Official Rules of the PRIDE FC Drinking Challenge

Igor VovchanchynBefore we get into the mechanisms of the game itself, let’s go over the most important rules:
1. Go at your own pace.

2. Don’t harm yourself.

3. Have fun.

4. But not too much fun.

There, is that clear enough for everyone? As for the other specifics, we’re going to get started right here on Patreon at about 8 pm MST on Friday, March, 9. We’ll be watching PRIDE FC: Final Conflict 2005. And if you’re playing along with us, these are the rules of the drinking challenge that we’ll try our best to adhere to:

– Soccer kicks/stomps: finish your beer (limit one per fight, past highlights exempted)

– Knees to the head of a grounded opponent: drink (one per knee)

– Yellow cards: finish your beer (limit one per fight)

– Confetti falling from the ceiling: drink

– Appearance of seemingly underage ring girls: drink

– Ref cam: drink

– Mauro Ranallo freaks out: drink

– Rope grab and/or outside officials shoving fighters back in: drink

– Awkward referee restart: drink

– Bas Rutten making noises that aren’t words to describe action: drink

– Someone wearing a damn gi in the ring: drink

– Someone wearing some damn wrestling shoes: drink

– Bob Sapp sighting: drink

– Bas mentions his own career: drink

– Alistair Overeem hammer sighting: drink

– Pride music: drink

– “Give up?!”: drink

– Ref touches someone’s groin while explaining rules: drink

– Weird-ass submission: finish your beer

– “Liver shot”: drink

Hey! Here’s the Link to the CME’s Patreon Page

CME signWe know, we know. You listened to the latest episode of the CME and immediately thought to yourself, “Self, how do I go on the internets and give these thoughtful motherfuckers some of my money?” Well, here you go, the link to the Patreon page Ben made for us, is right here.

Use it wisely. Or just use it.


Whoops! The CME is Off 6/12. We’re Back on 6/19!

CME signYou guys, remember when that scamp Ben Fowlkes went on vacation a couple weeks ago and canceled the Co-Main Event Podcast? Remember how much we laughed? Yeah, well, so, Chad Dundas is doing that same shit this week. So, uhhhh, there will be no new CME episode on 6/12. LOL right? One day this will all be so humorous. Just try to swallow your rage until we can all look back and laugh.

The CME will return on 6/19 with a regular episode that (barring any crazy breaking news) will probably discuss Mark Hunt’s win over Derrick Lewis (and the Beast’s kinda, maybe retirement?!?), whatever happens at Holly Holm’s fight against Bethe Correia and then looks ahead to that crazy main event between Michael Chiesa and Kevin Lee.




Happy Birthday, America! (CME Delayed Until 7/5)

CME signIn celebration of America’s birthday (and because everyone has a family barbecue/lake trip/short rehab stint already scheduled) this week’s Co-Main Event Podcast will be delayed until Tuesday.

This gives everyone the chance to really get their jingoistic  grooves on Monday, drink too many cheap American lagers, blow some shit up and brave the most dangerous day of the year on America’s highways. Besides, it also gives Brock Lesnar 24 more hours to pull out of UFC 200 with some sort of lower intestinal disorder nobody has ever heard of before.

The podcast will return on Tuesday to continue its wall-to-wall UFC 200 coverage. On that day, the CME will drop at the normal time, at some point in the early evening as soon as it’s all done. We’d appreciate you not asking. Thanks in advance!

Read Suzanne Davis’ Mind-Bending MasterTweet Theatre Stats

masterTWEET logoLongtime Friend of the Podcast Suzanne Davis (aka the Big Homie SoozieCuzie, aka the self-proclaimed MMA Journalist of the Year 2016) commemorated CME episode 200 by compiling some stats about MasterTweet Theatre. Like, a lot of stats. There’s no point in us going on at length about it, really, except to say it is awesome and Suzanne’s zeal for this project and attention to detail are amazing and humbling. If you’re not following her on Twitter at this point, well, you’re playing yourself.

