In the realm of professional sporting competition, the concept of sportsmanship entertains a wide range of concrete expressions. From trash-talking athletes that harp on colleagues and officials to highly-respected individuals that are distinguished for their game-time etiquette, the idea (or perhaps ideal) of good sportsmanship occupies its own niche in every particular sport.
One activity common to all sporting endeavors is that of conceding defeat to your opponent. In a combat sport, such as mixed martial arts, this can take many forms. Graciously accepting defeat in a postfight interview, acknowledging the better man on that day, and not making excuses, are but a few of the verbal forms that conceding defeat might take.
However, there is a more conclusive method of admitting defeat, and it is a feat that has come to symbolize the definitive way of losing a match: tapping out. The act of submitting to an opponent, either verbally or using one’s hand (or foot) has been practiced for centuries.
Whether it is a scuffle between siblings (where the term “uncle” is often employed to signify giving up) or a contest between two highly-skilled warriors, there is no more satisfying feeling than knowing that you made your opponent give up willingly (or unwillingly, as the case may be).
MMA is advertised as a sport where two world-class athletes enter the cage and proceed to punch, kick, elbow, and knee each other in the face for 15 minutes, before embracing at the end of a hard-fought battle.
There is no doubt that MMA has showcased some of the greatest sportsman-like gestures in all of sports throughout the past decade and a half. Many top fighters and champions are exceedingly humble and gracious to their opponents, more so than can be expected.
But I raise the question: Is refusing to concede defeat to your opponent, when they have rightly deserved it, a form of unsportsmanlike conduct itself? In other words, is it disrespectful or unethical to not tap out from a submission that you cannot escape? Better yet: Do fighters have an obligation to surrender when they have been placed into a compromised position?
Some fighters may refuse to tap because they see it as dishonorable, and some don’t do it because they don’t want to give their opponent the satisfaction of beating them definitively. Many also think that they can escape the submission, or try to wait until time runs out (more on this point later).
Yet, isn’t there a set of unwritten rules hidden in the martial ethos that is eschewed by millions of practitioners worldwide that places an emphasis on honor and virtue? After all, it is difficult to disagree with the outcome of a basketball game when you have lost by 20 points.
So why is it hard for some fighters to admit losing in a legitimate manner by tapping out, when they are clearly in no position to dispute the fact? I would say that refusing to tap out is more dishonorable than trying to reject the fact that one has lost.
It is obviously more difficult to accept losing than winning, but still, it is a test of the character and integrity of an athlete to lose in a gracious and praiseworthy manner. And MMA offers an outlet (tapping out), which makes this much easier than other sports. But some fighters refuse to play by the unwritten rules of single combat, which has proven costly in numerous cases.
There are many instances of fighters refusing to submit to their opponent, for whatever reason. Perhaps the most graphic example is when Frank Mir trapped Tim Sylvia in an armbar at UFC 48 and broke his arm in three places when Sylvia didn’t tap. Fortunately, referee Herb Dean was quick to recognize what happened and stopped the fight before further damage was done.
- B/R Ticket Guide
Sylvia later remarked that Dean had saved his career. But what would have happened to his arm if the match had continued? It was a title fight, and Sylvia really wanted to win back the belt after it was stripped from him for steroid use. But that doesn’t mean that he shouldn’t have played it safe and tapped.
You can hardly blame Mir for what he did, because when you get somebody in that position, you expect them to submit. And if they don’t, then naturally enough you are going to increase the pressure, because your goal is to win the fight and the opponent ought to know when to quit after getting caught in a submission like that. It’s not jiu-jitsu practice; it’s a fight, and the proverb “tap or snap” applies in this context.
Jorge Gurgel is still feeling the effects of his match against Masakazu Imanari in 2003. Imanari, a leglock specialist, caught Gurgel in a heel hook, and cranked it when the tap didn’t come. This caused Gurgel to cry out in pain, holding his newly-shattered knee. To this day, Gurgel’s busted knee affects his movement inside the cage and his training regime. If he had tapped sooner, all of that wouldn’t have happened.
