The Doggy Bag: UFC 100 Reflection

Was Dan Henderson serious when he said that he dropped the second punch just to shut Michael Bisping's mouth?

It seemed to me that the follow-up punch was an instinctive act to ensure that he finished Bisping and that he wasn't certain that Bisping was already done.

Advertisement

I have some friends who are new to MMA and they got real queasy about that second punch -- especially on the replay. What do you think? Do you think that overall the Hendo/Bisping fight has taken away some of the momentum that the UFC or even MMA has gained in the past few months?

I think we need Gina Carano and Cristiane "Cyborg" Santos to put on a good show without it becoming a bloody mess.
-- Victor, Palmdale, Calif.

Loretta Hunt, news editor: Victor, thanks for taking the time to write.

I have to admit, I’m a bit perplexed at the way people have reacted to Henderson’s post-knockout punch on Bisping, who fought valiantly but fell at the hands of a significantly more experienced and powerful striker.

I can clearly state with 100 percent certainty that Henderson did nothing wrong during the fight. A fighter keeps fighting until he is motioned to stop by the referee. In this case, if you watch the replay, referee Mario Yamasaki was en route to Henderson between the two shots. Henderson just beat him to the punch (sorry for the pun, but it fits), which shouldn’t be frowned upon in the slightest.

There was no malice or viciousness in what Henderson did. We’re dealing with a world-class athlete with 32 fights, most of them at the highest level the sport has to offer. Henderson has perfected his craft over the last 12 years, which includes pouncing on any openings his adversary might offer without hesitation. It’s not Henderson’s responsibility to register when his opponent is no longer “intelligently defending himself.” That’s the referee’s job. This is one of the parameters of this sport.

The uproar over the follow-up punch tells me a lot of new fans watched the event. For us salty dogs, we saw nothing new Saturday night and you need only go back to recent UFC bouts like Rashad Evans-Sean Salmon or Drew McFedries-Jordan Radev to see similar scenarios. (The boys at Fightlinker.com put together a nice montage of clips regarding this subject.)

Regarding Henderson’s post-fight comments in the Octagon and at the press conference, I think it’s up to one’s personal interpretation. A reporter from a national newspaper sent a text to me that night to voice his disgust with Hendo’s response and I take it he wasn’t alone.

Were the two connected? If Henderson hadn’t made those comments, would the second punch have been as big an issue to the offended? That’s something to think about as well.

As for his remarks, I’ve written about Dan Henderson since 2002. I know his wife Alison and I’ve met his children on many occasions. I have also grown accustomed to his sense of humor, which is as dry as vermouth. I do believe Henderson was trying to entertain the crowd when he stated he threw the extra punch to shut Bisping up. The comment was an exclamation point at the end of a well-earned victory and a response he knew the audience would react to. Whether we want to admit it or not, MMA has a streak of entertainment running through it. Fans want personality in all sports, whether it is heroic or villainous. That is the nature of sports at its simplest level.

I interviewed Henderson a few hours after the bout and he said he harbored nothing personal against the Brit. If you notice, Henderson doesn’t fight on that kind of emotion -- like a lot of wrestlers, his fuel is derived from the thrill of competition. However, Henderson did have an opinion about the young Bisping and even offered him a little advice.

As a side note, when I met with Bisping at his training camp in Las Vegas two weeks before UFC 100, I found him to be one of the most polite and conscientious fighters I’ve ever interviewed. I applaud him for testing himself against the top tier in his division, and I bet he learns life-altering lessons from this experience. I look forward to his next fight because I anticipate he will be a changed man.

To answer your question -- no, I don’t think this, or even Brock Lesnar’s post-fight diatribe will stall the sport’s momentum. I think it will only accelerate public curiosity, which will stimulate the sport.

Jumping to Aug. 15’s much-awaited bout between Carano and “Cyborg,” I haven’t thought about the ramifications of this fight if it goes red. I can’t recall a bloody female fight in recent memory (you experts email me if you do), and knockouts seem far and few between. It’s safe to say if Carano-Cyborg becomes a crimson battlefield, it could be a prime target for the mainstream media’s crusade against all that’s wrong with this nation. But I say this is the sport and we can’t hide it. Blood will flow sooner or later, and better it happen in a bout that is competitively matched rather than one-sided. I think Carano-Cyborg will be the former, for sure.

---

Please send feedback to [email protected]. Your letter could appear in the next edition of “The Doggy Bag.”