Take it away, Madam Davis …

Dear My Dear Dudes Mr. Ben Fowlkes and Chad Dundas,

Monday’s recording will mark the 200th episode of the Co-Main Event Podcast. That’s an amazing achievement! I mean, just look at the UFC. Unlike them, your 200th show is actually the 200th show.

Your first show dropped on May 23rd, 2012, your 200th will come out on April 11th, 2016. In the subsequent 1,419 days between, you’ve both had children, you’ve both changed journalistic outlets, you’ve both been published, Chad lost his laptop battery to the abyss, and Ben was ordered to ejaculate 15 to 20 times a week in the following 2 to 6 weeks to “clear out the stockpiles.” (Edit: These last two things are separate events.)

Sincerely, everyone loves your show and I am glad to have been a part of it a few times via listener mail. Now…if only you guys had an easier way to unsubscribe from your goddamn newsletter.

I wanted to put something together for you guys to show my appreciation and to celebrate a pretty damn cool milestone. I wanted to make something that was unique and that no one else would do. (At least, not without doing away with a large piece of their sanity.)

So I did. I made a spreadsheet…

…that documented every MasterTweet Theatre.

It took almost a month, but I went through all of the episodes with a MasterTweet Theatre segment. Then, I searched Twitter, found the exact text, and linked every available Tweet. (There were, of course, several over the past 4 years that have been deleted or could only be found via re-Tweet. In cases where only a re-Tweet was available, I linked the re-Tweet. In cases where no Tweet was available, I manually entered the text.) All of the Tweets you’ll see are copied as written and have links so that anyone can click on the Tweet and go directly to the Twitter page where that Tweet is located.

On top of this, I recorded your guesses and the number of times you guessed a specific Tweeter (e.g. Phil Baroni) and I recorded the number of times that specific Tweeter made an appearance on the show. I then broke this information down further into correct guesses and incorrect guesses, appearance percentage, and ratio.

I documented episode numbers and dates, themes, Chad Dundas’ Sir Nigel Longstock’s “What have you got going on this week…”, and Chad Dundas’ Sir Nigel Longstock’s roles.

The following episodes contained a MasterTweet Theatre segment:

2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 11, 15, 17, 19, 21, 23, 25, 27, 29, 33, 35, 37, 39, 41, 44, 47, 49, 51, 53, 55, 59, 61, 63, 66, 68, 71, 73, 74, 77, 79, 81, 85, 89, 91, 94, 96, 98, 100, 102, 106, 109, 111, 114, 117, 120, 123, 125, 128, 130, 132, 138, 140, 144, 148, 150, 156, 162, 166, 167, 170, 175, 178, 181, 186, 189, 195

Below, you will find just the results of the spreadsheet. You can click

→ HERE ←

(and you really, really should)

…to go directly to the spreadsheet to read/access the Tweets themselves and to find all of the individual fighter numbers and not just how many times you were right or wrong.

Until next Monday, you’re the only people who have a link to this page. After Co-Main Event 200 is uploaded, I’m going to share it with Twitter. (Unless there’s some reason I shouldn’t.)
Thank you guys for all the laughs and goofiness and for lifting my spirits exactly when I needed them lifted. Here’s to another 200 episodes.


Suzanne Davis

Overall Numbers:

Total Episodes: 72
Percentage of Episodes with a MasterTweet Theatre Segment: 36.18%
Total Tweets: 362

Total Guesses: 709 (combined)
Times Correct: 225
Percentage Correct: 31.735%
Ratio Correct: 1 in 3.151

Times Incorrect: 484
Percentage Incorrect: 68.265%
Ratio Incorrect: 1 in 1.464

No Guesses: 15

Top Ten Tweeters by Occurrence:

Phil Baroni
Appearances: 46
Total Percentage of All Tweets: 12.431%
Ratio: 1 to 8.044

