Do u think Kimbo/Shamrock was a work?

Welcome to our Community
Wanting to join the rest of our members? Feel free to Sign Up today.
Sign up

Was it a work?

  • Yes

    Votes: 17 34.7%
  • No

    Votes: 22 44.9%
  • TQN is a douchebag

    Votes: 2 4.1%
  • On the fence/skeptical

    Votes: 8 16.3%

  • Total voters
    49

Jonny Quest

Adventurer
Feb 12, 2015
2,617
3,099
Here is Kens defense for the KO shot. He sees it coming, closes his eyes, ducks his chin, and puts his head into it lolol
 

MMAHAWK

@MMAHAWK21 Coast 2 Coast Combat Hour @COMBATHOUR
Feb 5, 2015
10,223
24,968
Here is Kens defense for the KO shot. He sees it coming, closes his eyes, ducks his chin, and puts his head into it lolol
Total troll watch the flurry before. Ken is already dazed and throws a big punch leaving himself open for the counter. Show the 3 seconds prior to this punch.
 

Megaterio Llamas

Vigorously working member
First 100
Jan 15, 2015
7,863
9,604
I'd have probably felt cheated if he didn't take a dive or if there wasn't at least some kind of post-fight controversy myself. Wouldn't have felt like a Ken Shamrock event.

I honestly feel like it's part of the show and I know I was expecting some of this discussion we're having now.
 

Wild

TMMAC's Most Handsome Admin
Admin
Dec 31, 2014
59,624
108,148
Another Ken dive. Goes down when his glove gets grazed.

Now this we agree on. That's either a work, or Ken realizing he wasn't going to win the fight and taking the easy way out. Still don't agree on the Kimbo fight, but I respect your opinion and persistence sir :)
 

Megaterio Llamas

Vigorously working member
First 100
Jan 15, 2015
7,863
9,604
I thought Ken proved the point that he could've won when he was on Kimbo's back with the choke sunk in and then he made some coin on top of that.

So it went pretty much perfectly from a Shamrock viewpoint.
 

Jimmy Smith

Bellator MMA
Pro Fighter
Apr 14, 2015
123
384
Was asked to weigh in on this topic, and thought I would give my 2-cents considering I have been hearing a LOT about it.

I can only speak from the promotional/broadcast side of the equation of course, if Ken and/or Kimbo had some personal (and highly illegal) agreement to fix the fight they certainly didn't let Bellator in on it. For those who feel that Bellator would fix the fight I offer the following:

To get caught fixing a fight is tantamount to promotional suicide. ANYONE (the UFC, Dana, Coker, the Fertitta's, etc) who is caught influencing the outcome of a fight will never legally be allowed to promote a fight again (outside of perhaps a bare-knuckle fight on an indian reservation, but even that would be unlikely). The state would pull your promoter's license so fast it would make you nauseous. With that in mind you have to weigh the "risk vs reward" equation for fixing a fight, especially a televised show of the magnitude of Bellator 138.

MMA, unlike boxing, doesn't often work on the "undefeated mega-fight" system where there is a TON of money riding on 2 fighters overcoming certain fights to make the "big one" happen. Most fighters in MMA have records that would make them journeymen in boxing, even some of the biggest names in the sport. MMA doesn't have any title sanctioning bodies like boxing, there are no rival promoters on the opposing sides of 2 fighters, and the national promotions have virtually unlimited discretion in deciding who fights who, when, and for what title. There is no need for a fix to make a certain fight happen, the only thing necessary is the promotion themselves putting the fight together.

That is my general argument against most cries of "fix!!" in the MMA world (like I stated before: from a PROMOTIONAL point of view). Why would Bellator, the UFC, or anyone else take the ASTRONOMICAL risk of fixing a fight when they can make whatever fight they want with a fan base that is fairly forgiving of a loss?

