Month: October 2010

mma

Lightweightpalooza: The 60-something UFC/WEC fighters now joined by merger

Posted on by Beau Dure

In terms of sheer numbers, the lightweight class is certainly UFC’s deepest after the merger with WEC.

The UFC Web site lists 46 lightweights (for comparison: 53 welterweights, 41 middleweights, 35 light heavies and 29 heavyweights). That’s an inexact measure — the site doesn’t always keep up with every roster change — but it gives us a ballpark idea of who’s in the Zuffa umbrella.

The WEC site lists 21 lightweights. (Aside on lower weights: They have 22 featherweights and only 18 bantamweights. Will the UFC bucks and brand name lure more fighters from overseas? The rankings suggest they have plenty of room to grow at featherweight, with only five of the top 11 currently with WEC, but the bantamweight pool isn’t as deep.)

So if no one is dropped, the UFC will have 67 lightweights. Make it 68, with Marcus Davis dropping down from 170.

With the help of Sherdog’s trusty Fight Finder, I’ve tried to compile everyone’s resumes. Please do speak up if I’ve made a mistake in transcribing or otherwise made a mess of things. I’ve only taken fighters listed on the UFC and WEC sites, though there may be a couple of fighters who are in contract limbo and could bounce back in at any moment.

Rankings, of course, are from the USA TODAY/SB Nation consensus calculation.

CHAMPION

Frankie Edgar: 13-1 overall, 8-1 UFC. Wins over Penn (2), Sherk, Griffin. Loss to Maynard, his next opponent.

RANKED

2. BJ Penn: 15-7-1, 11-6-1 UFC. Had won five straight (incl. Stevenson, Sherk, Florian, Sanchez) at LW before losing twice to Edgar. Last four losses before Edgar had been at 170 or higher. Next fight at 170 vs. Matt Hughes.

Continue reading →

0
soccer

Colorado 1-0 Columbus: Squander, squander, squander

Posted on by Beau Dure

From the 10th minute to the 75th, the Colorado Rapids dominated the Columbus Crew, racking up double digits in shots. Funny thing, though — they only put a couple of those shots on frame, never seriously testing backup Columbus keeper Andy Gruenebaum aside from the well-taken goal, which left Gruenebaum with no chance.

Random thoughts:

– Crew sub Kevin Burns nearly earned himself quite a bit of play on SportsCenter tomorrow with a looping header from outside the box that clanged off the right post.

– Burns’ shot was one of three great chances for the Crew, all in the second half. Andy Iro pounded a shot off a corner kick right at Matt Pickens, and Guillermo Barros Schelotto put one well over the net.

– Colorado had three forwards on the bench, a testament to their offensive depth, but Mac Kandji was clearly the wrong call. He didn’t have the defensive poise he needed.

– The Crew defense had all sorts of problems. Frankie Hejduk misplayed several balls. Iro struggled with Omar Cummings, who undid the defense with a diagonal run into space where rookie Shaun Francis probably should’ve been.

– Colorado’s dominance came from the midfield, where Mastroeni and Jeff Larentowicz ran over Brian Carroll and a rotation of Eddie Gaven and Emmanuel Ekpo in the center. Carroll committed what you might call a frustration foul, sliding very hard into Cummings.

Second-leg projection: It’s 50-50. After the final 20 minutes, Columbus has the momentum. The game is in Columbus. Colorado counters with a one-goal advantage and the best defense of all — a strong offense.

0
mma

‘The Ultimate Fighter,’ Season 12, Episode 7: Kos gets a break, or three

Posted on by Beau Dure

[poll id=”4″]Dane Sayers, the last draft pick, reminds us that he’s part Native American. GSP and his fellow coaches have embraced his desire to show some Native American pride. GSP often calls him “Red Horse,” which Sayers says is his Indian name. Jean Charles Skarbowsky says Sayers is the real American, not Koscheck. “Koscheck didn’t ask his permission to come here.”

But Red Horse is clearly the underdog against Sako “Psycho” Chivitchian, and Dana White knows it.

“He knows Dane isn’t at the same level as most of these guys,” Dana says. GSP says they wanted Sayers to go last so they’d have more time to work with him.

