All The King’s Men 09.06.10: Week 1 – Sanctioned Retirements

Posted by Larry Csonka on 09.06.2010

With once heralded fighters like Ken Shamrock and Jens Pulver putting up either poor or embarrassing performances over the last few years, should athletic commissions have the right to refuse sanctioning their fights and essentially forcing retirement upon them? The 411 staff examines this topic in the debut edition of All The King’s Men!

ALL THE KING's MEN!



The Concept
The concept of the column is simple. As the "King" of the 411 Roundtable, I will pick a topic for discussion. The staff, or "Knights" of the old roundtable will then have the opportunity to state of they are FOR or AGAINST the week's topic, and then will have the chance to defend their position. When the Knights are done stating their opinions, I will chime in with my thoughts on what they have presented, and briefly share my thoughts on the subject. Lets get to it…


THE WEEK ONE TOPIC IS: SANCTIONED RETIREMENTS



With once heralded fighters like Jens Pulver and Ken Shamrock putting up either poor or embarrassing performances over the last few years, should athletic commissions have the right to refuse sanctioning their fights and essentially forcing retirement upon them? The knights of the 411 roundtable shall discuss…


Scott Kuczkowski - AGAINST: My initial reaction to this question was, "Yes, this needs to happen." Guys like Ken Shamrock and Jens Pulver clearly don't have any business in MMA nowadays and probably need to be saved from themselves. I wouldn't necessarily want to use age as a discriminating factor when making this decision, because doing so would probably keep Randy Couture from fighting, but something should be done. Perhaps restricting fighters who have lost 5 fights in a row from competing for a year would have some impact, but an obvious way to avoid such a restriction is to fight outside the US. Plus, while Mark Coleman's best fighting days are clearly past him, he won his second to last fight. Should he be cleared back into the cage?

But after I considered it I began to have doubts about how such a decision would be received by the fans and fighters. Would it even be legal? By advocating this measure, the state athletic commissions would be regulating employment, and while the commission technically does that as a sanctioning body, I'm not so sure I want them telling fighters, "No, you can't fight anymore." And even if they did, how would such a thing be enforceable outside the US?

I can't argue that we have to consider a fighter's health, because each fighter already goes through a pre-fight physical, so for me to claim that they aren't in the shape to compete anymore is easily disproven by a doctor's visit. And if what happened to Thiago Alves is any indication, fighters apparently undergo pre-fight and post-fight CAT scans. If their squashes are able to take it and they are physically cleared to get in the cage, why should a sanctioning body step in and tell them differently? On what basis would that decision be made?

Merely not being competitive is something that an athletic commission could make a decision on, but that judgment would only be useful for specific instances. If Ken Shamrock wants to get his ass kicked by a guy who only has two professional fights, how could a sanctioning body stop that? If Jens Pulver wants to lose to a fighter who's been out of MMA for a year, how could an athletic commission rule against it?

If Shamrock and Pulver want to go out and get paid to get their asses kicked, then I say let them. They are only pissing on their own legacies; why should any of us care? I understand that we are all human and some of us were even fans of these two guys, but aren't they adults? Don't they get to decide when they'll hang it up? Why should they be prevented from making the money some promoter will pay them just to get knocked out?

Jeffrey Harris - FOR: In the cases of Jens Pulver and Ken Shamrock I'm extremely for it. I think both guys are legends, but both also clearly have no business fighting anymore and are no longer competitive. Now the provision I think something like sanctioned retirements need to have is that they need to be extremely scrutinized and done on a case-by-case basis. I mean look at Randy Couture and how he has done since coming out of retirement like twice. Then you have cases like Chuck Liddell. Liddell is a legend and the dude is in amazing shape for his age, but its pretty obvious that his chin can't take the heat anymore. Friends that train MMA have told me that Chuck isn't even going down from big hard shots anymore. The thing is that I majorly fear the long-term damage it can cause guys like Liddell and Pulver who are still in some ways young men. Pulver and Liddell are family men and at this point they should no longer be taking the unnecessary risks they clearly are.

And I think this isn't about the money. It definitely isn't about the money for someone like Liddell who has more than likely made a fortune and clearly lives a cushy lifestyle. Liddell could easily become a pitchman or even make some money being a part time actor in movies or a guest star on TV. I think for guys like Shamrock, Liddell, and Pulver they are simply addicted to the sport. Chris Lytle once told me that the high after winning a fight is one of the greatest highs you can ever achieve, so its not surprising that fighters are looking to get yet another fix when they feel like they can still go. However at some point, you still have to intervene and try and protect these guys from themselves.

