Empire State ready to step into the Octagon

Just a quick note to let the fight fans know that we haven't forgotten about you. 

I'm in Dunedin, Fla. these days, trying to stay warm by setting the internet ablaze with my chronicles of Blue Jays training camp. Haven't seen outfield prospect Joey Gathright vault over any parked cars yet...

...but as he explained to the Star this week, he really, really REALLY wants to be known for something else.

ANYWAY after a few days to overcome the baseball intertia we're ready again to keep the blog ball rolling, so here's a link to get you started this Tuesday morning.

As of right now mixed martial arts is still illegal in New York, but MMA fans in the Empire State should be encouraged. Melvina Lathan, the woman atop the state boxing commission, supports the sport -- and the men in her family love it. Not sure how the pay-per-view habits of her husband and kids will affect legislation but as the story points out, the state budget comes down April 1 and it includes legislation to end the state's ban on MMA.

The reason?

The money. 

Really, what other reason is there?:

A study for the state said that one mixed martial arts show in Buffalo and one in Manhattan would generate $1.2 million in state and local taxes. Lathan said the study underestimated the economic impact of legalization, which would almost certainly lure New York fans who are attending combat cards held in states where the sport is legal.

“Those are our revenues going outside the state,” she said.

 If it makes dollars it makes sense for New York State. 

No word on how the coming legislation in New York will affect MMA's status here. I'm guessing it won't. The people running combat sports in Ontario seem determined to make -- or not make -- a decision on MMA on their own, without regard to legal barriers that tumble in other jurisdictions. 

But as the UFC's Canadian legal reps told us last month, the campaign will continue.

Follow the Star's Morgan Campbell on Twitter: http://twitter.com/morganpcampbell

UFC follows boxing to movie theatres

As we've discussed on this blog before, the boxing business still can learn a lot from the UFC about how to remain relevant in a rapidly fragmenting sports marketplace. Specifically, we've noted how boxing has followed the UFC's lead in making sure the best fighters face each other.

 

And if you're following Showtime's Super Six World Boxing Classic (and this blog will as the next round of bouts approaches), you've got to love the round-robin format, which ensures that a single loss doesn't ruin a fighter's chances of winning the tournament. The organizers of that tournament figured out what the folks at the UFC already knew -- that when the best fight the best, even the best have to lose, and that a blemish on a fighter's record doesn't render him worthless or dent his popularity.

In discussing the tournament with the Star in October, promoter Gary Shaw even cited the UFC when explaining why a single loss doesn't have to be a major setback for a world class fighter.

So instead of undergoing the usual post-loss rehab -- a string of meaningless tuneups to rebuild confidence and allay doubt -- a fighter like Andre Dirrell remains in the running for the tournament crown after his first career loss, climbing right back into the ring against Arthur Abraham March 27.

But this morning comes news that the UFC is set to follow boxing's lead in terms of distributing its product.

Starting with UFC 111, which also takes place March 27, the UFC will begin broadcasting pay per view events in movie theatres in the U.S. (Canada will still have to wait).

Interesting paragraph from the story about how boxing's struggles to retain a share of the combat sports market affected UFC president Dana White's decision to make pay per view events available in theatres as well.

White said he isn't worried about harming the UFC's pay-per-view revenue by making the fights available for the price of a theater ticket that will cost less than buying the fight at home. He believes boxing hurt itself in recent years by making its biggest fights only available on pay-per-view instead of creating alternative ways to watch, including the UFC's extensive business on the Internet.

True, but the story also points out that before UFC explored the movie theatre alternative, boxing had already proved it could work without sapping pay-per-view revenues. Floyd Mayweather's September dismantling of Juan Manuel Marquez was shown in movie theaters across the US, yet still sold more than 1 million pay-per-views.

As White says in the story, it's all about attracting as many eyeballs as possible while maximizing revenue sources. Sure a movie theatre ticket costs roughly a third of a pay-per-view buy, but if 20 people watch UFC 111 in my condo I'm still only paying one fee. However, if all 20 of us head to the theatre, all 20 of us pay to get in.

And you know what that means for the UFC.

  

Exactly.

Dana White is no fool. There's a reason he's worth an estimated $200 million. He'll take that trade and laugh all the way to the bank. Well, he'll probably curse all the way but you get my point -- either way the UFC wins.

