Olympic MMA: Why it must happen for the sport
Roar Pro There is no question that mixed martial arts has a place in the Olympics.
From the fact that the sport is a decendent of Pankration, a martial art introduced to the Greek Olympic Games in 648 BC, to the presence of MMA elements judo, wrestling, boxing, and tae kwon do in the current Olympics, the truth is that the case for the inclusion of MMA moving forward is pretty easily made.
There are going to be hurdles to clear along the way though.
First and foremost, the perception of the sport is going to hamper its inclusion. While adopting the standard rules used for amateur MMA would elimate some of the more brutal, dangerous elements from the competition, we’re still battling against archaic views about the sport both in some regions.
Though it has certainly changed a great deal from the early 1990s, convincing those who still harbor uneducated opinions about MMA that it has a place in future Olympiads will still be a challenge.
Secondly, who will participate?
In a perfect world, we’d have the best fighters from around the world competing for their country in an MMA World Cup-type tournament every four years, but is that a reasonable expectation?
Are UFC champions like Georges St-Pierre and Anderson Silva going to eschew a trip into the Octagon and the pay day that goes along with it to wear the Brazilian or Canadian flag on their shorts in the quest for gold?
I’d like to think they would, as national pride is evident in the sport now, and the opportunity to represent their countries on the biggest sporting stage in the world should compel the sport’s elite to press pause on their professional careers to pursue their Olympic dreams.
Additionally, I can’t see organizations like the UFC standing in the way of their champions and athletes taking part either.
Dana White has been vocal about his belief that MMA has a place in the Olympic Games, and so I would assume that the UFC President would give his blessing for UFC fighters to be involved.
If it’s not major stars like St-Pierre, Jon Jones, and Jose Aldo taking part, the Olympics could be a phenomenal opportunity to cultivate new stars from either the amateur ranks or further down on the divisional depth charts.
We’ve seen in the past how boxers with Olympic experience are able to turn that into incredible stardom and success in the ring, so it could certainly be comparable with MMA.
I do think the inclusion of established fighters would bolster the chances of MMA getting into the Games and being successful.
Bringing in big name athletes who can make the sport a “must-see” event every year would certainly be a check in the plus column for the sport.
While serious fans are still going to pay attention, seeing recognizable names always brings more eyes to the television. Additionally, the Olympics should be the best competing against the best.
Though I do believe it will be more challenging to clear these hurdles than some people estimate, I think we’re not too far away from seeing MMA in the Olympics. It is becoming a truly global sport, with countless countries represented on the rosters of the biggest organizations in the business, and new nations investing in the sport every year.
Not only would the inclusion of MMA in the Olympics be a positive step for the Games, it will be a moment of recognition for the sport as well. Though we may not put as much focus on the Olympics today as we did in previous generations, being accepted as an official Olympic event still provides a certain credibility, and a jolt in recognition amongst those who don’t usually follow the sport.
With its tremendous growth around the globe over the last decade, the time has come for MMA to be included in the showcase of the greatest sports and athletes in the world.
Will it happen? I’m not sure, but I’m hopeful.
What do you think: will MMA be an Olympic sport in the future? Let us know what you think in the comments section below.
Follow The Roar’s UFC Expert E. Spencer Kyte on Twitter (@spencerkyte).
August 2nd 2012 @ 11:12am
kingplaymaker said | August 2nd 2012 @ 11:12am | Report comment
Agree 100% MMA has the following arguments:
1) Panktration. This is the killer argument. It was a key original Olympic event, and as there is a modern equivalent to neglect it is bizarre not to include it. In a sense you wonder if MMA shouldn’t be called Pankration generally, which would give it dignity and an individual term-at least perhaps it should be referred to it as a second name as some sports often have.
2) Better to watch than other broadly comparable sports such as Judo and Taekwondo.
3) It has taken over from many of the martial arts and subsumed them, meaning it has a huge reach and in a way brings in many sports.
4) Genuinely global. However it is argument 1 that is the real big one.
One problem though is the octagon, which looks like a cage to those sceptical of MMA who will recall its early name of cage fighting.
August 2nd 2012 @ 11:40am
E. Spencer Kyte said | August 2nd 2012 @ 11:40am | Report comment
Thanks for the great comment!
I would say that MMA in the Olympics could be contested in a ring without many issues. The ability to restart bouts in the center of the ring when competitors are grappling in the ropes is great, plus it offers a less obstructed view than the chain-link cage. Additionally, we’ve watched boxing in a ring for years, so it has far less of a brutally violent stigma attached to it than the cage would.
Should have put that in the original piece (the ring) as I was thinking it at the time. Thanks for the reminder.