But first, we see the jockeying for the “wild card” slot that demonstrates a couple of the problems with the format. Spencer Paige is the only GSP fighter to lose so far, and he’ll be in a cast for three months. Jeff Lentz says Aaron “English” Wilkinson, the only Koscheck fighter to suffer a controversial loss, is also injured.

The producers don’t follow up on that, but we see a tiff between Lentz and Wilkinson. The Englishman scoffs at Lentz’s drinking and tobacco-chewing: “I don’t think he fits the criteria,” Wilkinson says.

Continue reading →

2
medal projections, olympic sports

2012 medal projections: Archery sweep is South Korea’s aim

Posted on by Beau Dure

You’ve seen the political projections. Now let’s get to the ones that matter.

The Olympics happen every four years. (Think of the Winter Games as the midterms.) The competition is a little more honest than the typical U.S. election, and you don’t have to sit through insulting political ads.

We’re going to go sport-by-sport through the Olympics and project winners in London. We’ll base it on past results. Like FiveThirtyEight.com, we’ll be able to update our projections based on recent data. In our case, though, that’ll be actual competition such as World Cups and World Championships, not polls. Another advantage we’ll have over FiveThirtyEight.com — less math.

Let’s get right to it with an event NBC probably won’t feature in great detail:

ARCHERY

First rule upon checking results: Ignore compound bows. Nothing personal, but they’re not in the Olympics. Seems a shame for the USA, because Americans tend to do pretty well with the high-tech stuff. What we’re dealing with here is the more traditional “recurve” bow.

Women’s individual: South Korean dominance ran into home advantage in Beijing, as China’s Zhang Juanjuan won gold ahead of 2004 champion Park Sung-Hyun. That ended a streak of six straight golds for South Korea, but the 2010 World Cup results give little sign that South Korea is going away. Four of the top six women in the rankings were South Korean, led by Ki Bo Bae in first and World Cup final champion Yun Ok-Hee in fourth. India has an outside shot with two contenders — Deepika Kumari and Dola Banerjee. Poland’s Justyna Mospinek is the best spoiler.

2008: Zhang Juanjuan (China), Park Sung-Hyun (South Korea), Yun Ok-Hee (South Korea).

Projection: South Korea, South Korea, India.

Top Americans: Khatuna Lorig (18th in World Cup), Jennifer Nichols (17th in world ranking)

Women’s team: South Korea could probably enter two teams and win medals here if the IOC allowed it. They’ve won all six women’s team events in modern Olympic history. India gets the edge for silver based on World Cup results. Bronze is wide open — 2008 silver medalist China, bronze medalist France, rankings-round runner-up Great Britain and Italy are among the contenders. We’d go with the hosts if their world ranking were any higher than 16th. Instead, we’ll take second-ranked China.

2008: South Korea, China, France.

Projection: South Korea, India, China.

Men’s individual: The USA has a decent shot, with ageless Vic Wunderle (silver, 2000) still going and Brady Ellison taking the World Cup prize in 2010. South Korea is deep, with three straight team golds. Italy has a good track record in the team event and a couple of top performers in the World Cup. But outsiders are a threat in this event — Mexico’s Juan Rene Serrano won the Beijing ranking round before finishing fourth in the knockout phase, and Ukraine’s Viktor Ruban squeaked through to gold past South Korea’s Park Kyung-Mo.

2008: Viktor Ruban (Ukraine), Park Kyung-Mo (South Korea), Bair Badenov (Russia).

Projection: USA, South Korea, Italy.

 

Top Americans: Ellison, Wunderle.

Men’s team: In Beijing, China made a stunning run from 12th in the ranking round to take bronze. We’ll chalk that up to home advantage and focus on the South Korea-Italy tandem frequently on top here. Bronze is open, with Ukraine getting the nod on current World Cup rankings and Ruban’s medal experience (2004 team bronze in addition to 2008 individual gold).

2008: South Korea, Italy, China.

Projection: South Korea, Italy, Ukraine.