Rich Franklin
Appearances: 22
Total Percentage of All Tweets: 6.077%
Ratio: 1 to 16.455

War Machine
Appearances: 21
Total Percentage of All Tweets: 5.801%
Ratio: 1 to 17.238

Michael Bisping
Appearances: 14
Total Percentage of All Tweets: 3.867%
Ratio: 1 to 25.857

Chris Leben, Sean McCorkle
Appearances: 10
Total Percentage of All Tweets: 2.762%
Ratio: 1 to 36.2

Josh Barnett
Appearances: 9
Total Percentage of All Tweets: 2.486%
Ratio: 1 to 40.222

Kendall Grove, Quinton Jackson
Appearances: 8
Total Percentage of All Tweets: 2.210%
Ratio: 1 to 45.25

Arianny Celeste, Dan Hardy, Randy Couture, Wanderlei Silva
Appearances: 7
Total Percentage of All Tweets: 1.934%
Ratio: 1 to 51.714

Ben’s Top Five Most Guessed:

Phil Baroni
Times Guessed: 46
Total Percentage Guessed: 12.885%
Ratio: 1 to 7.761

Joseph Benavidez, War Machine
Times Guessed: 19
Total Percentage Guessed: 5.322%,
Ratio: 1 to 18.789

Matt Mitrione
Times Guessed: 15
Total Percentage Guessed: 4.202%
Ratio: 1 to 23.8

Rich Franklin
Times Guessed: 14
Total Percentage of All Guesses: 3.922%
Ratio: 1 to 25.5

Total Guesses: 357

Times Correct: 114
Percentage Correct: 31.933%
Ratio Correct: 1 in 3.131

Times Incorrect: 243
Percentage Incorrect: 68.067%
Ratio Incorrect: 1 in 1.469
No Guesses: 5

Chad’s Top Five Most Guessed:

Phil Baroni
Times Guessed: 48
Total Percentage of All Guesses: 13.636%
Ratio: 1 to 7.333

Matt Mitrione
Times Guessed: 23
Total Percentage of All Guesses: 6.534%
Ratio: 1 to 15.304

Randy Couture
Times Guessed: 15
Total Percentage of All Guesses: 4.261%
Ratio: 1 to 23.467

Arianny Celeste
Times Guessed: 14
Total Percentage of All Guesses: 3.977%
Ratio: 1 to 25.143

t-Michael Bisping, Rich Franklin, War Machine
Times Guessed: 12
Total Percentage of All Guesses: 3.409%
Ratio: 1 to 29.333

Total Guesses: 352
Times Correct: 111
Percentage Correct: 31.933%
Ratio Correct: 1 in 3.171

Times Incorrect: 241
Percentage Incorrect: 68.466%
Ratio Incorrect: 1 in 1.460

No Guesses: 10

Buy Your Official CME ‘DUNDASSO’ T-shirt Now

9521_pI2KWe’re not going to mince words here. We know you want to buy a Dundasso T-shirt. You can do that right here. The design will only be available for 14 days, so don’t delay.

Shout out to Portland, Ore. area designer Jonny Ashcroft for hooking us up with the design. Be sure to look him up for all your graphic design needs.

Pre-orders Now Available for ‘Champion of the World’

HIST londos-lewis-wrigley.jpgOh, hey there. You came looking for the new episode of the Co-Main Event Podcast? It’s right above. While you’re here, though, do take a moment to note that pre-orders of Chad’s novel CHAMPION OF THE WORLD are now available at The book finally has a publication date (7/12/16 for those who want to stand in line early) and so far is available for order in hardcover only. Don’t worry, though, you tech-savvy motherfuckers, electronic versions and whatnot will be available soon. Don’t worry, we’ll let you know when that happens.

As for now, go forth and buy.

Also, read on to see how Amazon is describing Chad’s book. And go right here to read a sample chapter if you like.