Heels hooks are banned in many jiu-jitsu and Sambo competitions for a reason, but fighters need to be educated about the effects of all kinds of submissions and learn to tap accordingly.
Many fighters have been injured due to various kinds of leg locks. Some didn’t have a chance to tap because the submission came really quickly (and the damage is done before you feel anything), but others refused to submit because they were stubborn and paid the price for it.
Some competitors want to exude an aura of invincibility or toughness, and refuse to tap after getting caught in a rear naked choke. Others simply want to go down fighting, simply not tapping and consequently falling into unconsciousness.
Many fans consider this an authentic display of heart or grit, and a choke is definitely much safer than an armbar. There are many such examples of this phenomenon in MMA. Such finishes include Phil Baroni vs. Frank Shamrock, Takanori Gomi vs. Marcus Aurelio, and Josh Koscheck vs. Drew Fickett.
Still, the fact remains that these fighters refused to acknowledge defeat after getting caught in a position from which they weren't able to escape. “Going to sleep,” as it is colloquially known, might make you look tough, but is not a sportsmanlike gesture by any means, and robs the winner of his due.
The whole point of mixed martial arts is to determine who the best fighter is, so if somebody gets you in a submission that you can’t escape, shouldn’t you acknowledge that you lost in an honorable manner? The goal is to incapacitate your opponent and make them unable to continue fighting, so fighters should grant their opponents the victory when they have earned it by locking in a submission.
And the image of fighters getting choked unconscious has done nothing to make the sport more attractive to mainstream audiences or quell the assumption that MMA is a blood sport (a misconception that is still held by many detractors).
What about the time Joe Riggs caught Jason Von Flue in a triangle choke, and the latter flipped the bird before tapping out? It wasn’t the most appropriate message to send to younger audiences, but at least Von Flue conceded defeat in the end.
It may not be MMA, but an example from jiu-jitsu competition will help illustrate my point. At the 2004 Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu Mundials, in the Absolute Division final, Ronalda "Jacare" de Souza fought Roger Gracie. Gracie caught "Jacare" in an armbar and broke his limb when the latter didn't tap. However, "Jacare" was able to "evade" Gracie for the rest of the fight, and consequently won the match via points.
There are many fans in the jiu-jitsu community who believe that the match should have been stopped and Gracie awarded the winner, because he got "Jacare" in a submission which ended up breaking his arm.
Putting your opponent in a submission is the purpose of jiu-jitsu competition, and when the fighter can't escape, shouldn't he tap and concede victory? But there are also those who believe that "Jacare" won the fight, so it really depends on one's own interpretation of the rules and what criteria constitute the winner of a match.
Frank Edgar was on his way to a decision victory over Tyson Griffin before getting caught in a kneebar with one minute left in the third round. Edgar held on and won the fight. But did he prove that he was a better fighter than Griffin? After all, Edgar was saved by the bell after being put in an inescapable situation. If there was no time limit (like in the early UFC days) Edgar would have had to tap and lose the fight.
A similar incident occurred between Josh Barnett and Antonio “Minotauro” Noguiera, when the latter was put into a kneebar but was also saved by the bell. Barnett received the decision victory, but he was also the one who got Nogueira into a position where only the clock could rescue him, and for all intents and purposes, Barnett won that fight (it can be argued that Griffin “beat” Edgar as well, not officially, but technically speaking).
So did Edgar, Noguiera, and "Jacare" show themselves to be better competitors, even though they were “submitted?” I am not suggesting that fighters should tap out every time they get caught in a submission, but I am trying to analyze fights from a purely combat-oriented perspective with an eye on what defines who the true winner of a match is, despite what the scorecards might say.
And if you get saved by the bell, from a certain point of view, you “lost” the fight.