TOTAL PROJECTION (Gold-silver-bronze, 2008 gold-silver-bronze, total change):
– South Korea: 5 medals (3-2-0, 2-2-1, no change)
– India: 2 medals (0-1-1, 0-0-0, +2)
– Italy: 2 medals (0-1-1, 0-1-0, +1)
– USA: 1 medal (1-0-0, 0-0-0, +1)
– China: 1 medal (0-0-1, 1-1-1, -2)
– Ukraine: 1 medal (0-0-1, 1-0-0, no change)
– Russia: 0 medals (-1)
– France: 0 medals (-1)

BIG EVENTS:
– World championships: July 2-10, Torino

1
mma

The actual cause for concern beneath the Brock Lesnar panic

Posted on by Beau Dure

In a whirlwind of a heavyweight title fight Saturday night, Cain Velasquez wrested the UFC heavyweight belt away from Brock Lesnar. No controversies in this one — Lesnar was gracious in defeat, and referee Herb Dean stopped it at exactly the right time.

The reaction: Lesnar’s wrestling isn’t enough for him to succeed, the era of the colossal heavyweight might be over, Lesnar might not have a “fighter’s heart” and Dana White has to be fretting about business with his big-time draw defeated. And that’s just at Bloody Elbow, a reasonable MMA blog (and a great partner for USA TODAY). Somewhere in that mix, we even saw an argument that Lesnar might turn around and go back to pro wrestling.

The question about Lesnar’s heart comes from designated provocateur Jonathan Snowden and seems a little harsh after Lesnar’s twin comebacks from diverticulitis and the first-round battering he took from Shane Carwin. The questions about how his skills can and will match up with other talented heavyweights will be intriguing for a couple of years to come — if he isn’t slowed by age and whatever toll pro wrestling and illness took on his body.

The question about Lesnar going back to pro wrestling is a by-product of The Undertaker showing up and saying something to Lesnar, which seems the work of a desperate entertainment company or a desperate man. From my conversation with Lesnar in the weeks leading up to the fight, I think he’s very happy with his lifestyle and has no interest in going back to anything else. He wants to train in his private gym in Minnesota. He’s tired of talking and won’t want a scriptwriter putting words in his mouth.

So that leaves the question of the impact of Lesnar’s loss on the UFC, which Bloody Elbow’s Kid Nate rounds up as a short-term loss and long-term potential gain.

This much we can say with confidence: The UFC was building up pretty well before Brock Lesnar’s emergence. And only in his last two fights has Lesnar been asked to carry a card with little help. He first fought for the title against Randy Couture, a huge figure in UFC history making his return to the Octagon. He defended/unified the title on a star-studded UFC 100 card. Only in his comeback bout against Carwin and Saturday’s bout against Velasquez was he THE guy — and in the Spanish-speaking media, Velasquez was the guy.

So UFC naysayers can put the gloating to rest. This isn’t EliteXC screaming in terror as Kimbo Slice tumbles or Strikeforce trying to salvage the Fedor relationship and aura.

But there’s an underlying issue. Technically two, and one possible solution covers both of them.

Issue 1: The fighters who ruled the UFC as it went through explosive growth are starting to fade. That includes older stalwarts such as Chuck Liddell, Randy Couture, Matt Hughes and Tito Ortiz. It includes BJ Penn, shockingly dethroned as lightweight champion by lower-profile Frankie Edgar, and Anderson Silva, who is still middleweight champion but saves his explosiveness for brief forays at light heavyweight. Stretch a few years into this growth period, and it includes Lesnar, who hasn’t faded but isn’t quite as invincible as he once seemed. The exception is Georges St. Pierre, who has his critics after failing to finish a couple of opponents.

Issue 2: The UFC has been stretching its marquee fighters through an increasingly busy schedule of “numbered” events — 13 in 2009, 15 in 2009, 17 in 2010. That has led to a few pay-per-view cards with main events or co-main events featuring fighters who might be well-known to the devoted fan but not so much to the recent converts that UFC needs to keep those buy rates and ticket sales up. The UFC is getting by with good numbers, but the unrest among fans who don’t want to pay for all these cards is palpable. (Particularly if you’ve ever hosted a live chat.)

How can you make the fans happier while building more marquee names? One possibility: more fights on free TV. More “Fight Nights” and cards on Versus, which is nice for those of us who are a little too old and married for the Spike demographic.