In this stunning historical fiction debut set in the world of wrestling in the 1920s, a husband and wife are set adrift in a place where everyone has something to hide and not even the fights can be taken at face value.

Late summer, 1921: Disgraced former lightweight champion Pepper Van Dean has spent the past two years on the carnival circuit performing the dangerous “hangman’s drop” and taking on all comers in nightly challenge bouts. But when he and his cardsharp wife, Moira, are marooned in the wilds of Oregon, Pepper accepts an offer to return to the world of wrestling as a trainer for Garfield Taft, a down-and-out African American heavyweight contender in search of a comeback and a shot at the world title.

At the training camp in rural Montana, Pepper and Moira soon realize that nothing is what it seems: not Taft, the upcoming match, or the training facility itself. With nowhere to go and no options left, Pepper and Moira must carefully navigate the world of gangsters, bootlegging, and fixed competitions, in the hope that they can carve out a viable future.

A story of second chances and a sport at the cusp of major change, Champion of the World is a wonderful historical debut from a new talent in fiction.

Read a Sample Chapter of Chad’s Novel ‘Champion of the World’

HIST londos-lewis-wrigley.jpgEven though the dang thing doesn’t come out until 2016, Chad made a sample chapter of his debut novel Champion of the World available for public consumption on Monday at his website.

Wait, you’re saying, Chad has a website? He does, and you can read said sample chapter right here.

A Sentimental Miseducation

imagesThis essay, by Tom Hoisington of Eugene, Ore., won the grand prize in the CME’s second “annual” White Elephant Essay Contest.

You’ve got to be optimistic to be single. Stupid. You have to be stupid. Because that’s what optimism means, y’know. — Louis C.K.

So now, less than five years later, you can go up on a steep hill in Las Vegas and look West, and with the right kind of eyes you can almost see the high water mark — the place where the wave finally broke, and rolled back. — Hunter Thompson

If they could enter a time machine and travel to the mid- to late-80s, younger listeners of the Co-Main Event podcast arriving in suburban Seattle would witness a shocking phenomenon: Kids wearing the t-shirts and trading the stickers of surf brands. Although the drizzly Northwest is at a great remove from Mavericks and Diamond Head, kids of various ages proudly festooned themselves in neon wear from T&C, Gotcha, Ocean Pacific, and more. Our hypothetical time travelers would rightfully scratch their head in wonder: What the hell are all these soon-to-be-grunge fanatics doing in all this surf gear? The answer, of course, was that it was a fad. For some reason, some say because of “Fast Times at Ridgemont High,” surfing and surfing culture captured the imagination of the entire country for a couple years, even far-flung corners of the nation that had no real access to it or experience with it. I was reminded frequently of that time in my youth when I would pick up my nephews from school circa 2009 or 2010. There, elementary-age kids (and their fathers, to admit a harsh truth) proudly displayed their TapouT apparel for all to see. Likely none of the wearers trained, and many were far too young to invest the kind of attention it takes to intelligently follow a sprawling, disorganized, individual sport, but there they were. It was a fad. Now, about five years after, those t-shirts are not as readily found. Surf has given way to grunge. The single most perilous hazard currently afflicting MMA is the misguided notion that it will continue to grow, when in fact it has already peaked, and MMA promotions and affiliated companies would do well to focus on a sensible retrenchment rather than cancer-like expansion for its own sake.

Not persuaded by the anecdotal evidence? To indulge in a bit of picture-within-a picture citing, last year Greg Doyel cited CME-approved PPV-buyrates-svengali Dave Meltzer in saying that “UFC buys rose from 2007-10, then dropped by nearly 33% in 2011, then hovered in that same range for 2012.” TUF ratings continue their free fall; the show likely only remains on the air due to FOX’s desperation for original programming for its two recently launched sports networks. UFC Fight Night ratings on those networks are trending at about half of what they did on Spike. MMA media are fond of speculating on what the cause might be (dilution of the product quality, frequent PR blunders by fighters, Dana F’n White), yet often miss the forest for the trees: It’s two people. In a cage. Trying to hurt each other. The idea that such a concept would one day overtake the popularity of the NFL, let alone soccer globally, wasn’t just misguided from the start. Frankly, it was preposterous.

