What Fighters Owe Fans
Photo by Jeff Bottari/Zuffa LLC
On the heels of UFC 248’s underwhelming main event, a clash for the middleweight title between Israel Adesanya and Yoel Romero, MMA Twitter has been abuzz with discussion on whether or not the combatants fulfilled their obligations as professional fighters.
The crux of the matter is that the fight was, by the standards of most fans, very boring. There was tension as there always is when two dynamic fighters like Romero and Izzy stand across the cage from one another, but the bout was primarily marked by long periods of inactivity in which neither fighter seemed to want to lead. Slow fights, especially championship fights between normally exciting pugilists, can be very disappointing for the viewing public (some of whom at least shelled out $65 for the privilege of watching). But are bad fights a failure of the fighters themselves? Do fighters have an obligation to be entertaining?
Fans want to watch enjoyable fights. The UFC is in the business of entertaining fans, as all sports leagues are. Fun scraps showcasing high levels of skill are the product, and the UFC makes a tremendous amount of money by providing the highest quality action available. It would seem natural then to conclude that since entertainment is the business that fighters do have a duty to fight in fan-friendly fashion. But that would be misjudging the nature of what fighters actually do. Though the analogy is easy to make, fighters are not in fact gladiators: they’re sportsmen. The UFC is not a venue primarily for slaking bloodlust, it’s a platform where some of the greatest athletes in the world compete in arguably the most difficult and consequential sport in the world to determine who really is the best. As sportsmen fighters have only one obligation to the fans: to show up to fight on weight and in shape with the intent to win.
For most fighters in most fights the best route to victory and producing entertaining action coincide. But when they don’t, when the path to winning involves throwing a limited number of strikes, spending a lot of time clinched against the cage, or grinding out decisions from top control, that is what the fighter should do even if it’s as exciting as watching paint dry. And while as fans we don’t have to pretend to enjoy it, we should respect that a certain percentage of boring fights is necessary for the integrity of the sport.
That might seem a bit overstated, but think through the implications of entertainment, not victory, being the measuring stick by which we judge fighters. It would imply that being the best fighter isn’t actually that important and that developing sterling technique and iron will to win are less meaningful than being able to wade forward and sling leather, triumph be damned. The sport is already plagued with favoritism based on entertainment value and the ability to drive PPV buys, does anyone think the UFC would be better if Q score and not wins became the explicit goal? That happened to submission wrestling in the United States in the first half of the 20th century, which culminated in the creation of fully scripted professional wrestling. And while the WWE may be very entertaining for millions of fans, it’s incapable of producing the sort of drama and awe in the face of human will generated by the greatest fights. So by all means, never give Adesanya - Romero a rewatch, feel free to criticize the fight as boring, but don’t think you’ve been cheated by a cautious performance. Because without the possibility of bad fights, there can be no transcendent ones either.