The UFC Primetime shows, featuring up-close-and-personal looks at the fighters, can only do so much to build them up. When you have someone unpredictable like BJ Penn, it works. For Lesnar and Velasquez, it didn’t. TV producers can only do so much to push the “hard-working private Midwestern guy vs. hard-working Mexican-American guy” angle. Through three episodes, we saw more farmland than we’d see in a six-hour John Mellencamp video retrospective.

Free TV may not always be big business — for some reason, casual MMA fans have yet to realize how entertaining WEC cards can be, even without Urijah Faber — but they can help build these guys up. We can meet someone on The Ultimate Fighter and watch him progress to pay-per-view.

The problem isn’t that the UFC is doing too many pay-per-views. But as they build worldwide, they’ll need to do so with a mix of pay and free TV. Without The Ultimate Fighter and the exposure to casual fans, would the UFC be anywhere near the status it enjoys today?

Lesnar isn’t the problem. His next fight should draw some interest, and a possible championship comeback would be huge. Yet he shows why the UFC has been wise never to put all its eggs in a couple of baskets. And the emergence of relatively unknown champions such as Edgar and Velasquez shows why we need more time to meet these guys.

1
mma

‘The Ultimate Fighter,’ Season 12, Episode 6: Choke! Choke!

Posted on by Beau Dure

Tonight, we’ll learn the rest of the opening-round matchups. We have two fights, which will leave just two guys remaining to face off next week.

But before we get to that, we have to watch Team Koscheck acting like a bunch of NFL wide receivers dancing after that fourth-quarter TD pass with their team down 31-7.

First, Koscheck tries to tell Michael Johnson he shouldn’t have won his fight. Johnson says the MMA equivalent of “scoreboard.”

The much-ballyhooed “Team Koscheck goes too far” shenanigans don’t start until Koscheck shows up at the house and wanders out to the balcony to continue feuding with Johnson. For some reason — and maybe USA TODAY will be able to ask about this — mature veteran Nam Phan is out on the balcony by Koscheck’s side.

Continue reading →

1
basketball, sports culture

College hoops, dunks and generation gaps

Posted on by Beau Dure

Happened across (via a former Duke roomie’s Facebook feed) this compilation of “the best dunks in NCAA history.”

I don’t want to be that guy who stumbles across a list of best guitarists and says, “How could you leave out Blind Elderberry Pie?! Jimi Hendrix just stole everything from him!”

I will, however, point out the following:

1. Charging could’ve been called on about half these dunks.

2. This guy rounds up tons of clips of guys dunking on other guys, yet he misses Phil Henderson over Alonzo Mourning, showing us how to dunk over someone without charging:

Yes, I’m a Dukie, but even the selections involving my school are questionable. The Dahntay Jones dunk in the top 10 is OK, but I’d argue for a few items from the Robert Brickey catalog instead.

And two of the honorable mentions should be in the top 50, maybe the top 10. Grant Hill’s alley-oop off a pass that frankly got away from Bobby Hurley was just insane.

And as one of the commenters put it — if Jerry Stackhouse’s dunk against Duke’s Parks and Meek is “honorable mention,” there’s no reason to keep watching.

0
mma

MMA judging: A modest proposal

Posted on by Beau Dure

What should be valued most in MMA judging? Supposedly, it’s some mix of striking, grappling and Octagon control, but the definitions seem elusive to fans and losing fighters. (Winning fighters, of course, always find some way to interpret the scorecards.)

MMA fans and writers have many pet solutions for tweaking the judging process. This one attempts to give some idea of what should be valued the most.

1. Working toward finishing the fight – 60%

This includes both grappling and striking. A good solid submission attempt would count roughly the same as a punch or kick that stuns an opponent.

One key difference from what we usually consider in judging: This criterion is not “damage.” That was an old criterion in Pride, and there are two reasons it shouldn’t be considered. First, it’s political self-sabotage — NY lawmaker Bob Reilly brings it up every time anyone asks him why he opposes MMA regulation in his state. Second, it puts undue emphasis on drawing blood, the primary way judges can measure “damage.” If Fighter A lands a stiff body blow and comes close to a guillotine choke, he could still appear to be more “damaged” than Fighter B if Fighter B lands a glancing elbow in the right place.