Never ones to let facts get in the way of a good narrative, White and the Fertittas continue to try to expand. Rather than cancel TUF or work to freshen it, we get new iterations based around the globe. Likewise, events seem to proliferate like a cloud of locusts, ensuring dilution of product, no matter what anyone contends. By definition, if more events are held and the number of quality fighters remain stagnant, the company has to employ less talented fighters. (See: Reinhardt, Jason.) And I’ve yet to see anyone contend that there’s been a boom in people wanting to become professional MMA fighters. Given what we hear from fighters about their quality of life as they now begin to retire from the still-young sport, I wouldn’t expect a mad rush of interested parties in the future, either.

So what’s the answer? Much as the word makes White gag, it’s the hardcores. When the WWE included PPVs on its online WWE Network, it was making a calculated risk. It infuriated the cable companies; some declined to carry its PPVs anymore. It stood to make significantly less money per viewer. But the WWE understands that wistfully gazing backward at the halcyon days of business models gone by isn’t laying a solid foundation for the future. Streaming content to micro-targeted audiences is where all video is eventually headed. Will there be fits and starts along the way to discovering how to make it profitable? Yes. But those who begin that process sooner rather than later are at an advantage versus dinosaurs who refuse to evolve. UFC 100 is not walking through that door, MMA fans.

Like it or not, the UFC has its fanbase. Might a growing female roster interest more women? Possibly. Could entering new markets like Mexico interest a few more fans? Maybe. But UFC Fight Pass drew a higher percentage of international subscribers than was initially expected, and that reveals an inconvenient truth about the internet: it already allowed anyone who had any interest in discovering MMA to discover it. Regardless of sex. Regardless of nationality. The awareness is there. The market is what it is. The time to work on introducing MMA to new fans is over. The focus now needs to be on not antagonizing existing fans to the extent that, despite their interest, they decide it’s not worth their time to follow the sport anymore. Finding a profitable, convenient, consumer-friendly way to deliver content to current fans will ensure the sport’s survival. Foolhardy quests to sell bare-knuckle, no-holds-barred fighting to viewers with no interest in the spectacle is both quixotic and suicidal, and could well relegate MMA’s relevance to future episodes of “I Love the ’10s!”

Works Cited

Doyel, Greg. “UFC won’t tap out in fight for major sports status, but it has peaked.” CBS Sports. 07 March 2013. Web. 09 May 2014.

Meltzer, Dave. “Much to learn from and about UFC Fight Pass and future of streaming channels.” MMA Fighting. 09 May 2014. Web. 09 May 2014.

Cruz, Jason. “TUF 19 Episode 4: 438,000 viewers.” 08 May 2014. Web. 09 May 2014.

Saccaro, Matt. “Are events like UFC Fight Night 32 why the UFC’s popularity is suffering?” Cage Potato. 10 Nov. 2013. Web. 09 May 2014.

Martin, Brian. “UFC President Dana White has NFL, weather and more on his mind.” Los Angeles Daily News. 27 Jan. 2014. Web. 09 May 2014.

Ranking and Legitimacy: From Intuition to Measurement

This essay, by Corey Whichard, won first place in the Co-Main Event Podcast’s second annual White Elephant Essay Contest, in the persuasive essay category.

