Jump to content

Win Bonus


KRYME

Recommended Posts

Dana and the UFC award a fight bonus to each fighter that wins the fight on the card. But in the event of a controversial decision (take Machida/Shogun for example) they don?t always award the fighter who received the win with a bonus. Do you think this should be allowed? Should it be up to Dana and the UFC to decide if a fighter gets a bonus or not based on their own opinions? If a fighter wins, regardless of how controversial or what their opinions on the outcome of the fight might be, shouldn?t they give the fighter who won the win bonus? What are your thoughts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A fighter should get there bonus based on who won the fight..even if it is controversial. However i think that if it is a great fight they (ufc) could just award both fighters with the win bonus....because after all, that's what us fans pay to see...a good fight.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A fighter should get there bonus based on who won the fight..even if it is controversial. However i think that if it is a great fight they (ufc) could just award both fighters with the win bonus....because after all' date=' that's what us fans pay to see...a good fight.[/quote']

 

Well there is a cash bonus for Fight of the Night.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think "win" bonuses should be eliminated and "performance" bonuses implemented.

 

If you have a geat fight, with both guys giving it all, and giving the fans a great performance, both should be rewarded. If a fight is close enough to go either way, with neither fighter standing out as the clear winner, neither should be.

 

If one fighter is far and beyond, giving a dynamic and dominating performance, he should be rewarded. If a fighter plays the boring, win by points alone strategy, they shouldn't.

 

Since this sport is so much supposed to be about satisying the fans with the best fights, regardless of speculative rankings by keyboard martial artists, make it that way. More incentive to "leave it all in the octagon". and put on the best performance possible will bring out the true great fighters to shine above those satisfied with just getting another W on the record by any means necessary, instead of actually trying to win a fight, which is the root of this sport, FIGHTING!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

there is not always a bonus for the win. Lesnar didn't get a win bonus @ 100. I'm sure it is in their contracts. if , How much, when etc. And of course it should be up to the ufc weather or not they get a bonus, who decides if bonuses are to be given where you work? I own my own company and I decide who gets how much and when they get it, nobody else, (cept maybe my wife).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmm this is a good thread, I thought for a few minutes. If someone wins a bad decision, by a bad ref stoppage or like the DQ that Jones had... I think the winner, despite how they won should still receive the "WIN" bonus. If Dana disagrees however, he could do like he did for the TUF1 finale and give a bonus to the loser as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think "win" bonuses should be eliminated and "performance" bonuses implemented.

 

If you have a geat fight' date=' with both guys giving it all, and giving the fans a great performance, both should be rewarded. If a fight is close enough to go either way, with neither fighter standing out as the clear winner, neither should be.[/b']

 

Its called Fight of the Night award.

& Multiple FoN awards have been given.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmm this is a good thread' date=' I thought for a few minutes. If someone wins a bad decision, by a bad ref stoppage or like the DQ that Jones had... I think the winner, despite how they won should still receive the "WIN" bonus. If Dana disagrees however, he could do like he did for the TUF1 finale and give a bonus to the loser as well.[/quote']

again I think it comes down to what is in their contracts. Dana also gives bonuses to guys who lose the fight, but do a hell of a job. (Shogun)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dana and the UFC award a fight bonus to each fighter that wins the fight on the card. But in the event of a controversial decision (take Machida/Shogun for example) they don?t always award the fighter who received the win with a bonus. Do you think this should be allowed? Should it be up to Dana and the UFC to decide if a fighter gets a bonus or not based on their own opinions? If a fighter wins' date=' regardless of how controversial or what their opinions on the outcome of the fight might be, shouldn?t they give the fighter who won the win bonus? What are your thoughts.[/quote']

 

The "no win bonus" only applies if it's in your contract.

Lesnar obviously gets a set rate of pay, win or lose. I'm sure he also gets a % of the PPV revenue.

Win bonuses are USUALLY double their fight purse. In some cases, however, the bonus is less. It all depends on the contract that you have with the UFC.