How long until you think we see MMA in the Olympics? I say 12 years maximum, but hopefully it happens by the time the 2016 Games roll around.
August 2nd 2012 @ 11:39pm
paul said | August 2nd 2012 @ 11:39pm | Report comment
There’s no chance of it happening by the next Olympics. Rugby and golf were added a couple of years ago for those games and it took them a few years to get through. Perhaps 2020 or 2024 would be a more realistic goal
August 3rd 2012 @ 5:02am
amazonfan said | August 3rd 2012 @ 5:02am | Report comment
I think to place it in a ring would be vital. I must admit, that while I love maritial arts and combat sports, the cage aspect unsettles me and having it in a ring would take away my discomfort.
August 3rd 2012 @ 10:23am
kingplaymaker said | August 3rd 2012 @ 10:23am | Report comment
Agreed, in the end the cage just looks violent.
August 2nd 2012 @ 11:51am
kingplaymaker said | August 2nd 2012 @ 11:51am | Report comment
Spencer given it’s popularity, global reach and original Olympic status there’s no reason it shouldn’t immediately be made an Olympic sport except changing perceptions over its supposed violence: MMA still appears to be suffering for the higher level of violence in its founding days. It’s a shame those early days were so public. Convincing the IOC that it is no more violent than boxing and that is has outdated many martial arts that were originally included to broaden the Olympics appeal is the main task now I think.
August 2nd 2012 @ 1:12pm
Steve said | August 2nd 2012 @ 1:12pm | Report comment
Kingplaymaker has a great point when he says they should call in Pankration: this would also allow them to codify the sport in a way to suit the Olympics more and distance it just enough (as Olympic boxing is distanced from Professional boxing) from the octagon.Call it Pankration, have it in a ring or on a wrestling mat, fighters in appropriate uniform gear and rules adjusted for time concerns etc. if necessary: I really think it would work, and it would be great for the Olympics.
August 2nd 2012 @ 1:15pm
spongy said | August 2nd 2012 @ 1:15pm | Report comment
You make some good points. However in MMA today the fighters only fight one opponent and I doubt would be able to backup for multiple fights during the course of the Olympics, presumably in a knockout style competition.
Look at amateur boxing and the difference to professional boxing. They are very different sports and that is why the amateurs have the ability to backup for fights.
I know in the beginning of MMA in the days of Royce Gracie etc.. fighters backed up, but I think the sport has changed since then.
Not that it is a bad idea, I just don’t know if it will work.
August 2nd 2012 @ 3:34pm
Tristan Rayner said | August 2nd 2012 @ 3:34pm | Report comment
It’s a nice point. I think it’d have to modified.
Faster tap rules to prevent non-tapping injuries. More protection to the head? Points systems for strikes rather than 10-9? Boxing has done it, MMA could do it too. It wouldn’t be quite UFC though.
August 3rd 2012 @ 8:59am
E. Spencer Kyte said | August 3rd 2012 @ 8:59am | Report comment
You absolutely have to modify things for it to work in the Olympics, as I said in the piece. You can’t have full contact and expect guys to be able to fight every couple of days, so you adopt amateur rules. I also think you go with two five-minute rounds, not three, or three three-minute rounds to minimize the damage these guys take.
Additionally, ring not cage – easy choice, and one that will be acceptable to a lot of people who dislike the cage because of the image it sends.
That said – it’s not like there aren’t still one-night tournaments (or two fights in a night tournaments) in some places, and the guys on The Ultimate Fighter can fight three or four times in a six week period, so as long as no one gets hurt, executing a 32-man tournament (or whatever) over three weeks is doable.
August 2nd 2012 @ 4:21pm
tonysalerno said | August 2nd 2012 @ 4:21pm | Report comment
MMA may be the fastest growing sport given the rise of the UFC. It has the popularity and athletes to become an Olympic event but the only problem is it may be too violent. Personally, I enjoy MMA but it may be too offensive for a PG timeslot or family friendly sporting environment.
August 2nd 2012 @ 5:40pm
GrantOz said | August 2nd 2012 @ 5:40pm | Report comment
This is the biggest issue. It certainly taps into those traditional ideas of fighting started by the Greeks, which is a big plus, but perhaps that fighting is simply too raw for the Games.
August 3rd 2012 @ 9:01am
E. Spencer Kyte said | August 3rd 2012 @ 9:01am | Report comment
If amateur standards and rules are applied, it’s a combination of the combat sports already involved in the Olympics with Brazilian jiu-jitus tied in. You’re not going to see bloodbaths because you take out elbows or busted up legs because you take out leglocks. You can make this sport even safer with a few minor tweaks, just as the already do for amateur MMA.