Now, dealing with the specifics of Ken/Kimbo:

Of all the fights one COULD fix, why the hell would anyone fix a fight between two fighters who are not in their competitive primes and have roughly the same fan appeal? Kimbo winning doesn't do much more for Bellator than Ken winning. Neither fighter is going to be fighting the elite at HWT or 205, so there aren't any "Megafights" that a fix would set either fighter up for. Also, the crowd was going NUTS for Ken! To favor Kimbo over him wouldn't necessarily be a brilliant stroke of promotional genius. In a fight where one guy has considerably more marketing draw than the other the accusation of a fix would make a bit more sense. In this case they were roughy equal: both draw a ton of fan interest but have no real long-term prospects amongst the elite in their divisions. The "qui-bono" question (gotta love Latin) is answered fairly simply: Bellator doesn't really benefit any more with Kimbo winning then they would if it had been Ken because neither guy is going to be challenging for a belt in the near future.

The one question I want to ask people who doubt the veracity of the fight is: What kind of fight did you expect?

Ken has built his reputation on his submission skills, but he has always been a guy who generally forced a submission rather than relied on pure technique. If you recall his fight with Don Frye, he wrenched on leg locks several times and wasn't able to get the proper angle to finish the fight. It was a technical issue that dogged much of his career. He was squeezing the hell out of Kimbo's neck as hard as he could but (as some on this thread pointed out) he failed to engage his hips at all and that proved to be the difference. I thought he burned his arms out trying to muscle the choke out of a much bigger fighter. It was fairly clear to me that once Kimbo got out it was only a matter of time. Ken had cardio issues against Fujita and Tito and that was EONS ago in MMA years. He gave everything he had to one choke and it didn't pan out, as soon as he took a solid one to the chin that was it. Even the most ardent Ken supporter would have conceded that it wouldn't take many from Kimbo to end the fight and it didn't.

What we saw at Bellator 138 was, in my opinion, the best effort of a fighter who didn't have that much left to give. As soon as Ken took a solid shot he turned to Big John and shook his head, he simply wanted no more. Its unfortunate, but a performance like that doesn't require a fix in MMA, it requires a fighter who sees no merit in going any further and taking more of a beating.

Those are my honest thoughts, do with them what you will.

Thanks guys, you always great!

Jimmy
 

Zeph

TMMAC Addict
Jan 22, 2015
22,883
29,965
Shamrock came back from a 5 year retirement to get one more pay day. Let's say he won, then what? Is he going to take some more fights? Work his way up to a title fight? Hell no. He's done. So if that's his last pay day why not maximize the payout with back room payout for taking a dive. Everyone makes money and Bellator can make some future fights for Kimbo, preferably "exciting", as you defined them, stand up fights. Money, money, money and all the while the casual fan is too stupid to know they're watching fixed fights. People who have followed mma from the start know when something doesn't look right. I can name a couple of fights that looked fixed in the UFC - 1. Silva/Griffin (Griffin gets KO'ed by a jab Silva threw going backwards. Silva was good but not that damn good)....2. Kimbo (once again)/Alexander (what a farce that fight was). So fixed fights happen and when they do it's pretty obvious. I'm sure there are some that aren't so obvious, It depends on how good the actors are.
Forrest had been KO'd pretty badly within a couple of weeks of the Silva fight. Really, he shouldn't have fought, and it showed when he was KO'd easily.
 

WoodenPupa

Member
Feb 14, 2015
2,920
3,565
Of all the fights one COULD fix, why the hell would anyone fix a fight between two fighters who are not in their competitive primes and have roughly the same fan appeal? Kimbo winning doesn't do much more for Bellator than Ken winning.
I agree that there is little reason to assume Bellator would be in on a fix for this fight. But not because there is some "astronomical" risk, as you put it, but because there isn't enough reward.

Just to clarify something, risk of the kind we're discussing here has three dimensions, (1) the likelihood of getting caught, and (2) the penalty for getting caught, and (3) the payoff if the scheme succeeds. It's very naive to think that (1) by itself will stop any criminal from taking a risk (unless the likelihood of getting caught is outrageously high, like 50-50---but then, see Lee Murray and the Securitas heist) and that includes would-be fight fixers.