Of course, fighters should do everything they can to escape a submission, but I am talking about a refusal to tap (when they aren't able to escape) which seems futile, unnecessary, dangerous, and which is at odds with the martial spirit within which MMA is supposed to be practiced (at least ideally).
There is no need for heroism and broken limbs in the cage, and safety needs to be paramount. Most fighters cannot afford to get injured and sidelined, and they are allowed to submit at any moment during a fight, for their own good. And MMA is still in its infancy, so we surely don’t need a serious incident inside the cage from somebody playing the role of the tough guy.
On the other hand, mixed martial artists really shouldn’t be holding submissions after the other fighter taps out, but that goes without saying, and could serve as the subject matter for an article on its own. But here I just wanted to raise awareness about an issue that plagues modern MMA and remains a sticking point in the discussion about ethics and sportsmanship in contemporary athletic culture.
comments (27) write a comment »
write a new comment
2 months ago
Another great article Jad. You bring up an interesting point here.
2 months ago
the response to your headline: No, its a display of pride.
Fantastic article though. Pick of the day.
2 months ago
Avery interesting article which you approached from many different perspectives. I loved it. ***** and POTD.
2 months ago
I disagree with your entire premise. However, this is still a great article. Very well written, good examples given, and an original and thought provoking topic.
2 months ago
Thanks everybody for the feedback.
2 months ago
I'm sorry but I disagree completely. This article is very well written, but the idea that a fighter has to tap if he's caught in a submission isn't practicle . You say through out the article that these submission leave "no chance for escape." Watch the Rich Franklin/Travis Lutter fight. By your standards Rich Franklin should've tapped because he was caught in a deep armbar. Watch on for another 10 seconds and Rich Franklin ESCAPES the submission and goes on to win the fight. There isn't any way to really gauge how tight a hold is unless you are the person that is in the hold. If the hold isn't putting a fighter in danger enough for him to feel the need to tap, then why would he?? And for cases like Sylvia/Mir, this is a contact sport. It is dangerous, and the fighters know that. He took a gamble in not tapping, and it cost him. I'm pretty sure these fighters are well aware of the risks when they walk into any MMA fight. Like I said very well written, just very off the mark in my opinion.
from 2 months ago
I think was referring more to a fight like Frank Mir / Tim Sylvia. Where Sylvia end up getting his arm broke instead of tapping when he really had no hope of getting out. Now I will say if there 10sec on the clock and you can hold out you should. This is part play in to strategy and a fighter sprit to endure. Not to be mistaken for fighter pride.
from 2 months ago
I did say that a fighter should do whatever he can to escape a submission, and of course only they would know how tight it is. I also know that fighters are prideful and sometimes stubborn, but occasionally they unnecessarily put themselves in danger when tapping out could save them from injury (easier said than done) . I understand not tapping out to chokes, because no extensive damage is done, and limb submissions are much more dangerous. If a fighter thinks that he can escape, then of course he will whatever he can to get out, and that's to be expected.
For example, fighters know that leg locks (especially heel hooks) are very dangerous, and if you're going up against a leglock specialist, you need to be aware of the risks (see Imanari's fights, Rousimar Palhares, and Manny Gamburyan). I think that fighters try to hang on too long after getting caught in a leg lock, but by then the damage is done. It's a lot easier to gauge escaping an armbar, but with a heel hook you feel the pain only after your leg has been injured (because there are no nerve endings in your knee). It would be safer to tap early instead of risk getting injured in that situation (again, easier said than done, and only competitors would know).
