# Ken Talks Stoppage



## Andrew Green (Jul 21, 2006)

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]When InsideFighting spoke with Ken Shamrock before his July 8th rematch with Tito Ortiz, "The Worlds Most Dangerous Man" expressed disappointment with his portrayal on The Ultimate Fighter season three, but relish that during the upcoming fight, there would be no one that could edit what happened inside the ring between him and Ortiz. 

But after losing quickly to Ortiz by controversial TKO stoppage called by referee Herb Dean, Shamrock now feels he was mistaken. 

"I guess I was wrong about my statement that no one could take away our abilities to settle things ourselves" says Shamrock. "I didnt think that type of stoppage could be possible in this kind of fight. I thought we would beat each other up and it would come down to who had the biggest heart and the better fight. But the referee didnt allow us to fight. He took it away from the fans, from me and from Tito. He took away a fight that could have been one of the most exciting ever."

http://www.insidefighting.com/betweenRoundsDisp.aspx?uid=3071[/FONT]


----------



## Brian R. VanCise (Jul 21, 2006)

I really do not think it was stopped way to early, or only early enough to prevent Ken from a hospital trip.  
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





  Really, I just hope that Shamrock decides that it is time to retire.  The last three or four fights he has been involved with that I have watched have all been very, very disapointing.

Having said that, he is still one of the first guys that started the mma craze and will be remembered in a good light by me no matter what.
(Here is hoping that he retires)

Brian R. VanCise
www.instinctiveresponsetraining.com


----------



## tshadowchaser (Jul 21, 2006)

Brain has said it correctly

Ken would not have got up from what i was seeing in that fight and I think the ref was looking out for ken's health

I agree that Ken has put on some poor preformances in his last few fights and maybe he should go back and look at the film then retire


----------



## Lisa (Jul 21, 2006)

I saw no way of Ken coming out of Tito elbowing him into la la land and the referee did what he was suppose to do, keep the fighters safe.

That being said however, I suppose if I were Ken I would want my last fight (if I was considering retirement) to be an all out brawl and win or lose to have no contraversy behind it.  I am thinking he would have liked to go out like Randy did, with dignity.  Nothing wrong with that.


----------



## gillpad (Jul 21, 2006)

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif] 
The major problem here is that at the point the ref stopped this fight, SHamerock was not fighting.  Of course he was dissapointed in the stoppage, but just as he should have stopped shooting his mouth off several years ago, he should have stopped imagining that he was capable of fighting guys like Tito,  Part of being a man is to realize when you aren't physically as capable as you once were; its just a reality that you have to face up too.  Shamerock can't accept it, as obvious as it is.  Had that fight continued, Tito would have beat him senseless; Shame was not defending himself, and against Tito's elbows, he very shortly would have been a bloody, comatose mess.  
Shame might even want a rematch, that's how ridiculous he is.  He's not even close to being able to fight Tito, and time will only be his enemy.  I guess the big question SHamerock should ask himself is just how utterly humiliated does he want to be?  (!)

http://www.insidefighting.com/betweenRoundsDisp.aspx?uid=3071[/FONT][/quote]


----------



## MMAfighter (Jul 22, 2006)

Ya know, next time just let tito drop another 10 elbows so Shamrock will shut up


----------



## bobster_ice (Jul 22, 2006)

If Shamrock was as fit as he used to be, he would clearly kick Ortiz` ***.


----------



## Cruentus (Jul 24, 2006)

bobster_ice said:
			
		

> If Shamrock was as fit as he used to be, he would clearly kick Ortiz` ***.


 
I disagree. Fighters of todays NHB sport are far more sophisticated then the hero's of the mid-90's; for throwbacks like Shamrock, their training needs to be cutting edge, or these folks are looking to get destroyed. Case in point: Gracie vs. Hughes. Mr. Ortiz is hands down a better fighter today then Shamrock ever was.

And....I still think the fight was stopped too early even if that wouldn't have changed the outcome.


----------



## matt.m (Jul 24, 2006)

I think the fight was called too early, however maybe the ref was looking out for Kenny's well being.  I agree with the retirement bit as well.  He should hang up the gloves and call it a day.  He and Gracie, among others will be remembered as the great pioneers.

In 2000, Kurt Angle was asked how he would do against the heavy weight hopeful.  His words were "I am not in the type of training or shape I would need to be in to hang out with him."

I myself have a slegh of gold medals from greco wrestling and judo randori.  However, even if I didn't have two leg braces, I know if I competed at the same level again I would get killed.  

I quit wrestling and randori competition while in the Marine Corps almost 10 years ago.  I know I would be very hard pressed to beat the 18-25 year olds.  It just wouldn't happen.  Go the distance maybe, get a clear cut victory.....hmmmm I don't think so.