I agree with Dana White that fighting is a young man's game despite some exceptions. It's saddening for guys who probably started earlier before the sport started getting lucrative but even though they don't have money they still have a legacy. Fighters should not risk their livelihood or their legacies at this point merely for money.

Jonathan Solomon - AGAINST: Should athletic commissions have the right to refuse to sanction fights for former MMA greats who are poor or embarrassing in the cage/ring? No. The only way a commission should not sanction a fighter to fight is if they are too injured/ill to properly defend themselves or if a particular match-up puts them at an unnecessary risk (ie. Ken Shamrock taking on a Lyoto Machida or Shogun Rua).

Commissions should not base such decisions on past glories from a decade ago. Their job is not to ensure a guy, who was considered among the best in the sport circa 1993 or a major television star in 2006, protects a legacy. What's the difference between Ken Shamrock or Jens Pulver and Dan Severn (who is five years older than Shamrock and 16 years older than Pulver)? Severn has stayed more active than the others and has strictly fought on smaller, regional shows against nowhere near anyone who may be considered a top 20-40 (rough estimate) fighter in any specific division. Severn has fought more than 70 more professional bouts than Shamrock or Pulver. Combine their total number of fights and Severn still has them beat by more than 30. The difference is hardly the fact that Severn remains an elite fighter and Shamrock/Pulver are not.

Their health is not being put to a more extreme test when they fight than the average MMA fighter. Ken Shamrock has not fought more than once a year since his 2006 series with Tito Ortiz. Despite testing positive for steroids afterwards, he defeated Ross Clifton via submission in 2009. Jens Pulver took then-dominant champion Urijah Faber to a five-round decision in 2008. It so happens that Pulver is on a six-fight losing streak. However, he has only been knocked out twice since 2006 so you cannot tell me his body is being harmed more than it was when he was younger.

As long as their health is not in any more danger than it normally would, why should commissions have the power to tell certain fighters they cannot earn a living? Pulver is quoted as saying he has enough bills to pay that he needs to continue fighting. If he wanted it, WEC would be more than happy to give him a commentating job, but Pulver reportedly declined. Pulver will turn 36-years old later in the year, and he has been fighting for over a decade. Why should he be prevented from going to work and trying to improve?

Right now, we're only seeing the guys from early days of MMA age and the effects of it. In ten years when we see a bigger list of names wind down the road to being passed their primes, there is no reason to see commissions rule they cannot continue to compete (as long as they are healthy and physically able to do so).

Bill Wannop - AGAINST: This is a somewhat muddled question, as the athletic commission have the power not to sanction any fight if they feel that it is not a competitive matchup. I don't think that the commission would ever sanction a fight, say between Ken Shamrock and Anderson Silva for an example (well in North America at least). Having the commissions not sanction any fights for a specific fighter and forcing a fighter into retirement, I am completely against. If the fighters still want to compete and people are willing to pay to watch them, then no harm is done as long as they are facing suitable competition.

Ken Shamrock and Jens Pulver are big names in MMA, and having them compete on smaller shows against up and coming fighters is good for MMA in general. It gives some name recognition to the smaller shows and may help draw in some casual fans, as well it can help elevate some up and coming fighters and get their names out into the world by defeating these former champions.

If there is an athletic commission did start forcing retirement on fighters then the main problem is what are the guidelines by which this is used? You could use age, but then we would have been robbed of great fights by Randy Couture. We could use number of losses by KO, which would retire Chuck Liddell, but what about other divisions, which do not have knockout fighters that the light heavyweight division does, such as the welterweight division or lightweight division? Matt Hughes went on a downward spiral a couple years ago being completely dominated by GSP and Thiago Alves. While he wasn't viciously knocked out in both fights, he didn't look on the same level as either fighter, and was completely outclassed, should he have been forced into retirement? What if BJ Penn has two more fights at lightweight where his opponents utilize the Frankie Edgar strategy and completely dominate him in every avenue but do not finish him, should he be forced into retirement?

I think what Ken Shamrock and Jens Pulver are doing is just fine, and on Fighting Words with Mike Straka, Ken Shamrock spoke about this topic, stating that he knows he is not going to be fighting the best in the world and he is never going to be considered a top 10 fighter again. But who is he hurting? If people are willing to come out and pay to see him, then he is going to go out and entertain.

