Are five-round main event non-title fights good for the UFC?

http://www.mmamania.com/2011/7/24/2291424/are-five-round-main-event-non-title-fights-good-for-the-ufc

On the one hand, it would seem obvious that an extra two rounds would provide more time for closely contested fights to decide an eventual winner.

On the other, training will become more difficult and in turn, injuries are more likely to occur. Lord knows there have been enough injuries to last a lifetime.

On a recent episode of Inside MMA, Chris Leben (who will participate in the first five-round main event non-title fight against Mark Munoz at UFC 138) and Melvin Guillard gave their take on it. Here's Leben:

"Five rounds, you want to know how I feel about it, sucks. I'll be honest with you, I'm not stoked on the idea. But this is what we do, this is my job and this is what allows me to move up so I'm going to do what I gotta do."

And Guillard's take:

"I'm one of those guys, I'm a finisher. Training for five rounds will probably be the worst part of it. But actually going five rounds? I doubt if anybody fights me (it) goes five rounds. I think the good thing about it is that it prepares you mentally for a title fight. A lot of us, I haven't been in a five round fight. So when you step up to the stage and possibly after I knock out Joe Lauzon, they move me to number one contender or title shot, I have to fight a five round fight. I don't go into a fight thinking that I'm going to go the distance or going to finish it quick but it's good to be prepared."

They are good.

They are gay.

freakzilla wrote:They are gay.

You're gay.

Lol, great comeback. Only took you 18 hours to think of it

freakzilla wrote:Lol, great comeback. Only took you 18 hours to think of it

You're still gay though

Five round main events are great, I really don't see the problem. As if your average fan is really going to care about the prestige of championship rounds.

I do, it cheapens it. I mean Leben vs Munoz? seriously?

freakzilla wrote:I do, it cheapens it. I mean Leben vs Munoz? seriously?

Would you rather Hardy vs Lytle ?

ONLY TITLE FIGHTS!

freakzilla wrote:ONLY TITLE FIGHTS!

Just think if Page vs Shad or Shad vs Silva went five rounds, perhaps we might have seen stoppages.

Or we might have gotten 2 more boring rounds.

I've got a bad feeling this will lead to more stalling. One of the reasons MMA rose to popularity was the short fights

NJBeatdown86 wrote:I've got a bad feeling this will lead to more stalling. One of the reasons MMA rose to popularity was the short fights

+1 Can you imagine 2 more rounds of Rampage-Machida?

It's a tough call, because it feels that world class fighters should have more time than 15 minutes. But it's the nature of the sport that causes the quick stoppages, and allowing more rounds will lead to stalling, Machida-Rampage would have just had 10 more minutes of Machida running and Rampage standing there angrily grimacing.

I actually think fights should be 5*3min rounds and title fights 7*3min rounds. Gives the striker a better chance because he gets more rounds to get that KO instead of sitting on his back for 5 minutes. If the fight is a draw we get an extra 3 min round to decide the winner.