-- Follow Morgan Campbell on Twitter: http://twitter.com/MorganPCampbell

Pugilism's Super Bowl Weekend

Yes, we're creeping ever closer to Super Bowl Sunday, but if you're a fight fan you already know the most compelling action this weekend will take place on Friday and Saturday.

You probably know all about some of those fights, and as much as I have complained about seeing guys old enough to be my uncle fight in main events (that goes for boxing and MMA), I will probably tune in with the rest of you when Couture and Coleman throw down Saturday night.

Still, there are a few other fights taking place a little further under the this weekend that we should pay attention to.

In no particular order they include:

1. Edwin Valero vs. Antonio DeMarco (Saturday, 9 p.m., Superchannel)

If you're one of these folks who hates boxing because you can't stand the powerless picking and poking of the pretty boy slicksters who tend to populate every division south of heavyweight, watch Valero fight and see if he doesn't change your mind about the sweet science. Not that Valero, the WBC lightweight champ, is that much of a scientist.

 

 He's long on power and short on polish, loading up on big shots and pressing forward with his hands low and chin high. And if you're wondering how a fighter that raw can steamroll 26 opponents, wonder no more.

Personally, I prefer technicians, but even I can't pass up the opportunity to see the type of action Valero brings to the ring. 

And if you like concussive punchers who disdain defense, neither should you.

2. Phillipe Nover vs. Rob Emerson and Melvin Guillard vs. Ronys Torres (UFC 109)

Seriously.

Focusing specifically on Nover and Guillard here, because they have so much in common.

Like skill sets. In a 155-division stacked with great athletes, these two are especially explosive.

And nicknames. Nover is a "The Filipino Assassin" while Guillard is the "Young" ... you guessed it..."Assassin."

And potential. Each of these guys has teased us with glimpses of what they might accomplish in the octagon. Nover showed so much talent in season 8 of The Ultimate Fighter that UFC president Dana White compared him to welterweight kingpin Georges St-Pierre, while Guillard tantalized fans with one-shot KOs over Gabe Ruediger and Rick Davis.

One more characteristic they share:

So far in the UFC, their performances haven't equaled the sum of their considerable parts. 

Nover dropped a decision in the TUF finale, suffered a TKO in his next start, then had to abort a September bout with with London's Sam Stout when he suffered pre-fight seizure.  

Guillard, meanwhile, has cobbled together a pair of mini winning streaks, but clearly didn't listen to the Wu Tang Clan growing up, because he just can't seem to protect his neck.

So even though these two are so far from the main event that they may as well be ushers, I'm interested to see if one -- or both -- of them can turn potential into consistent performance, and avoid the "Permanent Prospect" label hanging over them.

3. Cubano Libre -- Guillermo Rigondeaux

The most polished 4-0 fighter you will ever see steps into the ring tonight on Friday Night Fights (10:30 p.m., TSN2) to try to extend his undefeated record and take another huge leap up the 122-pound ladder.

Don't let Rigondeaux's record deceive you. He's a contender already at junior featherweight, a two-time Olympic gold medalist from Cuba who defected in 2008 and turned pro last year. He's training with Freddie Roach and on the fast track to a title shot.

 And with Juanma Lopez and Pelenchin Caballero moving up a weight class, and with Israel Vasquez and Rafael Marquez apparently only interested in fighting each other (chapter four is slated for this spring), Rigondeaux is also an fresh face in a division that needs an infusion of new talent.

Running out the clock in the Octagon

Raise your hand if you're as sick as I am of formerly great, 40-something pro athletes migrating to the octagon for one last shot at the spotlight.

For former WWE stars like Brock Lesnar and Bobby Lashley I can see it. After years destroying opponents in scripted matches they need legitimate competition and find it in the octagon.They're still in their early 30s, explosive enough to compensate for their inexperience, but young enough to learn MMA's more subtle skills.   

Works for me, and when either of these two enters the octagon we watch, eager to see how much they've learned since the last time out.

But spare me Herschel Walker, the former NFL running back who at age 47 will make his MMA debut at a Strikeforce event later this month. 