2. Other effective strikes – 15%

This is where you’d count all the jabs and leg kicks that a fighter would need to accumulate in bunches to finish the fight.

3. Other effective grappling – 15%

If you’re one of the fans complaining that MMA puts too much stock in takedowns, good news — this category is only 15%.

4. Initiating action – 10%

Replaces “Octagon control.” This rewards the fighter who presses the action. Essentially, it serves as a good tiebreaker if two fighters neutralize each other throughout a round.

0
mma

‘The Ultimate Fighter,’ Season 12, Episode 5: Nam better

Posted on by Beau Dure

Josh Koscheck’s team has lost three fights, so he’s serious now. He brings in American Kickboxing Academy teammate Jon Fitch. Then he makes reference to his team’s lack of balls. Foreshadowing the Axe ad later in the broadcast?

Back at the house, Michael Johnson is doing laundry. Alex Caceres confesses that he put bleach in Nam Phan’s fabric softener. Fortunately, Johnson’s laundry is rescued in time. Johnson’s still pissed.

Team GSP brings in Jean Charles Skarbowsky to teach Muay Thai. GSP warns his team that JCS isn’t like other guys. Not in those words exactly — that’s Michael Jackson’s Thriller. JCS, we’re told, sleeps only three hours a night, then gets drunk and comes into the cage to beat everyone up. Fortunately, no one’s hurt.

Back in the house, Caceres is playing pool and musing to Jeff Lentz, his tournament victim, about his lack of popularity. Lentz suggests that he ease up. Caceres says he has to be who he is, borrowing heavily from Popeye, Edie Brickell and Smash Williams.

Fight selection: GSP sends Spencer Paige, who looked good in a tough prelim, against Phan, the most experienced guy in the field.

Continue reading →

0
soccer

Does the USA need a “No. 10”?

Posted on by Beau Dure

David Hirshey critiques the U.S. MNT with a lament for the bygone days, which never really existed in the USA’s case, of a “No. 10” playmaker directing the team.

From Ives Galarcep, we get a very different reading — the USA fared well in the 4-2-3-1 set-up that seems so common worldwide these days.

The 4-2-3-1 doesn’t rule out a “No. 10” — the midfielder at the center of the “3” line could be that guy. But all three of those midfielders are likely to see a fair amount of the ball, and the best playmaker need not be in the center. Landon Donovan, the MLS assist leader, is listed as a forward on Galaxy previews and is, as Hirshey notes, more commonly found on the flanks.

Bob Bradley was long criticized for playing an “empty bucket” midfield, with two central midfielders who leaned more toward the defensive end. Yet that system simply demanded that everyone share the load. It’s not inherently inferior to a diamond midfield with an attacking No. 10 and a defensive midfielder behind him. Some of the better midfields in MLS — Ronnie Ekelund and Richard Mulrooney spring to mind — were more fluid than the traditional attacking/defending split.

We’d all like to see skillful players, of course, and the buzzword in youth development these days is to encourage players to experiment and play a game more freely than the regimented days of the past. Freddy Adu in particular may have suffered from an insistence that he play more defense than a typical No. 10 or withdrawn forward would play.

But it’s tough to blame senior-level coaches for not having a Messi on hand. Hirshey curiously lumps Bruce Arena in the “hustle first, skill second” mindset of college coaches, even though Arena built fluid teams at Virginia and based D.C. United’s attack on a traditional No. 10 in Marco Etcheverry.

To show off a No. 10 in that mold, you need a player who’s head and shoulders above the rest. (Well, in the literal sense, he’s usually a head shorter — El Pibe excepted, most No. 10s are on the diminutive side.) Then you need to have a team so dominant and confident that someone else can carry the load if the defense focuses too heavily on one predictable mode of attack. Switch Messi to North Korea’s team, and he might not look like the swaggering No. 10 that Hirshey pictures him to be with Barcelona and Argentina.

So to see a true No. 10, the USA would need more than a change of tactics or one excellent player. We’d need to see a Golden Generation come up through the ranks. A No. 10 may be a symptom of a great team, but not the root of one.

1