I don't know why people think artificial results in sports fall automatically under the heading of "conspiracy theories". Take college basketball. The Boston College scandal in 1978-79 was just one of many point-shaving schemes that have been discovered, and doubtless there are countless others that we don't know about. The funny-looking games from that time period were all explained away by players being tired, "my game was off", and all that stuff. Those who followed the sport at the time were baffled by Boston's many close calls, winning games by only 3-4 points that they were favored to win by 18-20 or more. Some people in the press wondered what the fuck was happening to the team. But no one could prove anything because---obviously---the players involved had no reason to confess. And the point-fixing would have passed right over everyone's head had Henry Hill (the guy Ray Liotta played in Good Fellahs) not randomly brought it up when being questioned by the feds about unrelated matters.

A case like this demolishes any skepticism about fight-fixing (or a dive) based on reasoning like "x would never risk it!!" If we're going to insist on using this sort of evidence, we have much better grounds for eliminating possible culprits based on reward. Just as there would be little in it for the Boston coach to orchestrate point shaving---coaches are well-paid, after all---we can surmise Coker would have little reason for fixing a fight. The players/fighters are a different matter. The ones involved in the Boston scandal made quite a bit of dough, and Hill and others made huge amounts off bets they made.

In the end, I think most here agree that Coker wouldn't have much to gain by fixing THIS fight, at least. But it's not the risk of getting caught that would stop him, it's the absence of reward (obviously an ethical principle might stop him, but we don't know for a fact he has such principles). The fact is, there is no way to prove a fight fix absent direct, unquestionable evidence (say an audio recording of the agreement) or a confession combined with dubious events in the fight. Weird shit happens in fights all the time, so what happens can always be explained away by means other than a work/fix/throw. Unless it's straight up WWE acting, with punches that don't even come close to landing, absurdly theatrical expressions, etc, what happens in a fight isn't proof of a fix.

Anyway, due to the above, this

To get caught fixing a fight is tantamount to promotional suicide. ANYONE (the UFC, Dana, Coker, the Fertitta's, etc) who is caught influencing the outcome of a fight will never legally be allowed to promote a fight again
is moot, because "getting caught" is extraordinarily unlikely. The athletic commission members certainly aren't going to start investigations based on internet chatter, nor are they going to drop a drink mid-fight with finger pointed at the TV screen, yelling outrage, followed by frantic phone calls to other members of the commission, based on their own suspicions. And nobody who voices concern directly to the commission is going to be taken seriously either unless they have proof. But there will never be proof unless people involved, for some reason, start talking, or a mysterious tape shows up at the doorstep of the athletic commissioner.

For all we know what happened in the fight was legitimate. But the fight itself raised enough eyebrows to wonder whether it was. And what happened in the fight itself is mainly what we should focus on, even though it won't prove anything beyond all doubt, either. It is what raises questions in the first place, however. Just like in the Boston scandal, where the weird performances of the players were worth talking about. Most didn't opine that a fix was at hand, but some wondered why Boston was just scraping by teams they should have been demolishing, and they had a good reason to wonder.

Motivations, risk, and that sort of thing does not by itself supply any general reasoning sufficient to truly close the matter one way or the other. I don't know why people think it does. Criminals and desperate people take risks all the time that, considering the consequences of getting caught, look very foolish. But risk is never assessed only by that factor. There is the likelihood of getting caught as well as the reward to consider, and those potentially involved will each have their own outlook on this. I don't think Coker has much to gain from this. Kimbo and/or Ken? Definitely.
 

Jonny Quest

Adventurer
Feb 12, 2015
2,617
3,099
I dont know nor think that Bellator or Coker knew anything about it. Motivation is simple. Money. Something as simple as Kimbo not wanting anything to do with the fight and Ken wanting an easy payday and telling him he would take a dive. Could be anything like that or something completely different.

Some things I do know from watching that fight:

1. Weird clinch in the beginning. They were talking to each other and doing nothing, and did a break like it was, ready, set, break. WWE stuff.

2. Takedowns looked fake as hell. They were slow and being shot from across the cage. The second one Kimbo lifted his leg for, didnt try to fight it off at all, and sat into it like her was closelined in a pro wrestling match.

