Hey Vinny... What rules & ring or cage do you prefer & why???

Hey Vinny.

I was wondering... Could go in depth about what you prefer & why?... (strategically/who has advantages-disadvantages/how they play into your strengths/weakness/etc.?)

1. The Unified Rules vs M-1's vs any other's you fought with???
2. The ring or the cage???

I like unified rules better, I've been in fights where elbows were not allowed that I wished they were.

As for ring or cage... It really depends... I was really enjoying fighting in the ring until I dealt with 2 of my last opponents grabbing the ropes to stop my takedowns. Still, other than the fact that people tend to cheat more in the ring, I felt like in the ring the pace of the fights were faster, so I might like the ring slightly better. As long as I'm not going against guys that are trying to grab the ropes in every takedown attempted by me.... lol

I wish ring was standard in mma. It looks classy and it makes the fights better. The crowd can see the fighters much better, the wrestlers can´t wall and stall and strikers can corner the opponents.

M-1 rules control stalling & LnP much better to me.

M-1 rules say you have to be "working to finish" your opponent. In other words, when on offense in a dominant position,you have to be working for submissions or throwing big enough strike to KO your opponent standing or on the ground. Endless rabbit punches from the guard,head on belly for long periods of time is a no-o by M-1 rules. It might not always be called that way though.

I think forcing a fighter to posture up and throw KO-power-level full shots because they have to be "working to finish" is much more fair to all types of fighters. Submit or KO your opponent was the object of the game of MMA from the beginning. It' getting way far away from that in the UFC or under Unified Rules today.

Wrestlers have a huge advantage when they don't have to be work for submissions or throwing full shots from the top. Simply "keeping busy" pinning a guy down, head on belly throwing tiny rabbit punches that do nothing means the fight is a standstill/stalemate. Having to posture up on top to throw big shots or attempt submissions really levels the playing field for say... BJJ players from their back. Know what I mean.

IMO - M-1 rules give a much more level playing field for all styles of fighters. The ring with out a doubt is more fair cause there is no solid external wall/weapon to pin guys to. They have that when you fight in the alley after the bar let's out. An external object should not be allowed to determine the outcome of a fight.

I think the Unified modified-Boxing Rules need to be reviewed and amended. Coaches and fighter are finding little 'unintended' loopholes in them to take advantage of and the sport is getting away from it's origins and becoming a GAME like cricket or badminton. Yawn.

Unified rules were boxing commission rules that got changed a bit for MMA is a hurry to get the UFC sanctioning in NJ. MMA needs it's own unique rules that are keep up to date to reflect where the sport is currently at. They do that in every other major pro sport.

Yeah, holding ropes happens, specially because the ring is small, but in the cage lots of times guy's try to hold the fence too. Anyway as Vinny said, in the ring it's more fast paced, and that's one of othe reasons ring > octagon IMO.

Are you guys trying to convince a pro fighter who has fought in various rules in a ring and a cage what is best?

total finish wrote:Are you guys trying to convince a pro fighter who has fought in various rules in a ring and a cage what is best?

No, just discussing. What do you think?

total finish wrote:Are you guys trying to convince a pro fighter who has fought in various rules in a ring and a cage what is best?

We're trying to create a discussion, and a pro fighter with experience's here to give us details. It's not that hard to notice that.

I honestly believe MMA was meant to be fought a ring for so many reasons.

I once fought (drunken boxing rules) in a 4-sided cage. I have some videos on a VHS tape which I retrieved on my recent visit to the US, I've been hoping to somehow convert them to digital format and maybe I can post a couple of vids. The technique is really, really, really, really, really bad, but I was undefeated that night . I unfortunately only got tape of about a match and a half though (there was also a wet t-shirt contest, and I have most of the video from that).

Anyway, it makes me wonder how a 4-sided cage would be in MMA. As Vinny says, the grabbing the ropes is a problem. Also, there is the issue of falling out of the ring. There are problems with the cage too however, such as the surface area. Guys can run away from strikers (Kalib Starns--SP--anyone? Also I remember a lot of running in Cro Cop-Kongo, and many other fights).

Great thread though. I agree that the ring looks better, from the fan's perspective. I like the ring, but I see plenty of problems with it. I don't really think a 4-sided cage is going to be instituted, but the fact that I once boxed in one brings it to mind. Great to hear Vinny's views on the matter.

I like the ring better as well, from a fans perspective its easier to see the fighters, as a sport a ring is also classier, from the promoters perspective its cheaper (just use any boxing ring), and its also better because it shows rings man ship better and teaches fighters how to move around (not just run around in circles like in an octagon).

I like both. As I always say, as long as there is variety in the sport I am happy. It's great having MMA in a cage for one promotion and a ring for another.