August 3rd 2012 @ 10:21am
kingplaymaker said | August 3rd 2012 @ 10:21am | Report comment
I think MMA unfortunately looks more violent than Boxing although it is less so as the boxing gloves and concentration on the head mean that it can be permanently damaged in a way that is unlikely to happen in MMA. However, partly because of its speed and lack of boxing gloves MMA looks the more violent, which again means that a focus on perception should be the main challenge.
I think it would be good if sooner rather than later it were referred to as Pankration: sports are often referred to and advertised by two names and while MMA describes more exactly what it is, Pankration is a real, individual, unique name like rugby or cricket and what’s more one as old as the hills, older than those two by thousands of years in fact. It would be good if someone would forward this article to Dana White although he must be aware of these issues..
August 4th 2012 @ 12:57am
E. Spencer Kyte said | August 4th 2012 @ 12:57am | Report comment
I understand what you’re saying, but I can’t recall any instances where a sport is referred to by two different names. Hockey is hockey, baseball is baseball, volleyball is volleyball, etc.
Calling it Pankration isn’t going to change the archaic perception people have about the sport. It might sound more fitting of the Olympics, but opponents of the sport will be the first to point it out (vigorously) as MMA, and condemn it for all the same reasons they already do.
As for the perception of violence – yes, it looks worse, but there are a number of studies that say otherwise. Far easier to forward those to the IOC than get everyone around the world to start calling MMA by a different name.
August 2nd 2012 @ 4:37pm
Tom said | August 2nd 2012 @ 4:37pm | Report comment
I think its a great idea and would love to see the sport in Brazil. But with amateur rules should come amateur fighters. Just as with the boxing. Its should be a way of introducing amateurs to the big stage.
August 2nd 2012 @ 11:37pm
Chris said | August 2nd 2012 @ 11:37pm | Report comment
They should have this sport as it’s like a an amateur style of MMA and includes Karate/Judo and Boxing and it’s called Daido Juku.
http://youtu.be/M5AvCcLwaJQ
August 2nd 2012 @ 11:38pm
kingplaymaker said | August 2nd 2012 @ 11:38pm | Report comment
What emerges so far from this debate is the following:
-The format would have to be altered so contestants could have multiple bouts within a short space of time. Headgear suggested for example.
-Any toning down on the level of violence possible, which would also help the contestants undertake multiple bouts.
-It might well have to take place well into the evening to avoid family viewing.
-Ring instead of octagon. Isn’t this a good idea anyway outside the Olympics as it allows fans to see much better? You wonder if the octagon doesn’t play on old associations of violence that may have attracted some to the sport. It may give the sport its own kind of arena, but at the expense of the fans viewing lines, ease of spreading the sport to wherever there is a boxing ring, and carrying the suggestion of a cage and a sport selling itself through violence.
August 3rd 2012 @ 12:10am
LeagueLunatic said | August 3rd 2012 @ 12:10am | Report comment
I think you’re kidding yourselves, personally. The main flaw of the argument is the contention that popularity, global or otherwise, matters any to the Olympic elites and the sports they will allow for their cash-cow. Like they care that tens of millions around the world watch or participate in MMA.
If it was about popularity then nothing sports like Equestrian wouldn’t take place at the olympics. And other rich people sports for the silver spooners, like yacht racing and rowing, would be replaced by more global sports such as camel racing and 8-ball.
MMA has the credentials, but unfortunately it’s not much of a sport for establishment people.
August 3rd 2012 @ 9:05am
E. Spencer Kyte said | August 3rd 2012 @ 9:05am | Report comment
MMA is one of the few sports televised around the world, and has massive financial potential for the Olympics. It’s not a sport that is going to only appeal to a narrow percentage of the world’s population – countless countries can be represented, and therefore you’re looking at a potential ratings monster, though probably one that has to be aired later in the evening as others have pointed out.
It’s not that popularity matters – it’s that the sport is based on one that started in the early Greek Olympics AND IS WILDLY POPULAR. Additonally, anything that can bring in money will get a look; that’s why stuff like snow-cross and halfpipe are in the Winter Games now.
August 3rd 2012 @ 12:43am
kingplaymaker said | August 3rd 2012 @ 12:43am | Report comment
Leaguelunatic I wouldn’t deny that some sports may be in the Olympics for the establishment and elite, but there are also plenty which aren’t if you think about it: table tennis, judo?
MMA’s main problem is simply the perception of violence and that’s one that needs to be overcome even if it means toning down the level of violence in whatever form the sport would take in the Olympics.