|
Navigation
|
 |
Article Navigation:
Want to write?
We're always looking for new writers and people willing to help out with the magazine and site. If you're interested, [Click here for more info]. |
|
Stay Updated!
If you'd like to stay updated and recieve a notice when the next issue of is released, just sign up at our forums by [Clicking here]. We will send out a mass e-mail to all our members when the next issue is released. |
|
Your Comments
Let us know how you feel about this issue. We will read e-mail sent and would appreciate any comments and/or suggestions that you may have. [Click here]. |
|
|
|
 |
MMA: Selling the Sport and Refining the Image
by Justin Hardjowirogo
"Note: This article is a follow-up to the Article, "MMA: Growing Pains of a Rebel Child", which appeared in issue #5 of Ironlife."
The fledgling game of Mixed-Martial Arts (MMA) has apparently reached something of an impasse with respect to where it is going, and how it is growing. While promoters  both small and large grapple with different methods to sell the game to larger audiences, they must be aware that the game and its image are constantly at stake in these critical times. Yes, the sport is bigger than ever, and has a solid enough (albeit slightly esoteric) following. The Mixed Martial Arts game has flourished in Japan, but it has yet to really catch fire in North America. It's no simple dilemma, but some practices that apparently do occur commonly, and some of them, very explicitly, may be souring what the "mainstream" views as MMA. While the game is rather large in Japan, some of the practices with respect to how the game is promoted, and what aspects are promoted, must be examined. Would "works" (fights with pre-determined outcomes) or the presence of pro-wrestlers, for example, widen the MMA audience in North America? While such practices are pretty much accepted in Japanese MMA, they have not taken hold in America. Would such tactics even work in North American MMA? If not, then what would? Maybe these questions cannot be answered, and perhaps you may even view them as unimportant. What is, however, important, is that the game can be bigger than it currently is in North America, and image, in all likelihood, has much to do with it.
Before even getting into any depth regarding the image of the MMA game, let me state, that while I do compare the state of MMA in Japan to that in America, I do realize that we are dealing with two distinct cultural bases, and as a result two different methods of selling an image. What is essentially the same is the actual sport itself. While the rules do vary (which in and of itself is a problem), the level of technique and ring-conduct are essentially the same in Japanese and North American MMA. The images of MMA in Japan and North America are far different. How can the same sport be so big in Japan, and so small in North America? In the sense of going mainstream, there may be no simple equations for American MMA. Still, the dilemma, as always, is worth a look.
In examining the combat sport that is quite well followed in North America, one would see that boxing is not only bigger in a monetary and audience sense than MMA, but it enjoys mainstream coverage. Is the game better than MMA? Is its image any cleaner? I would suggest that the answer to both those questions is a resounding NO. The reality is that even though boxing enjoys something of a mainstream acceptance as a sport, it is viewed, in a sense, as almost a black sheep of pro sports due to the presence of crooked promoters, back-room dealings, and slanted judging, among other things. Ok, ok. By that criticism, almost any sport could deserve criticism as "dirty", from figure skating to pro football. But really, no sport owns the reputation of being so filled with, well, villainy, as boxing. MMA may be following in that route.
"Works" or fights with pre-determined outcomes, are reputed to be something of an accepted practice in MMA (at least in Japan). The debate does rage on, but the fact that it does, and quite constantly, is indication enough that works are likely happening more frequently than is good for the sport.  When a fighter chooses to do a work, it is often a decision that is financial. The scenario is not so remote. A fighter may be asked to take a dive for another fighter who, perhaps, costs more, is more popular, is a "national hero", or even a combination of those things. So what's the problem? Well, in simple terms, it hurts the integrity of the game, in that real competition is the essence of any sport. You can seldom do anything about crooked (or incompetent) judging, but works should not be a part of any game that wants to be taken seriously as a sport. Still, these things happen. In a special issue of "Martial Arts legends" magazine, way back in 2000, in an interview by Stephen Quadros, Maurice Smith was quoted as saying that, " There are fixed fights in the business. There has been and always will be. It's a business…if somebody were to ask me to do it and the money was right, sure I'd do it. I've proven myself as a fighter and it's all about making money in the end." While I may be inclined to agree with the part in Smith's comment about having proven himself in the ring, the entire statement begs the question of whether having a nonchalant attitude about works hurts the image of MMA. What fan, or what commission, sanctioning body, or network, will be willing to buy or sell a sport where the competitors themselves accept pre-determined outcomes? That is not sports-like at all.
It doesn't have to be that way. Right now, perhaps fortunately (in a twisted way) the game is small enough that the monetary stakes are not gargantuan enough that works and corruption are rampant in the sport. But the issue remains. The "gatekeepers" of the sport, those with clout, must decide if helping the sport grow in integrity first and foremost, as opposed to caring first about live gates, sponsorship, merchandising deals, and par-per-view revenue, is what will ultimately matter. It's a question of whether money is loved more than the game, or not. I'm not naïve. I realize that any sport has the room and potential for some corruption, and that those directly involved in the sport, particularly the fighters themselves, would like nothing more to enjoy salaries that are on par with pro athletes in major sports. In an issue of "Grappling" magazine, in 1997, Ken Shamrock was already ruminating about this. "Some of these guys go in and fight for a thousand dollars…It's much tougher than boxing or football or anything of that nature. It's a tough sport, mentally and physically." Nobody can dispute the "work ethic" of MMA athletes. However, raising the acceptance, and later, the stakes of the game, will not be easy. There will be a price for that. And if the game becomes filled with works, pro wrestlers, and other "gimmicks", the game may not last long enough to be ever taken seriously. The mainstream, whether we like it or not, must be tapped if MMA is to ever grow in financial terms. Works, despite the potential damage they can cause, are small problems with respect to MMA's image when compared to the selling of the sport as being grudge-filled, sex-drenched (see most ring girls) and rage-fuelled. Those problems, arguably, are bigger in North America than in Japan. What that means, in essence, is that the sport's image has to be refined. For a fighting sport, admittedly, that may be hard. Violence does sell, but it's a harder sell in such a blatant form as hand-to-hand combat. Having no organizational unification in terms of rules, championships, and even rings in MMA, makes it that much more difficult for the "dream" to be realized.
Having said all this, I do realize that my perspective as a North American viewer/sports fan, more than likely varies from the views in Japan, where MMA is quite huge. The Japanese fans, judging by the packed stadiums, don't apparently mind the presence of pro wrestlers, or even works (yes, I know, many are myths). Will the game survive only in Japan, where it is thriving? If the current state of the game in Japan is the pinnacle of MMA, I dare suggest, that it's sad. Don't get me wrong; Pride, Inoki, K-1, and Pancrase have entertained us with some legitimate, exciting, and truly grand competitions. But allowing MMA to include all of the shady and sideshow flavouring that works, pro wrestlers and other "selling tactics" almost inevitably drag along with them will likely have the effect of leaving the game with a non-sport-like image. In the American MMA landscape, works and pro wrestlers are not problems. The lacks of organizational and regulatory unity, and the frequent attempts to sell events with "WWE-like" overtones, do present problems. The image of disunity, perhaps above the image of violence and sex, may ultimately hurt the sport more than anything. It all goes back to perception. What image of the sport of MMA do we want to sell? While we would all love to see MMA competitors get compensated well for their endeavours, we must accept that if the game can't sell itself for what it is (or could be) then it may not be anything more than a fad, or an underground culture. And those poor fighters that Ken Shamrock spoke about may never get more than that thousand dollars.
* Article by Justin Hardjowirogo.
* Back to This Issue's Frontpage
|
|
|