“The UFC always has the fallback to where if some really bad shit happens, it can just have Dana White yell at us about it … Bellator doesn’t really have that. … It doesn’t have that figurehead who is endowed with the confidence to think that he can just make us believe whatever.”
— Chad Dundas, 5/12/14, Episode 103

“But, you know, there’s a lot of weird stuff going on with those rankings … It seems like if the UFC wanted to make those rankings into a thing that we could all take seriously, they would have to have some rules …”
— Ben Fowlkes, 5/12/14, Episode 103

In today’s MMA landscape, the UFC’s capricious abuse of its own ranking system is symptomatic of a much more serious threat to the overall health of MMA. That is, the UFC has too much control over how the sport is presented, and it often uses this control to benefit its own financial agenda at the expense of the sport’s integrity. If MMA is ever going to attain the kind of “sport for sport’s sake” legitimacy that attends football (or even tennis), an important first step is to develop a meaningful ranking system based on objective standards of athletic accomplishment. In this essay, I describe a method for creating such a system and demonstrate its validity.

One way to generate a standardized MMA ranking system involves drawing on techniques used in a sub-field of sociology called “social network analysis.” The basic idea is to model the structure of a social group by mapping out the relationships between individual group members (Borgatti, Everett, and Johnson 2013). It helps to think about this visually. For instance, picture all of the fighters in the UFC’s Welterweight division as large dots drawn on a piece of paper. Now imagine that there are lines linking certain dots together, where each line represents a fight, and each linked pair of dots represents fighters who have competed against each other. Using information from to construct a win-loss matrix for all Welterweights employed by the UFC circa September 2013, I actually diagrammed the 170-pound division with a program called UCINet. [See Figure 1; Georges St. Pierre is the red dot.]

170Once the network structure has been mapped out, it is possible to rank the fighters by calculating each fighter’s “Beta-centrality.” Beta-centrality functions by assigning each fighter a score based on the number of opponents in the network that he has beaten; it then adjusts that score based on the position of those opponents in the network, which itself is based on the position of the opponents that they have beaten, and so on. The process counts all opponents that are directly tied to the fighter, and all opponents that are indirectly tied to the fighter within 10 fights, though opponents that are “farther” away contribute less and less to the fighter’s score. Thus, when Jake Shields beat Martin Kampmann, his “Beta-centrality” score got a bump for this direct victory, but it also got a smaller bump for Kampmann’s win over Paulo Thiago, and an even smaller bump for Thiago’s win over Mike Swick, etc. This kind of recursive calculation is impossibly difficult to perform by hand, though relatively simple with the right computer program.

In plain English, a ranking system based on Beta-centrality means that the “best” fighter in the division does not simply have the most UFC victories, but he has the most victories over the most accomplished fighters in his division. Unlike the current ranking system, where the criteria for evaluating a fighter’s accomplishments largely rest on human opinion, a system based on Beta-centrality has the advantage of standardization. The relevant concept here is prestige, or the notion that a person’s prominence in a group only exists as an emergent quality of their relation to other group members. If you can empirically measure a person’s relationship to others in a group—using, say, a win/loss record—then you can empirically measure their relative position in that group. I used these techniques to generate a top-ten list of the Welterweights described above [see Table 1]. Keeping in mind that this ranking technique does not (yet) account for wins against fighters who were not employed by the UFC during September 2013, that it does not account for periods of inactivity (as long as the fighter was employed, their record was counted), and that it does not assign “style” points for impressive wins, it is notable that 50% of the same names appear (in different order) on my top-ten list that appear on Bloody Elbow’s September 2013 Welterweight meta-rankings (Wade 2013). This overlap provides suggestive evidence that the Beta-centrality rank is at least somewhat accurate. However, I ran one more test to verify this ranking technique’s validity.