----------



## gillpad (Jul 24, 2006)

I'm not really comprehending why anyone would think the Shamrock fight was stopped too early.  This isn't some backalley fight, where blood rules and the 'only the fighters' determine the outcome. It was more than obvious that Ken was not defending himself under the barrage of Tito's elbows; waiting longer would have only caused damage, and who knows to what extent:  and it is this very situation that refs are in the ring for, above all else -- to protect the fighters when they no longer can do so themselves.  Sure, the ultimate contest of manliness would have been to allow the fight to continue, but all that would have done was shown what anyone could easily imagine:  Ken getting knocked senseless, perhaps seriously injured, until his unconscious condition proved beyond any doubt that he really was unable to defend himself.  
Knowing when you cannot compete with younger fighters is part of moving on.  And honestly, no matter what you do, and no matter how much you train, you aren't going to do it.  I have pretty  much wrestled all of my life (I'm 50) and I have 2 sons who wrestle -- both very well.  One is a div.l NCAA All American true freshman who is my size and weight -- and if I need any proof of where I am at, all I need to do is work out with him for about a minute.  No matter how much I learn, or how hard I train, I could not compete with him for even a minute.  This is kind of what I am seeing (only not as bad!!) when I see Ken try and fight Tito.  There's a huge difference -- induced by age!!, that cannot, and will not, be overcome.  Ken cannot will it to happen, or workout enuf to balance the scales.  The evidence is in the short lived fight with Tito. 
Perhaps hardcore fighters would like to see a more natural ending to fights like this, without artificial referee interference.  But there really isn't any place in the civilized world for that sort of barbarity, and most certainly outside the hardcore circle of 'fight to the natural ending' advocates, referees stopping slaughters will always be the preferred ending.


----------



## crushing (Jul 24, 2006)

gillpad said:
			
		

> I'm not really comprehending why anyone would think the Shamrock fight was stopped too early.  This isn't some backalley fight, where blood rules and the 'only the fighters' determine the outcome. It was more than obvious that Ken was not defending himself under the barrage of Tito's elbows; waiting longer *would have only caused damage*, and who knows to what extent:



Would have only caused damage?  Maybe that's where people have the problem with this fight ending so quickly.  There didn't seem to be any damage inflicted on Ken.  Usually when a fighter loses a fight, there is some sort of damage.  Ken popped right up off the floor when the fight was called and looked nearly every bit as fresh as when he entered the ring.  Sure Tito looked like he was striking fast and furious, and I thought initially the ref should step from the first camera angle, but upon further review (to which the ref doesn't have the luxury), only the first couple elbows were very solid hits.  The follow up short quick elbows certainly looked impressive (impressive enought to get the fight stopped), but they were doing much damage.


----------



## Cruentus (Jul 25, 2006)

It's no different then boxing.

You don't stop the fight because a fighter is getting punched a lot because his defense is inadequete and he is losing. You stop the fight when the fighter is beaten to a point where he isn't able to fight back or defend himself. 

Ken was clearly outskilled and outclassed. Ken was not defending himself adequetly, BUT he was still physically capable to do so. So this means that the fight was stopped too early. This was a bad judgement call by the ref.

I think the facts and logic is pretty plain and simple here.


----------



## chris_&#3617;&#3623;&#3618;&#3652;&#3607;&#3618; (Jul 25, 2006)

i think shamrock couldnt have carried on because he was not defencding himself against those elbows , if the referee didnt stop the match ortiz would have knocked him out , as you can clearly see after the match when shamrock is complaining he is obviously dazed , and i think the whole argument should stop there , atualy i dont , its a fun argument lol


----------



## gillpad (Jul 25, 2006)

Tulisan said:
			
		

> It's no different then boxing.
> 
> You don't stop the fight because a fighter is getting punched a lot because his defense is inadequete and he is losing. You stop the fight when the fighter is beaten to a point where he isn't able to fight back or defend himself.
> 
> ...


 
Ok, I guess if you are going to talk about 'facts and logic being pretty plain and simple', you might use 'are' rather than 'is' -- sort of a basic rule of grammar.    That being said, the facts aren't obvious, or we wouldn't be having so much discussion about it, and there is no logic to speak of.  The only logic might have been in the ref's decision to halt the match.  So what if Ken jumped up and argued right after the stoppage?  How was the ref to know he would or could do that?  Its not a guessing game, and this also isn't boxing, where thicker, padded gloves help to shield a head -- Tito's elbows, you may have noticed, were not padded, and they hurt quite a bit more than most punches.