Fighters don't have to tap, it's a personal choice. I certainly have no authority in telling pro athletes what they should or should not do. But sometimes submitting outweighs the benefits of not submitting. Tapping means conceding defeat, and if a fighter knows he can't escape the sub, wouldn't tapping be a sportsmanlike gesture? I know the winner won't get offended if his opponent doesn't tap, but it's a way of acknowledging a loss, which itself is part of good sportsmanship. But some fans won't agree with that, and I understand. It's about winning at all costs, and fighters who don't tap will have to bear the consequences.
from 2 months ago
Yea, I guess as far as injuries go it really depends on the submission and of course the fighter dishing out the submission. I understand where you're coming from on tapping out of respect, but I don't think its a respect issue. If they really needed to tap they I think most fighters would. Either way very well written man
2 months ago
Very well written article but what do you think about forrest griffin he had his arm broken in a fight because he didnt tap but then came back to knock the guy out it seemed for him winning the fight was worth more than an injury he sustained
2 months ago
Very well written article but what do you think about forrest griffin he had his arm broken in a fight because he didnt tap but then came back to knock the guy out it seemed for him winning the fight was worth more than an injury he sustained
from 2 months ago
Yeah, Griffin proved just how tough he is after that performance. I think a few other fighters wouldn't mind sacrificing a limb to ensure a victory; it's their arm after all. You just gotta do what it takes to win, and if sacrificing an appendage is what it takes, then I'm sure there are many who would accept that proposition. MMA fighters are some of the toughest dudes on the planet, and you simply have to applaud the kind of grit that Griffin showed in that match.
If a fighter doesn't tap, it's their choice, but if they still manage to pull off the victory, it's hard to argue against them. It has to be hard on their opponent, knowing that you broke the guy's arm and still lost the fight, but it just shows how difficult some guys are to put away.
2 months ago
Very nice article Jad...my POTD for sure. However, there is one thing in your article I don't necessarily agree with: "more conclusive method of admitting defeat, and it is a feat that has come to symbolize the definitive way of losing a match: tapping out." With this, I personally know what you mean, but the truth is tapping out hasn't always been so definitive. With "Phantom Taps" being discussed, and the ever famous C.B. Dollaway fake tap, I think sometimes they cause more trouble than the words "I quit". Matt Hughes was smart, and he did both...hehe. Anyways, what do you think? Is tapping out always so definitive? Oh, and to answer your article, it's not disrespectful, quite the opposite actually. It means that you have the heart to endure whatever pain the other will inflict on yourself, much like the noted Griffin-pride mentioned above me. IMHO.
from 2 months ago
I meant that when a fighter clearly taps, he has acknowledged defeat via his own free will. Usually, you can't help being knocked out by a punch or kick, and somebody can always argue against a bad stoppage or a biased decision. But when you tap, you have nobody but to blame for losing but yourself; you can't say it was the judges or referee's fault. That is why I said that tapping out is a definitive clear-cut loss.
Of course there are instances where the fighter argues that he didn't tap, and this causes controversy. Then again, a broken limb is very definitive and hard to argue against too, so that is a conclusive way to end a fight, similar to a jaw-dropping knockout. But fighters don't willingly get knocked out, and tapping is a conscious decision. That is why I think making your opponent submit from his own accord is more definitive and satisfying than winning by knockout, though many will disagree with that statement.
To be sure, refusing to tap does show a lot of heart and tenacity. I was curious about the opinions of others in the MMA community, which was one of the reasons why I wrote the article.
2 months ago
agreed...
2 months ago
The article is well put togheter, but saying a refusal to tap is unsportsmanlike is ludicrous. That's like sayin a player that hits a walk-off home run in baseball is disrespectful because he should have conceded defeat or in boxing when someone gets up after a knockdown.
2 months ago
The article is well put togheter, but saying a refusal to tap is unsportsmanlike is ludicrous. That's like saying a player that hits a walk-off home run in baseball is disrespectful because he should have conceded defeat or in boxing when someone gets up after a knockdown.
2 months ago
By you saying everyone should tap when deep into a submission hold, that could have changed alot of things. Sean Shedrk would have been submitted in the first round of his first title defense against Hermes Franca. Franca had a Guillotine in as deep as you can get around Sherks huge neck but Sean got out of it.Think about it. I for one would not have been too excited with Hermes/Penn for the undisputed title.