Beta-Centrality Ranking for UFC Welterweights

Rank          Fighter Name          Prestige Score

1                       Georges St. Pierre          5.43

2                      Matt Hughes                     3.16

3                      BJ Penn                               2.39

4                      Martin  Kampmann        2.22

5                      Johny Hendricks              2.02

6                      Carlos Condit                    2.00

7                      Thiago Alves                      1.87

8                      Jake Ellenberger             1.80

9                      Matt Serra                         1.79

10                   Rick Story                           1.63

Highly ranked fighters are highly successful fighters. If this ranking system is valid, then a fighter’s rank should be strongly related to other factors associated with professional success, such as financial compensation. It is reasonable to assume that the amount of show money that a fighter receives is a decent approximation of how much the UFC values that fighter. There are aberrations—Nate Diaz received 15K show money for UFC on Fox 7 ( 2013)—but the overall pattern holds true. For the group of Welterweights described above, I recorded the amount of show money (in thousands) that they received for their most recent fight. I also recorded each fighter’s Beta-centrality (“prestige”) score. Because the amount of show money each fighter makes will be influenced by other factors, I also gathered data on how long each fighter had been employed by the UFC, their number of UFC victories, and the number of performance-based bonuses they had received. [Descriptive statistics for these variables can be found in Table 2.]

I then entered all of this information into Stata 11 (StataCorp 2009), a computer program designed to model statistical relationships between multiple variables. I used a statistical technique known as “Ordinary Least Squares” (OLS) regression to examine the correlation between Beta-centrality and show money, while simultaneously accounting for the influence of UFC wins, tenure, and bonuses. [See Table 3 for results.] Here’s how to read the table of results: the “b-coefficient” value estimates the correlation between the variable and “show money,” the “standard error” value represents the degree of imprecision, and the asterisks indicate the probability that the estimated correlation may be due to random chance. For instance, a “p-value” of 0.05 means that you can be 95% certain that the observed effect is real. To interpret the correlation, you read the b-coefficient as “a one-unit change in the predictor variable produces an X-unit change in the outcome variable.” Alright, so here’s what all this complicated shit really means: after accounting for the number of years a Welterweight has been employed by the UFC, how many wins they have, and how many bonuses they’ve won, each 1-point increase in the Welterweight’s prestige score translates to an additional $25K in show money, give or take about $4K. The model is more than 99.9% certain that the correlation is not due to random chance. In other words, Beta-centrality is powerfully correlated with financial success. The highest-rank fighters make the most show money, and the lowest-ranked fighters make the least show money. This confirms that the ranking metric is highly correlated with fighter success, which supports the notion that “Beta-centrality” is a legitimate way to go about ranking fighters.

Which fig 2






 Which fig 3






With enough manpower, it is theoretically possible to use every professional fighter’s win/loss record from to create one enormous MMA combat network. When fighters change promotions, it would be possible to treat them as “bridges” (Granovetter 1983) between the ranking structures of different organizations—a prospect that is increasingly plausible, given the UFC’s recent habit of releasing fairly high-profile fighters. In brief, using fancy mathematical techniques, it is totally possible to create an objective ranking system for MMA fighters. I propose that the implementation of such a system would go a long way toward elevating MMA’s status as a legitimate sport, and would wrest a core piece of the greater MMA narrative out from between Mr. White’s teeth.

Works Cited

Borgatti, Stephen P., Martin G. Everett, and Jeffrey C. Johnson. Analyzing Social Networks. Los Angeles: Sage, 2013. Print.

Dundas, Chad, and Ben Fowlkes. “Co-Main Event Podcast Episode 103.” 12 May 2014. Web. Accessed on 17 May 2014.

Granovetter, Mark. 1983. “The Strength of Weak Ties: A Network Theory Revisited” Sociological Theory 1: 201–233. “UFC on FOX 7 salaries + bonuses to Brown, Mein, Romero, Thomson.” 21 April 2013. <–bonuses-to-Brown-Mein-Romero-Thomson/>. Accessed on 17 May 2014.

StataCorp. 2009. Stata Statistical Software: Release 11. College Station, Tx: StataCorp LP.

Wade, Richard. “Bloody Elbow September 2013 Meta-Rankings: Welterweight.” SB Nation. 4 October 2013. Web. Accessed on 17 May 2014.