Grapplemonkey.com

The Cage vs. The Ring

Time for another think-out-loud fest by yours truly. Let’s get down to some MMA nerdery, shall we?

Rami Genauer (MMAWeekly.com) has written the first of a series of articles about the often controversial issue of safety in MMA.

Genauer’s first article tackles the question of whether the cage is safer than a ring. In it, he argues that the cage, with it’s superior containing ability, is safer when it comes to a sport where the action can occur standing or on the ground. With a ring, there is a higher probability that fighters can fall out and be seriously injured. So logically, the cage is the safer choice. The dillemma lies in the fact that to the general public, the use of a cage crosses the line between sport and brutality. They’d rather see a ring.

Genauer says that it’s more of a semantic and ideological issue more than anything else. The idea of putting two men in a “cage” is something that is generally not acceptible. Cages are for rabid animals. If it’s an Octagon™ or a ring, that’s a different story. The argument Genauer lays down is that these are all containment methods, it’s just a matter of choosing the safest one, right? Or is it choosing the one that appeals most to general society?

Here’s my deal. There has to be a line we draw on how “civilized” we want to make something that is inherently uncivilized. Fighting is brutal. Of course it shouldn’t be life-threatening, but to package and distill it into something that a suburban housewife finds digestible is something that’s equally unacceptable. I like that MMA is brutal. I like that we have an avenue to exhibit such an honest, raw form of human interaction. In our 9-5 commerce-driven lives, it’s an escape that many of us can appreciate.

Yes, we do need the support of the general public, but we simply can’t completely rationalize out the danger in MMA. It’s just not possible. We can improve it to a point, but beyond that we compromise the combat aspect of combat sports. Based on its recent history, I think MMA is on a non-stop ride to (almost)mainstream and society will simply have to come to terms with it. Hopefully it’s society that does the bending and not MMA.


*

3 Comments

  • SamScaff said

    What a useless post. There is absolutely no real analysis of the issue. And I thought I was actually going to read something in-depth and thought provoking. My mistake.

  • themonkey said

    OK so maybe the headline could’ve been clearer that my comparison would be in the context of safety. Maybe I’ll write more about the fight-related aspects of the ring and cage at some point…or you could just go to Sherdog and read the bazillion posts on the topic.

  • Chuckmonster said

    Cage vs. Ring - who cares. Discussing this to any degree more deeply than is here is like reviewing how a car drives based on whether or not it has whitewall tires.

    Yeah the fence has psychological connotations - once the gate is closed it becomes more like a cock fight. Two go in, one comes out. With the loose boundaries of a ring, the opportunity for escape and interloping by nefarious heels and managers is available… its purely psychological.

    Stand up fighting seems more appropriate for the ring, grappling seems hindered by the ring. I’d rather have the fight continue un-interrupted than to have a ref stand em up and move em to the center then sit em down again. It ruins the whole flow of the fight… from this fan’s persepective.

    Get rid of the ring.

Comments RSS | TrackBack URI



Leave a comment



Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial 3.0 Unported License.
Powered by WordPress