----------



## Cruentus (Jul 25, 2006)

gillpad said:
			
		

> Ok, I guess if you are going to talk about 'facts and logic being pretty plain and simple', you might use 'are' rather than 'is' -- sort of a basic rule of grammar. That being said, the facts aren't obvious, or we wouldn't be having so much discussion about it, and there is no logic to speak of. The only logic might have been in the ref's decision to halt the match. So what if Ken jumped up and argued right after the stoppage? How was the ref to know he would or could do that? Its not a guessing game, and this also isn't boxing, where thicker, padded gloves help to shield a head -- Tito's elbows, you may have noticed, were not padded, and they hurt quite a bit more than most punches.


 
Ah Yes....

You know, correcting someone's grammar on an Internet forum screams of insecurities, as does sad attempts to insult the intelligence of other posters of who you disagree.

It's kind of silly to have so much invested in this argument that it becomes O.K. to be insulting, wouldn't you say?

That said, sorry to break it to you and others, but it is pretty logical to say that the fight was stopped a bit too early.

First of all, one might want to review the litany of rules that UFC competitors must abide by, and realize that this is a sporting contest, not an unregulated blood bath:

http://www.ufc.com/index.cfm?fa=LearnUFC.Rules 

There are many things in place that prevent fighters from getting permanently injured. Some actually say that one is less likely to get _Boxers Syndrome _(for those not familiar, click here: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=3895196&dopt=Abstract ) from UFC type fighting then from actually boxing. The argument is that the larger gloves allow for contestants to withstand repeated head trauma that would otherwise end the fight, and it is the cumulative effect that causes the damage. Some would argue on many levels, that UFC is safer then boxing. I am not in agreement or disagreement because I don't believe the evidence is conclusive yet; I only know anecdotally that NHB fighting was more taxing on my body then boxing/kickboxing was. But none-the-less, the arguements are there.

My point is, the boxing analogy holds true because both boxing and UFC are legally sanctioned sporting contests that are both dangerous by their own rights. And in such sporting contests, the general consensus on criteria for stoppage is that the fighter should be physically unable to defend himself for a stoppage to occur. Not "Gosh... it might be dangerous if he gets elbowed to the face again" or "someone might get hurt."

If the general consensus for fight stoppage (same in boxing as in NHB, btw) doesn't hold true, then why let fighters fight at all? I hear that MTV has a new contest on TV where people do a bunch of physical skills like rock climbing and point sparring to see who is the better martial artist...we can just have PPV's for that and forget about all this sports fighting nonsense, right?  

I think my point is clear. What wasn't clear was Ken Shamrocks apparent "inability" to defend himself; and that is why the stoppage was too early.

You and everyone else can disagree with me, and that is fine; I won't attempt to insult you for it. But understand that you are not thinking like a professional fighter when you do, which is what these guys are. None of these guys want a fight stopped because they are simply not winning or because they "might" get hurt. They go into these contests with the expectation of hurting someone, or being hurt themselves; getting hurt is part of the game. Plus, no one wants to win or be beaten indecisively. Ortiz would have been glad to continue to pound Shamrock until it was conclusive, and Shamrock would have rather had that happen where he might have had the chance to turn it around rather then to have the match stopped before it was conclusive. This was reflected in both interviews. 

I would guess that most people who would disagree with the above have never been in a sporting contest like that before. So if that is the case, let me fill you in: people who fight competitively don't want to win or lose questionably.

Last but not least on this issue, you are right in saying that the evidence is not clear or we wouldn't be having this discussion. But that points to the notion that the fight was stopped too early as well; if the fight was allowed to continue until Ken could clearly not physically defend himself, then there wouldn't be a discussion. So the mere fact that there is points to the notion that the ref stopped the fight too soon.

But that is just my take on the issue. Feel free to disagree, but just try not to be an insult throwing *** about it if you do....

Paul


----------



## gillpad (Jul 26, 2006)

Tulisan said:
			
		

> Ah Yes....
> 
> _You know, correcting someone's grammar on an Internet forum screams of insecurities, as does sad attempts to insult the intelligence of other posters of who you disagree._
> 
> ...


----------



## Cruentus (Jul 26, 2006)

That's cool. You make some good points and I appreciate your opinion even if I don't agree.


----------



## gillpad (Jul 26, 2006)

Good 'nuf.  I think I'm about to retire from this particular subject anyway!!  Its become a rather strange obsession.....


----------



## Cruentus (Jul 26, 2006)

gillpad said:
			
		

> Good 'nuf. I think I'm about to retire from this particular subject anyway!! Its become a rather strange obsession.....


 
lol... I'm with you there!


----------

