UFC Live: Sanchez vs. Kampmann Parting Shots

If fans still don’t realize that you can’t judge a card’s quality by name value alone, the third UFC Live on Versus event should have taught them that lesson for good. While it didn’t have the star power of a pay-per-view event, it was filled with quality fights from top to bottom, and even the least impressive bouts had their moments (such as whenever Cyrille Diabate ever decided to actually strike his opponent). Here are my thoughts on the event.

Close doesn’t necessarily mean controversial

As I noted before, I was highly disappointed with Joe Rogan’s inciting of fan sentiment both in the arena and among those viewing at home against the judges’ decision in the Diego Sanchez-Martin Kampmann fight. Rogan has long been comfortable with criticizing the performances of ringside officials and referees during his announcing duties, but has recently been more outspoken in his post-fight interviews (which, of course, are heard by all in attendance), as well.

Usually, it’s pretty humorous. In fact, I would gladly pay $10 extra for UFC pay-per-views if they would split the screen to show cameras on the three individual judges’ faces while Rogan is lambasting their decisions after fights. That would be great entertainment, my friends. I’ve often thought, how shitty must it be to be sitting there at ringside, listening to this guy rake you over the coals and encourage the fans to boo you even more lustily than before?

Except that last Thursday, it really wasn’t warranted. MMA fans as a whole are not always as savvy as they could or should be, this being a young sport with a growing fan base and all. Many of them do not seem to understand that not every close fight means that someone is being “screwed over” or that the decision is a bad one. As a mature MMA fan, you need to admit to yourself that some rounds could go either way. Personally, I think the second round of the Sanchez-Kampmann fight was one of those.

Fightmetric’s stats show that the second round was very close, indeed. Sanchez threw just a few more strikes than Kampmann did, and landed just five less. However, he also landed more power shots, and threw 25 more power punches than Kampmann did, as Kampmann focused on jabbing throughout the round. Now, let’s not forget that “aggression” is one of the judging criteria. Then, there’s the punch that wobbled Kampmann briefly. Is it not fair to say that that punch could have swayed a judge or two?

I’m not trying to convince you that Sanchez won. I thought Kampmann won the first two rounds when I watched the fight, personally. What I’m trying to do is illustrate that it was a close round that could have gone either way. This is not the kind of fight that should inspire outrage. Let’s save that for the truly bad decisions that have become more and more commonplace in the sport. By this point, MMA fans should know better, and Joe Rogan should certainly know better. The decision isn’t wrong simply because you don’t agree with it.

Worst of all, this partially-manufactured controversy has overshadowed a brilliant fight that featured gutsy performances from both competitors. It’s just too bad that the story was presented as that of bad judging when it should be more about bad criteria and a poor scoring system that needs to evolve.

Palhares does it again

If you’re not impressed/surprised/intrigued by the fact that Rousimar Palhares’ last three UFC wins have come by way of heel hook, you should be. Check this out: before Palhares’ first UFC win by heel hook at UFC 107, there had been one heel hook submission in the previous forty-three UFC events. Now, there were between 10 and 12 fights on each of those events, placing the percentage of fights ending by heel hooks during that time period in the UFC at about .2%. That percentage would probably hold up pretty well for the entire existence of the UFC, honestly.

In contrast, 42% of Palhares’ UFC fights have ended by a submission via heel hook, and as I said before, his last three wins have come that way. It’s incredible, actually. There is one thing that does help explain the lack of heel hooks in the UFC that immediately comes to mind, and that is that they just aren’t attempted that often. Heel hooks, like most leg locks, require the fighter to sit back and seize their opponent’s leg, giving up their top position on the mat and often leaving them vulnerable to strikes in the process.

Furthermore, they’re just plain hard to do. How many times have you seen a fighter sit back for a leg lock, fiddle around with it for a bit, then just give up? It happens all the time. Combine that with the risk involved and the loss of position, and there isn’t a lot of incentive for most fighters to mess with them in the first place.

Of course, the best explanation is that Palhares is very, very good at them. And that’s scary, because heel hooks are possibly the most dangerous submission in all of MMA, since by the time you feel pain or discomfort, the damage is usually done and you’re nursing a serious knee injury. Even in training, you have to be careful with heel hooks and make sure that you apply them carefully rather thank “cranking” them. Since it’s a completely different matter in a real fight, Palhares’ future opponents had better be prepared to tap quickly if they want to walk out of the cage on their own two feet.

[EDIT: Okay, so I was victimized by Sherdog.com's results on this one. They have the win listed as a heel hook by Palhares, when it was actually via kneebar. Since it was an unaired preliminary bout, I haven't been able to see it yet. Still, even two heel hooks in 7 fights is good for 28.5%, which means you're 142 times more likely to see a heel hook in a Palhares fight than in any other UFC fight.]

Quick Shots

–For all my criticism of Rogan’s handling of the Sanchez-Kampmann decision, he was right on with his analysis of the strange Cyrille Diabate-Steve Cantwell bout. Very rarely do you see a fight that is so one-sided, yet where the victorious fighter shows almost no interest in finishing his opponent. Diabate did look visibly tired near the end of the fight, but he also looked strangely complacent throughout. Did he not know that he could possibly win a nice bonus by knocking Cantwell out? Did he simply not care? Even though he dominated Cantwell, it’s hard to be very impressed with such a lethargic performance.

–Chris Weidman was impressive in his win over Alessio Sakara. I thought Sakara might be crafty enough to outlast the youngster, but it only took one round for Weidman to make the necessary adjustments and start taking it to the UFC veteran. Weidman should be a talent to watch if he can continue to evolve his game past simply using his wrestling talents.

E-Mail Jon Hartley

Tags: Alessio Sakara, Chris Weidman, Cyrille Diabate, Diego Sanchez, Joe Rogan, Martin Kampmann, Rousimar Palhares, Steve Cantwell, UFC, UFC Live: Sanchez vs. Kampmann