FWIW, a win bonus is pretty much a performance bonus. Why should you be rewarded for losing?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The "no win bonus" only applies if it's in your contract.

Lesnar obviously gets a set rate of pay' date=' win or lose. I'm sure he also gets a % of the PPV revenue.

Win bonuses are USUALLY double their fight purse. In some cases, however, the bonus is less. It all depends on the contract that you have with the UFC.

FWIW, a win bonus is pretty much a performance bonus. Why should you be rewarded for losing?[/quote']

 

Well that's why I listed the Shogun/Machida fight as an example. Shogun got a win bonus, and Machida didn't. Even tho he was awarded the win. That was basically what I was asking. If they should give out bonuses based on their own opinion. If that is even the case.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well that's why I listed the Shogun/Machida fight as an example. Shogun got a win bonus' date=' and Machida didn't. Even tho he was awarded the win. That was basically what I was asking. If they should give out bonuses based on their own opinion. If that is even the case.[/quote']

 

Well then I guess Machida didn't want a win bonus.

Fighters around his salary range, usually make $150k to show and $100k to win. Maybe he opted to take a base of $200k, win or lose. Plus, as champion and headliner, he will get % of PPV revenue.

Machida likely made close to $500k for that night, and I STILL think that they should have been awarded FOTN.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well then I guess Machida didn't want a win bonus.

Fighters around his salary range' date=' usually make $150k to show and $100k to win. Maybe he opted to take a base of $200k, win or lose. Plus, as champion and headliner, he will get % of PPV revenue.

Machida likely made close to $500k for that night, and I STILL think that they should have been awarded FOTN.[/quote']

 

yeah I think it said Machida got 200k for the fight. I forgot about the PPV revenue too. That probably did put him up even higher. And yes it should have been FOTN.

It just seemed to me that Dana gave Shogun the win bonus and not Machida based on his own opinion. I could be wrong though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

you're clearly missing the point

 

I do see your point, a "win" bonus should be for a win, not based on Dana's opinion, seems the only fair and ethical way.

 

But just change that one word from "win" to "performance" and it becomes opinion based, and in the case of Machida/Shogun, was completely justified the way it went down. Shogun put on a great performance, and Machida didn't, regardless of the judge's decision, which I btw happen to agree with based on the scoring system as it is currently established.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do see your point' date=' a "win" bonus should be for a win, not based on Dana's opinion, seems the only fair and ethical way.

 

But just change that one word from "win" to "performance" and it becomes opinion based, and in the case of Machida/Shogun, was completely justified the way it went down. Shogun put on a great performance, and Machida didn't, regardless of the judge's decision, which I btw happen to agree with based on the scoring system as it is currently established.[/quote']

 

that's the thing. should "opinion" be removed completely when it comes to awarding fighters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

that's the thing. should "opinion" be removed completely when it comes to awarding fighters.

 

I don't think it should because the point of the UFC is supposed to be about putting on good fights for the fans. Whatever anyone wants to say about Dana's personality or business decisions, noone can deny that he knows good entertaining fights when he sees them, and makes no bones about his opinion about the quality of the fights guys put on. Why do you think Clay Guida still has a job when it is clear he will never hold a belt? And the extra bonuses heaped on Shogun further prove it.

 

If they are going to call it a win bonus, it should go to the winner of record, regardless of opinion. But opinion based performance bonuses should be bigger, and do more to encourage a fighter laying it all out there, which is what we pay to see.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think it should because the point of the UFC is supposed to be about putting on good fights for the fans. Whatever anyone wants to say about Dana's personality or business decisions' date=' noone can deny that he knows good entertaining fights when he sees them, and makes no bones about his opinion about the quality of the fights guys put on. Why do you think Clay Guida still has a job when it is clear he will never hold a belt? And the extra bonuses heaped on Shogun further prove it.