Walker's workout regimen is legendary, and he remains in outstanding shape for a guy born during the Kennedy administration, but do we really expect him to impress us Jan. 30 against an opponent who remains TBA?

Granted, he looks okay in this public workout, but unless he's fighting a mannequin I expect his opponent to move just a bit faster than the coach in the video.

Anyone who crumbles before that low-speed attack is clearly too bad of a fighter to make anybody look good, even by contrast, and anybody with some skill and a chin figures to give Walker fits.

A tough sell once you get past Walker's famous name.

Meanwhile an even bigger name (at least in the world of pugilism) is threatening to enter the octagon.

That would be James "Lights Out" Toney, the 41-year-old former heavyweight champ who has tailed UFC president Dana White to the last two pay-per-view-events, hoping to score a meeting and, eventually, a UFC contract.

Toney, a former middleweight champ who ballooned into a 230-pound heavyweight, finally cornered White last weekend after UFC 108, and Sportsnet's Showdown Joe Ferraro was among the folks lucky enough to witness the conversation. (Warning, some adult language here)

Before you let Toney's big talk sway you (be warned -- more adult language), understand this proposed move isn't at all like a prime Michael Jordan ditching basketball for baseball in 1993-94. It's more like Marion Jones' upcoming tryout with the WNBA -- an attempt to make a splash when lucrative options dry up in the sport that made you famous.

The thought of Toney in the octagon holds marginally more appeal than a Herschel Walker bout simply because it attempts to address the question of who would win in a fair fight between a top boxer and an MMA practitioner.

Not that Toney is still a top boxer. He's about 10 years and 40 pounds past anybody's pound-for-pound list, and after hearing him slur and mumble through the video clip above it's clear the only thing thicker than Toney's waist is his tongue. A troubling sign for a guy trying to get licensed in yet another combat sport.

Still, for all his bluster Toney's right when he says his years of boxing training put his knuckle game light years ahead of even MMA's best boxers. Fact is, the spectacular one-punch KO's that help make MMA so popular wouldn't happen so often if MMA fighters could box a little better. Even a novice boxer knows leading with an uppercut can get you knocked out, but Chuck Liddell had to learn that lesson the hard way.

So against a co-operative fighter with limited skills, Toney should have a puncher's chance and then some.

Problem is finding such a fighter in the UFC.

Of course, heavyweight is far from the UFC's deepest division, especially not without its most compelling competitor. But everyone there earned his spot by defeating lesser foes elsewhere, so MMA credentials of the UFC's heavyweights make them bad test cases for any proposed James Toney experiment.

Traditionally the UFC forces you to prove you can fight (not just wrestle, box or grapple) before they bring you aboard.

Lesnar, for example, fought on a K-1 card seven months before debuting in the UFC.

And Internet sensation Kimbo Slice had to fatten his record on a few has-beens and never-wases in Elite XC, even losing to UFC castoff Seth Petruzelli before finally earning a spot on season 10 of The Ultimate Fighter.

If that pattern holds look for Dana White to demand that Toney serve a stint in MMA's minor leagues before earning a promotion to the UFC.

Here's hoping he loses interest before then.

Links to the Sweet Science

BITTER FRENEMIES

No denying that the folks at the head of the boxing business have learned a little about good matchmaking from their cousins in the octagon in the five years since the UFC forced its way into the mainstream sports scene with its monthly pay-per-view shows and star vs. star showdowns.

But this week two of the UFC's top fighters could learn something from a pair of boxers, all of them preparing to throw down this weekend.

As we mentioned yesterday, UFC 155-pound champ B.J. Penn and challenger Diego Sanchez are good friends who have struggled to muster any animosity towards each other before this Saturday's title fight.

But that same night in Rancho Mirage, Calif. Timothy Bradley will defend his WBO 140 pound belt against mandatory challenger and long-time buddy Lamont Peterson. These two have been friends for a decade, and while they're reluctant to talk trash, they at least are talking like people who are actually about to fight.

"We're both undefeated, which makes for a great fight. Web both have speed and power, and we both have boxing ability," Bradley told espn.com. "But at the end of the day it's my job to teach Lamont Peterson how to lose, and that's what I'm going to do."

See how that's done, B.J. and Diego?

SUPERFIGHT SITE?

So where will the March 13 megafight between Floyd Mayweather and Manny Pacquiao land?

