just had Mike Perrera break the news on FS1 that Rousey was knocked out....

ESPN website brought up interesting point.


Darren Rovell
@darrenrovell
Ronda Rousey loses Round 1. There is so much $$ for UFC to lose if Ronda Rousey loses here. Would be just a colossal financial loss.

You just wonder if this would be like Strike Force, who when Kimbo Slice lost never recovered.

Guess that's whatcha get for domestic abuse.

UFC still has other stars so one loss won't sink them the way it did Strikeforce. That was a marginal promotion in a sport dominated by UFC, what else are MMA fans going to watch, Bellator?

It just sets up a big money rematch, since many will see this loss by Rousey as a fluke, then even more money to be made on Holm-Rousey III.

Nice to see Rousey get her ass kicked, didn't think I'd see it happen. The rematch will make tons of money for the UFC.

(11-15-2015 01:35 AM)Zombiewoof Wrote:  It just sets up a big money rematch, since many will see this loss by Rousey as a fluke, then even more money to be made on Holm-Rousey III.

This. The buy rate for their rematch will be insane.

What made Rousey was her being invincible. Very similar to Mike Tyson. Now that it's gone- going to be tough to ever get that back.

The problem for UFC, MMA, boxing, or any other fighting sport is that they don't get the best athletes the US has to offer. This is the same reason why US soccer has no chance to win a World Cup

(11-15-2015 05:26 AM)5018Calhoun Wrote:  The problem for UFC, MMA, boxing, or any other fighting sport is that they don't get the best athletes the US has to offer. This is the same reason why US soccer has no chance to win a World Cup

Maybe because it's one of the most brutal sports out there and people don't want to watch it? Yes, MLS is an inferior product, but it doesn't mean people stop watching soccer all together. I love boxing, but the sport has passed public interest and is antiquated. UFC has a very niche audience by definition. It's never going to break new grounds and viewership than currently due to the nature of the sport.

Personally, I think UFC is boring. Why would you want to watch two fighters rolling around on the ground for four minutes a round?

Not saying kickboxing (or boxing) is any better.


Face it, the only entertainment from watching two people fight is when lots of strikes are landed. That sounds barbaric, but it's true.

(11-15-2015 09:07 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  Personally, I think UFC is boring. Why would you want to watch two fighters rolling around on the ground for four minutes a round?

Not saying kickboxing (or boxing) is any better.


Face it, the only entertainment from watching two people fight is when lots of strikes are landed. That sounds barbaric, but it's true.

I don't find anything entertaining about somebody sitting on somebody's chest and punching them. MMA is definitely a niche sport.

(11-15-2015 01:35 AM)Zombiewoof Wrote:  It just sets up a big money rematch, since many will see this loss by Rousey as a fluke, then even more money to be made on Holm-Rousey III.

It wasn't a fluke...Rousey got dominated....

(11-15-2015 10:05 AM)Maize Wrote:  

(11-15-2015 01:35 AM)Zombiewoof Wrote:  It just sets up a big money rematch, since many will see this loss by Rousey as a fluke, then even more money to be made on Holm-Rousey III.

It wasn't a fluke...Rousey got dominated....

This. Holms was a boxer. She used her footwork to keep Rousey at bay, landed jabs to the face repeatedly, avoided contact, and when there was an opening after Rousey's roundhouse missed a well placed kick to the side of the head put her down.

In other words folks boxing and kick boxing kicked bar room brawling in nuts and it wasn't even close. I saw it as a victory for pugilism as an art form, even if it is a brutal one whose popularity has passed.

Those Aussie's are a tough lot.

Holm is the first person, man or woman, to win a boxing championship & a UFC championship. She is good. Rousey is supposedly going to star in a remake of Road House so the rematch won't happen for awhile.

(11-15-2015 10:12 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(11-15-2015 10:05 AM)Maize Wrote:  

(11-15-2015 01:35 AM)Zombiewoof Wrote:  It just sets up a big money rematch, since many will see this loss by Rousey as a fluke, then even more money to be made on Holm-Rousey III.

It wasn't a fluke...Rousey got dominated....

This. Holms was a boxer. She used her footwork to keep Rousey at bay, landed jabs to the face repeatedly, avoided contact, and when there was an opening after Rousey's roundhouse missed a well placed kick to the side of the head put her down.

In other words folks boxing and kick boxing kicked bar room brawling in nuts and it wasn't even close. I saw it as a victory for pugilism as an art form, even if it is a brutal one whose popularity has passed.

So this question obviously means I know nothing of this Rousey and her fighting style ... but isn't the question obviously begged then: "why the heck did she try to stand up and strike with her"?

Isn't it just an assumption that if you're fighting a boxer/kickboxer, you have to try to win by taking them to the ground?

Here is a link: http://ftw.usatoday.com/2015/11/ronda-ro...highlights


Interestingly, they must not be allowed to show video of the knockout itself, even though they show video of everything else. Which just proves my point, that's all people really care about.

Just curious, for those of you who know:

- how legit is the IBA & WBA title, for women's boxing? Is it like in men's boxing, where there are a bunch of different titles?

- is there just no money in it, period?


I guess I'm trying to ask, why would she give up a career as (perhaps?) the top female boxer in the world to fight in MMA?

(11-15-2015 10:22 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  Just curious, for those of you who know:

- how legit is the IBA & WBA title, for women's boxing? Is it like in men's boxing, where there are a bunch of different titles?

- is there just no money in it, period?


I guess I'm trying to ask, why would she give up a career as (perhaps?) the top female boxer in the world to fight in MMA?

I would suggest to try to reclaim an audience lost to the popularity of the brawling that UFC and others offer.

Most folks my age were riveted to Ali / Frazier etc. What turned us off of boxing was the clinch and hold crap that took over, followed by the obvious and farcically corrupt judging that dominated the Olympics for almost 20 years. So between boring bouts of dancing bears and corruption followed by the loathing of Tyson the death of boxing was inevitable. I think Holm may have reclaimed a tad of interest by fighting Rousey.

(11-15-2015 01:50 AM)stever20 Wrote:  What made Rousey was her being invincible. Very similar to Mike Tyson. Now that it's gone- going to be tough to ever get that back.

That's the big danger for Rousey. Tyson had a huge mental edge because so many fighters were scared when they got in the ring with him, and that edge plus his own confidence were gone after he lost to Douglas.

If Rousey can't get that back right away, she might just transition straight into movies or TV like The Rock.

(11-15-2015 10:12 AM)BIgCatonProwl Wrote:  Those Aussie's are a tough lot.

They are, but Holm isn't one of them. She's American.