 

If they are going to call it a win bonus, it should go to the winner of record, regardless of opinion. But opinion based performance bonuses should be bigger, and do more to encourage a fighter laying it all out there, which is what we pay to see.[/quote']

 

Good point. That's kind of what I was thinking. The win bonus should go to the winner regardless of opinion. That was basically my whole point. Cause I saw that Shogun got it, and regardless fo whether or not who "should have won" he wasn't awarded the win.

But as far as the performance bonus I agree with you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A fighter should get there bonus based on who won the fight..even if it is controversial. However i think that if it is a great fight they (ufc) could just award both fighters with the win bonus....because after all' date=' that's what us fans pay to see...a good fight.[/quote']

 

Exactly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

id like to see the win bounus scrapped and base wages increased for all fighters

 

this seems to come up alot here. Does anybody have a link to any fighters saying that the pay they get from the UFC is too low? Or complaining about anything? For real, I have never read about a released fighter saying, "oh well, the pay sucked anyway"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

who ever they believe should get the bonus should get the bonus

exactly, it is a BONUS. you are not entitled to it just because you did your job the way you were supposed to do it. "Hey bob, go dig that ditch.....good, you dug a ditch, here's an extra day's pay for doing just what I asked you to do."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

exactly' date=' it is a BONUS. you are not entitled to it just because you did your job the way you were supposed to do it. "Hey bob, go dig that ditch.....good, you dug a ditch, here's an extra day's pay for doing just what I asked you to do."[/quote']

 

I agree with you. It's just odd they call it a "Win Bonus" but don't give it to the winner. It's their right to do so, and there may be more to the equation than what we know. It's just speculation.

 

As for your last post about fighters complaining about their pay. People say that cause some people like to compare what a fighter makes to other athletes in other big sports. Which most agree they are over payed. But no, no fighter has ever really complained about what they make.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with you. It's just odd they call it a "Win Bonus" but don't give it to the winner. It's their right to do so' date=' and there may be more to the equation than what we know. It's just speculation.

 

As for your last post about fighters complaining about their pay. People say that cause some people like to compare what a fighter makes to other athletes in other big sports. Which most agree they are over payed. But no, no fighter has ever really complained about what they make.[/quote']

k, cuz everybody seems to have the opinion that they are unhappy with what they get. We have no idea how much they make as far as under the table, hidden bonuses, ppv and the like, or how much they get from their sponsers. The $4000 fight pay may just be the tip of it. They sign a contract that has to do with image rights, but nobody knows what that entails either. Maybe they get $1 everytime their name is mentioned in print, or a pic of them is shown. Until all that is disclosed, nobody should complain on behalf of the fighters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think "win" bonuses should be eliminated and "performance" bonuses implemented.

 

If you have a geat fight' date=' with both guys giving it all, and giving the fans a great performance, both should be rewarded. If a fight is close enough to go either way, with neither fighter standing out as the clear winner, neither should be.

 

If one fighter is far and beyond, giving a dynamic and dominating performance, he should be rewarded. If a fighter plays the boring, win by points alone strategy, they shouldn't.

 

Since this sport is so much supposed to be about satisying the fans with the best fights, regardless of speculative rankings by keyboard martial artists, make it that way. More incentive to "leave it all in the octagon". and put on the best performance possible will bring out the true great fighters to shine above those satisfied with just getting another W on the record by any means necessary, instead of actually trying to win a fight, which is the root of this sport, FIGHTING![/quote']

 

contract deals aside i think the performance bonus sounds like a good idea, on top of fight of the night ko of the night etc awards

Link to comment
Share on other sites

k' date=' cuz everybody seems to have the opinion that they are unhappy with what they get. We have no idea how much they make as far as under the table, hidden bonuses, ppv and the like, or how much they get from their sponsers. The $4000 fight pay may just be the tip of it. They sign a contract that has to do with image rights, but nobody knows what that entails either. Maybe they get $1 everytime their name is mentioned in print, or a pic of them is shown. Until all that is disclosed, nobody should complain on behalf of the fighters.[/quote']

 

no complaining from me. Just purely for discussion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...