Not in Dallas, where Cowboys owner Jerry Jones had wanted to bring the bout to his brand new, $1.2 million stadium. Both fighters' camps have turned down that proposal.

But before you book your tickets to Vegas for fight weekend, consider that another site has put in a bid.

A big bid.

A $20 million bid to bring the bout to the Staples Center in Los Angeles.

As Golden Boy's Richard Schaefer points out, the tax issue complicates the case for a fight in California. Specifically, fighters would have to pay taxes in L.A. that they wouldn't face in Vegas or even Texas.

But a decade ago there was enough public interest and money available to stage Oscar De la Hoya and Shane Mosley's first bout at the Staples Center. So it could happen.

Unless, of course, some Las Vegas outfit with a little spare cash and a lot to gain from hosting the fight of the century steps in and outspends them all.

Yeah, that could happen too.

Mayweather and Pacquiao! Finally!

Any sports fan with a pulse has to find it quickening at the news that Manny Pacquiao and Floyd Mayweather have finally agreed to throw down for the pound-for-pound crown.

Tough to overstate the magnitude of this one but it's easily the biggest fight of the decade and probably bigger than any fight that took place in the 90s too. It's a clash between two first-ballot hall-of-famers who are still near the top of their games, and a mega-event that figures to smash the pay-per-view records Mayweather set in his 2007 showdown with Oscar De La Hoya.

It's also compelling evidence of something I and a lot of boxing purists have maintained since the UFC emerged as a dominant force on the combat sports scene.

Boxing ain't dead.

In 2007 Mayweather's 12-round decision win over De La Hoya was supposed to herald the end of boxing's run as a mainstream sport. After that fight, the UFC was supposed to crowd the sweet science out of the collective sports consciousness.

Purists and casual fans alike had grown tired of the proliferation of titles that cheapened the meaning of each belt, and of inter-promoter bickering that kept the best fighters from clashing. After Mayweather and De La Hoya fought we were supposed to turn away from all that drama and tune into the brutal simplicity of the UFC, where Dana White makes sure the best always fight the best (as long as the best are under contract).

But instead of getting lost, boxing got a clue. Great fights started happening regardless of who held what belt. Miguel Cotto fought Shane Mosely, then Antonio Margarito. Mayweather flattened Ricky Hatton and Pacquiao pounded his way through three weight classes.

Suddenly sports fans were paying attention.

Instead signalling boxing's death, Mayweather-De La Hoya led to boxing's re-birth on the mainstream sports scene, of which Pacquiao's ascent from Filipino cult hero to stateside Nike pitchman is a stunning example.

But for Pacquiao, conquering Madison Ave. is one thing; conquering Mayweather is something else.

Since moving up from lightweight Pacquiao has dismantled a drained De La Hoya, destroyed an outgunned Hatton, and plastered a shellshocked Cotto. He has looked indestructible lately, but against Mayweather we'll see how he stacks up against a master boxer who, unlike his last three opponents, won't lead with his chin.

Mayweather, meanwhile, finally gets to silence critics who have needled him for years about avoiding the welterweight division's best. The undefeated Mayweather claims to be the greatest fighter since the original Sugar Ray, but will have to change his story if he can't get past Pacquiao.

Mayweather thinks he will

And I agree with him -- to a point.

I don't think anyone makes "easy work" of Pacquiao because Pacquiao over the last year has proven that he's just that good.

But Mayweather wins because he's that much better. He's a defensive master and the smartest fighter of his generation, a brilliant counterpuncher who is stronger than most people give him credit for. 

Will Pacquiao land some shots?

Of course he will. But no way he lands like he did in his last three fights. Mayweather's much too elusive. And he won't run the way Cotto did when Pacquiao found some success, nor will he settle in and wait for the end like De La Hoya did when he figured out Pac-man was actually pretty damn good. Instead he'll stalk behind a stiff jab, belt Pacquiao to the body and solve any puzzle the Pac-man presents him.

I should warn you that my predictions are not legally binding, and if you jet to Vegas and bet the house based on what you read here, neither I nor the Star are responsible for your losses. Besides, a lot can change in the three months leading up to fight night.

But my prediction won't.

If you disagree, feel free to let me know.