3. The choke looked fake as hell. Shamrock, who has been doing submission fighting for 30 years couldnt finish a RNC against a guy who gave him his back and neck, Kimbo had his hands at his sides, wasnt even trying to defend it and Shammy had one arm in deep. Shamrock never pulled his shoulders back, never tensed his arms up, nothing, Shamrock never threw one punch to his head or anything. It looked like classic WWE stuff.

4, Kimbo does a face like he is going to pass out and Hogan style, he gets up and right out of Shamrocks hold. Shamrock is in possibly the most favorable of all positions in fighting. He had him in a RNC, had his back with hooks in, and Kimbo just stands up out of it like he has no problem at all and Shamrock does nothing to try keeping him there.

5. Storybook KO. First punches of the entire fight, up until then no one threw fists at each other, and he catches Ken and it is over.

6. Walkout in the beginning was weird, and felt off from the get go. Ken didnt looked focused for all the training he did. He didnt seem like a guy going into battle. He looked like he was doing a pro-wrestling gig.

7. Ken has been known to take dives before. His Berry fight was an obvious dive or fix. He did worked fights for a living in pro-wrestling so he would have no problem with it. He needs the money.

8. Leading up to the fight the animosity in interviews Ken wanted to kill Kimbo. The fight happens and Kimbo supposedly tapped according to Ken and that is the reason he let up. Ken isnt like that and he would have been all over McCarthy after the fight, yelling and hollering there was a tap. He did nothing.

The only arguments that I hear is that Ken is old this and old that. I roll with guys in their 50's and they are not weak at all. I dont know if some of you train or lift or what, but strength is one of the last things to go on a man, and Ken is not your average guy. He is strong as fuck and should have easily put Kimbo out. They werent gassed either. They hadnt thrown one punch and it was too early for gassing. Even Kimbo was fresh enough to get up out of the choke and knock out Ken cold.

The whole fight seemed off and stunk of a jobber fight. This isnt some conspiracy theory shit. Lots and lots of respectable people on the MMA world think something fishy went on. I watched the fight with a group of people, some never watched fights before, and even they were laughing and saying how fake it looked. I am a huge fan of Ken, have been for 20 something years. I am only this invested in the fight because I am pissed he would throw this fight and as a fan I feel duped. Could it all be a legit fight, absolutely, but in my opinion there are way too many coincidences that something else didnt go on. That's my take on it.
 

Leigh

Professional Fighter
Moderator
Pro Fighter
Jan 26, 2015
10,146
19,171
How many of you guys saying it was a work have competed in MMA? That's not an appeal to authority and you certainly don't have to have competed to have a valid opinion but when you have, you realise that things don't go like they would in your head, especially when one guy is an old man who hasn't fought for years and is giving up 30lbs to a guy who can one punch KTFO and the other guy is......"technically limited" and also out of regular competition
 

Zeph

TMMAC Addict
Jan 22, 2015
22,883
29,965
1. Weird clinch in the beginning. They were talking to each other and doing nothing, and did a break like it was, ready, set, break. WWE stuff.

2. Takedowns looked fake as hell. They were slow and being shot from across the cage. The second one Kimbo lifted his leg for, didnt try to fight it off at all, and sat into it like her was closelined in a pro wrestling match.

3. The choke looked fake as hell. Shamrock, who has been doing submission fighting for 30 years couldnt finish a RNC against a guy who gave him his back and neck, Kimbo had his hands at his sides, wasnt even trying to defend it and Shammy had one arm in deep. Shamrock never pulled his shoulders back, never tensed his arms up, nothing, Shamrock never threw one punch to his head or anything. It looked like classic WWE stuff.

4, Kimbo does a face like he is going to pass out and Hogan style, he gets up and right out of Shamrocks hold. Shamrock is in possibly the most favorable of all positions in fighting. He had him in a RNC, had his back with hooks in, and Kimbo just stands up out of it like he has no problem at all and Shamrock does nothing to try keeping him there.

5. Storybook KO. First punches of the entire fight, up until then no one threw fists at each other, and he catches Ken and it is over.

6. Walkout in the beginning was weird, and felt off from the get go. Ken didnt looked focused for all the training he did. He didnt seem like a guy going into battle. He looked like he was doing a pro-wrestling gig.