2 months ago
I think refusing to tap is disrespectful to your own body (if you're in danger of permanent damage).
2 months ago
I think saying you didn't lose after you clearly didn't win (Rampage saying Forrest didn't beat him later) is more disrespectful than not tapping. You have to take into consideration that this is a super-human person that refuses to tap. He is not someone from off the street. Most people would tap from sheer pain. The ability to control yourself and not tap while your your body is breaking is no easy feat. Many great fighters have refused to tap. I think even Helio Gracie. That said, I would tap. But I can't speak for people who don't tap. I don't know what they are thinking.
2 months ago
First im kinda late in seen this article so my bad. Now to the point. Lets go back in history were martial arts first orignated, Japan. Back in the day with samuri and all that good stuff it was considered dishonorable to be defeated. If you were defeated and you happened to live through the fight or battle you typically took your own life shortly after because of the shame you have brought your family and yourself. So i think that by not tapping and continuing to fight till unconciousness is a sign of strenght and unrelentless honor. What really counts is how you act once you wake up, which hopefully isnt like an asshole. Because if thats the case then everything Ive just said would be bullshit.
2 months ago
Well, I read the whole article and have concluded that you've never stepped into a ring. I really don't think it's only a matter of pride, when guys don't tap. I train in BJJ and have for some time. If I get caught in a "compromising" situation I won't tap until the submission is fully locked. You've brought up the Tim Silvia break which was a big red flag for me. An armbar is a submission that applies pressure to the elbow resulting in hyper extension. Big Tim's arm was broken at the forearm. It very well could have been that he felt he could muscle out of the position without realizing that his arm was about to get snapped off and taken home. If you train, you know that sometimes you just don't tap until you wake up on the floor with everyone peering at you.
from 2 months ago
Um ive actually trained with some well respected fighters and I dont like to tote my own horn. I just have a different point of view. See Im aspiring to be a Navy SEAL and one the SEAL traditions is to never give up which is my mentallity in anything I do wether it be just a regular workout or in a fight. In my mind fighters of any art are warriors and true warriors never give up even if you do look like a fool to everyone else. Training on the other hand is completely different. Of course you will tap in a training exercise, it would be stupid not too. It's the real battle that counts.
2 months ago
I don't believe a fighter is obligated to tap, for the same reason I think it's ok for a football team losing by 20 in the fourth quarter to onside kick. If there is still time on the clock, you should still be in the game. Nothing wrong with tapping, (or not onside kicking) but a guy shouldn't be "expected" to.
The flip side to that coin, which would make a great follow up article to this one: Is it ok to go ahead and break a guys arm if he won't tap?
from 2 months ago
I agree with you there is no obligation, unless your training. I also think it would be acceptable for the other fighter to break any part of his body that he feels neccesary to win. Again, MMA and martial artists all around the world are warriors and their battle grounds are the streets, rings, and cages. Once you step on the battle ground it's an all out war. Survival of the fittest.
2 months ago
it i8s not a show of disrespect...its a pride or sometimes stupidity thing..sometimes u just actually think u have a chance of escaping...if a fighter refuses to tap and then gets injured in the process the only one to blame is himself...if u are dumb enough to risk your career and income because u cant accept a loss then its just too dam bad...this is fighting and except for the case of Fedor..lol...your going to lose at some point...its no big deal accept it and fight again
about 1 month ago
Good article, Jad. Fighters who are too proud, stubborn, or disrespectful to tap out eventually weed themselves out of MMA. Potential career ending injuries either push fighters out the door or they get smart and play ball. And that tends to send a message to other fighters: If you want longevity, if you want to stick close to the real money and glory, lose the denial and eat the losses. Tap the hell out!
Also, the saved-by-the-bell from submissions problem in American MMA should be addressed: Why not try the former Pride FC system by implementing one 10-minute round and two-5-minute rounds and see what happens?
write a new comment