and practiced is a pretty strong one. It makes sense. On paper. In reality, with the quality of fighters and the incentives and deterents given to them nowadays, complete let-downs -while certainly possible and have happened- are not a regular thing, and occur just as much as they do in wrestling.

[sek69]

By the way, the point of this chat (at least when I started the thread) was to discuss how a real sport and a worked sport can be considered competitors.

[Guest TheShawshankRudotion]

*MY* point is no matter how realistic you can make pro wrestling look, the fact remains it's worked.

 

Of course I'm well aware that WWE doesn't define pro wrestling. I wouldn't have become goodhelmet's man whore if I only was aware of WWE.

 

Talking to Coffey there, champ.

 

I know boxing isn't very simliar to MMA in terms of technique and tactics, but they really hit each other in boxing. They really hit each other in MMA. They're not supposed to really hit each other in pro wrestling.

 

They really hit each other in football. Why aren't you comparing football to boxing? They don't really hit each other in movies. Why aren't you comparing wrestling to Bloodsport?

 

I wouldn't consider Sam Waterson capable of handling a real case just because he does an outstanding job playing an assistant DA on Law and Order. He uses the same techniques a real lawyer uses, but his cases are all scripted.

 

Are you saying that a real lawyer can't watch Law and Order because it's fake? Or that an actor can't look in on a trial because it's real? Fake and Real, it's so fucking minor nowadays. The line is so blurred. It's about appearances and perception.

[Guest TheShawshankRudotion]

By the way, the point of this chat (at least when I started the thread) was to discuss how a real sport and a worked sport can be considered competitors.

You answered it yourself.

 

Stylistically they are similar. They look similar. There are many common elements between the two that appeals to fans.

[sek69]

They really hit each other in football. Why aren't you comparing football to boxing? They don't really hit each other in movies. Why aren't you comparing wrestling to Bloodsport?

 

Because football and boxing aren't being covered by the same newsletters like MMA and pro wrestling are. (They *are* both found in the sports page of your local newspaper, however, because they're both legit contests. Pro wrestling usually isn't, cause it's not. )

 

Because Vince McMahon isn't trying to convince actors to no-show movie shoots and appear on Raw like he is with UFC employees.

[sek69]

By the way, the point of this chat (at least when I started the thread) was to discuss how a real sport and a worked sport can be considered competitors.

You answered it yourself.

 

Stylistically they are similar. They look similar. There are many common elements between the two that appeals to fans.

Well then let me try this route:

 

Do you think it's fair to have a worked sport compete with a legit one? Wrestlers have the advantage of having agents, bookers, and writers to cover their weaknesses while MMA fighters are pretty much out there swinging in the breeze when they have a match.

[Guest TheShawshankRudotion]

Because football and boxing aren't being covered by the same newsletters like MMA and pro wrestling are. (They *are* both found in the sports page of your local newspaper, however, because they're both legit contests. Pro wrestling usually isn't, cause it's not. )

 

But you said that all things being equal ("Stylistic Similarities), the only difference between MMA and Wrestling is one is real and the other isn't. And that that is the only reason why you can't watch MMA and the only reason why MMA and Wrestling shouldn't be viewed as competition. Could this be considered a bit of a strawman? Sure, but from what I've gathered, it seems to be the case that the issue here is "real" and "fake". If that's the case, then are you prepared to apply that standard evenly?

 

Speaking of football...

 

When the XFL was up and about, I'm pretty sure it got coverage in the WO. Hmm, why did Vince start up a football company? Why does Monday Night Football take a chunk of RAWs ratings every falls? Why did the WWE brag about beating MNF back in the late 90's?

 

Was it because they share some of the same audience? But that can't be! Football isn't fake!

 

If _football_ has enough elements in it to appeal to wrestling fans (or vice versa), shouldn't MMA?

 

Because Vince McMahon isn't trying to convince actors to no-show movie shoots and appear on Raw like he is with UFC employees.

 

If Vince sees you as competition, you are competition. It's a shame Vince doesn't do that for more than just MMA, because he seriously needs to hire better writers if he wants to compete with todays standard of television writing, characters, and storytelling. That Vince sees the UFC as competition is more because of SPIKE than the UFC. Not to say that UFC shouldn't be considered competition, but in terms of how Vince sees it, it was more of a SPIKE thing. Vince would be wise to steal writers from other shows. Hell, if he could pick up David Fury and Tim Minear from FOX that would be fantastic. Unlikely though. Vince lives in his own lil world.

 

Speaking of own lil worlds, you need to shift your paradigms if you believe only pro wrestling companies can compete with each other. It's a much bigger world than that.

 

Do you think it's fair to have a worked sport compete with a legit one?

 

This is a very strange question. Are we talking in general or in terms of UFC and WWE?

 

Wrestlers have the advantage of having agents, bookers, and writers to cover their weaknesses while MMA fighters are pretty much out there swinging in the breeze when they have a match.

 

MMA fighters are told to have exciting fights. In PRIDE they have cards for inactivity where if you get a card, you get 10% taken off your fight purse. In the UFC, if you are an exciting fighter they bring you back, even if you lose. If you are a boring fighter, even if you win, odds are you won't be hearing back from them. Most fighters know this going into their fights. Forrest Griffin vs. Stephan Bonnar. Both guys knew the stakes and went all out in a war. MMA has ways of correcting itself, without having to go to "works".

[Guest Sass]

There is no competition between MMA and Porfessional Wrestling. There shouldn't be any comparisons made. I blame Antonio Inoki and Dave Meltzer for this bastard bitch hybrid that has been shoved down wrestling fans throats. Neither one has any business being associated with the other. Prescedents be damned.

[sek69]

 

When the XFL was up and about, I'm pretty sure it got coverage in the WO. Hmm, why did Vince start up a football company? Why does Monday Night Football take a chunk of RAWs ratings every falls? Why did the WWE brag about beating MNF back in the late 90's?

 

 

The XFL got coverage in WO because it was started by the owner of a wrestling company.

 

Vince started a football league because it's always been his obession to broaden his reach beyond wrestling. Same reason he's gotten into bodybuilding, supplements, movies, music, and ice cream bars.

 

It failed because after the first week, football fans didn't want to see "sports-entertainment" in their football and wrestling fans didn't want to see football in their wrestling.

 

Monday Night Football takes a chunk out of everyone's ratings, since football is argueably the #1 sport in the US.

 

 

But you said that all things being equal ("Stylistic Similarities), the only difference between MMA and Wrestling is one is real and the other isn't. And that that is the only reason why you can't watch MMA and the only reason why MMA and Wrestling shouldn't be viewed as competition. Could this be considered a bit of a strawman? Sure, but from what I've gathered, it seems to be the case that the issue here is "real" and "fake". If that's the case, then are you prepared to apply that standard evenly?

 

What I said was the reason I can't get into MMA is that mentally I'm always thinking that someone could get seriously f'ed up and it keeps me from getting fully into the match. Maybe that just makes me a pussy, but whatever. I don't have to worry about that when I watch wrestling, unless Nash drops someone on their head again.

 

 

Speaking of own lil worlds, you need to shift your paradigms if you believe only pro wrestling companies can compete with each other. It's a much bigger world than that.

 

 

Not really. In the world of legit sports, baseball doesn't compete with football, basketball doesn't compete with hockey. The TV stations they air on compete in terms of ratings each sport gets, but I doubt Bud Selig gives a shit what the NFL playoffs garner in the ratings. He might care from a business standpoint when it comes to negotiating with the networks, but I don't think MLB is brainstorming ways to beat the NFL.