7. Ken has been known to take dives before. His Berry fight was an obvious dive or fix. He did worked fights for a living in pro-wrestling so he would have no problem with it. He needs the money.

8. Leading up to the fight the animosity in interviews Ken wanted to kill Kimbo. The fight happens and Kimbo supposedly tapped according to Ken and that is the reason he let up. Ken isnt like that and he would have been all over McCarthy after the fight, yelling and hollering there was a tap. He did nothing.
1. The clinch was weird, but it isn't the only time we have seen fighters clinch like that. DC vs Jones they clinched like that for significant time periods for instance. Also BJM was right next to them, and if he couldn't hear them talking I don't think they were. There is no way in hell that BJM was party to any work, I just don't believe it.

2. Kimbo's knees are shot just as bad as Ken's, if not worse. To expect good looking takedowns or takedown defence from either fighter is a bit much. As for him lifting his leg, he was trying to move backwards out of range of Ken's grasp.

3. The choke has been explained numerous times, Ken has a history of having bad technique and muscling subs. You've chosen to ignore this, so I don't think anything anyone says will change your mind.

4. Kimbo turned into the choke while defending, eventually getting his back to the matt, at this point the position is lost for Ken and Kimbo can either roll over into Ken's guard or Ken can give it up and stand up. There is nothing ambiguous about this.

5. Did you think Ken was going to withstand any punches landed? If you did, would you be interested in a newly built bridge I have for sale? Never been walked on.

6. I don't see how this is relevant to the fight at all.

7. True.

8. Ken is just justifying his loss in his own mind. Competitors do it all the time. For elite athlete's they almost have to have this delusional attitude to set backs, because if they looked at it objectively they might give up or lose that drive. Another explanation for why Ken is still trying to fight at 51 coincidentally.

Ken has taken dives before and has a WWE background, but I don't think this was one of them. It does cast a shadow over his bouts, but there are enough real explanations in this case for me to believe that what we saw was a very shitty MMA fight by two old men.
 

dacofty

Yea..Ok..Whatever
First 100
Jan 15, 2015
9,485
9,454
How many of you guys saying it was a work have competed in MMA? That's not an appeal to authority and you certainly don't have to have competed to have a valid opinion but when you have, you realise that things don't go like they would in your head, especially when one guy is an old man who hasn't fought for years and is giving up 30lbs to a guy who can one punch KTFO and the other guy is......"technically limited" and also out of regular competition
I agree but the RNC was very suspect. Ken has mastered that to a point he knows every in and out of it. I dont think the KO was put on, but i wouldnt be surprised if there was a try to let the fight go on as long as possible. Just a mystery as to why Ken attempted the RNC as he did even with the way kimbo attempted to get out of it. As for the fight, i really dont care, neither was main event material.
 

Leigh

Professional Fighter
Moderator
Pro Fighter
Jan 26, 2015
10,146
19,171
I agree but the RNC was very suspect. Ken has mastered that to a point he knows every in and out of it.
Has he? I haven't seen evidence of that. I have seen evidence of fighters being in the game a long time and still making fundamental mistakes. We know Ken was clueless to the RNC in UFC1. Do we have evidence that he's addressed that hole in his game and mastered the technique since then?
 

Jonny Quest

Adventurer
Feb 12, 2015
2,617
3,099
Has he? I haven't seen evidence of that. I have seen evidence of fighters being in the game a long time and still making fundamental mistakes. We know Ken was clueless to the RNC in UFC1. Do we have evidence that he's addressed that hole in his game and mastered the technique since then?
He choked Bas Rutten out with one, so probably.
 

Nuk Soo Kow

Season 24 Monsters Tourney Champion
Admin
First 100
Jan 14, 2015
32,113
53,553
When I saw the clinch start I thought of the Ken vs Kimo fight first and was waiting for Ken to start to delivering some knees. The last thing I thought of was secrets being whispered. Maybe Kimbo was was also waiting for some knees and decided to let Ken make the first move so he kept his body back? Nobody knows but these guys I guess.