Dustin James - FOR: Force those old bastards to retire. No one wants to see them fight anyway. Athletic commissions are here for a reason people, and much like referees, their first priority is protecting the fighters. Athletic commissions have the right to refuse to sanction a fight if they believe it's not a fair fight, so why not just go all the way and let them decide if a fighter is too old to participate in an MMA fight in their state? Sometimes fighters need this kind of thing to protect their health. It's a known fact that taking too many headshots in your lifetime can lead to some serious brain damage. It doesn't matter if you are talking MMA, football, or pro wrestling. These guys are constantly getting their shit rocked and then left to drown in their own drool once they do finally retire only because they physically can't compete anymore.

If Athletic commissions were able to decide if a fighter should retire or not, I really don't think anyone would notice. So what if we will never have the privilege of watching Ken Shamrock get beat down by someone who really SHOULDN'T be beating Ken Shamrock again? If Shamrock wants to have the ability to remember anything he did with his life, and since he won't call it quits personally, perhaps it's better that someone force the guy to hang them up? Of course, none of this would matter if promoters would just stop using guys like Shamrock and Pulver altogether, but promoters are money grubbing whores and we all know that will never happen....

Samer Kadi - AGAINST: In theory, this sounds fine. In reality, the issue is much too complicated, and in the end, it might do more harm than good. For starters, it will be very difficult for the commissions to assess, which fighters should or should not be granted a license. For example, Jens Pulver may have lost a gazillion fights as of late, but rarely has he taken an absolute beating that would make you seriously worried for his health. Most of the times, he either gets caught with a submission early, or gets dropped with a single punch before getting tapped out. Neither scenario is really worrying for his health, and I never get the feeling that Jens Pulver might end up hurting himself. He's getting embarrassed to be sure, but commissions shouldn't deny a fighter his license in fear of him getting "embarrassed".

Conversely, someone like Gary Goodridge should never be allowed to fight. The man has suffered more concussions than I can count and is a disaster waiting to happen. Of course, fighters like him are getting all of their fights abroad, but that only reinforces the problem: Even if American athletic commissions were to deny these fighters their licenses, they will simply cash in by fighting overseas.

Moreover, the commissions would essentially be denying fighters the right to make a living. In a perfect world, fighters would be responsible enough to know when to stop. However, we all know this is seldom the case. However, in most commissions make the necessary medical procedures before and after the fight, and in most cases, it ends up being sufficient. Of course things are different in the bush league organizations, but that is an issue that is unlikely to be rectified anytime soon.

And finally, there simply is no "rule" for not allowing a fighter to compete. Is it age? Win/loss record? Number of times getting knocked out? List of previous injuries (most if which remain unknown)? The commissions can and do occasionally refuse to sanction fights they deem as totally one-sided (I doubt that Shamrock/Rizzo gets sanctioned in the States), but outside of that, there is little to be done.

Larry Csonka - First of all I would like to thank the knights of the 411 roundtable for their participation in the column's debut. Kuch makes a great point about the age discrimination issue, but I feel that this is only one factor. While we don't want to completely discriminate against age, I do think that it has to become a factor.

Jeffrey's insistence on the taking things on a case-by-case basis is also key. A guy like Randy Couture is honestly competitive still, even at his age, and wouldn't see the scrutiny like a Shamrock, Pulver or even Liddell could.

Solomon's question, "As long as their health is not in any more danger than it normally would, why should commissions have the power to tell certain fighters they cannot earn a living?" is another great point. None of us want to stop these men from earning a living, but I also think that we want to protect the men that have built the sport and have made us fans.

Bill asks who these men are hurting, and that is the point, they are hurting themselves. Some of these guys either do not known when or cannot stop, like the pro wrestlers that hang on too long because they didn't save or just cannot do anything else with their life.

Dustin comes off a bit harsh, but the sentiment of protecting the fighters since they essentially won't is something I agree with.

Samer discusses Gary Goodridge and concussions, which is something that I think the MMA world really needs to look into and test a little more for. While not everyone gets knocked completely out, there is undeniable head trauma in MMA, and that could lead to bad things as we have seen in the NFL, pro wrestling, ect.

In the end, I am FOR this initiative. While I do not want to stop people from finding work, and with shows in Japan, Australia and other places without sanctioning there will be places to fight, I feel that the US Commissions should scrutinize more. Maybe not full out "sanctioned or forced" retirement, but when a Ken Shamrock or a Jens Pulver pops up for approval, they should only be sanctioned against guys like Kimbo Slice, Bo Cantrell or Tank Abbot. If they won't worry about their well being and safety, the commissions have too.


AND NOW WE FEAST…ON TWITTER



Your heart is free. Have the courage to follow it…TO CSONKA'S TWITTER!

http://www.twitter.com/411wrestling
http://www.twitter.com/411moviestv
http://www.twitter.com/411music
http://www.twitter.com/411games
http://www.twitter.com/411mma