ASK THE TORCH: Amadi answers reader questions on Velasquez-Bigfoot, "TUF: Live" Finale matchups

By: Jason Amadi, MMATorch Columnist

Tom writes: I was just wondering what you made of the doctor's decision when he was brought in the cage to look at Antonio Silva's cuts. I for one thought that the fight should have been stopped given how bad the cuts were, where they were and how badly they were bleeding. Especially considering "Bigfoot" had not shown anything in the way of defense to the ground and pound and more was clearly imminent. I'm a longtime fan and was really impressed by Cain's performance but surely the bloodbath isn't going to help the sport to gain acceptance?

A: The beating Antonio Silva took at the hands of Cain Velasquez last Saturday night is exactly why cut stoppages exist. The sight of a nonplussed Velasquez bathed in the blood of his opponent was certainly impressive, but the fight was over as soon as the cut opened up. Blood was pouring into Silva's eyes, nose and throat; it compromised his ability to defend himself and at that point there was just no question about who was going to win the fight.

The doctor that allowed the fight to continue made a mistake and it resulted in a fighter taking tons of unnecessary punishment.

That being said, there is no way around the fact that Velasquez finishing that fight the way he did was a huge plus for him and the UFC. Like I said, the sight of Cain walking away from a guy caked in his blood was cool to see and really put him over as the kind of emotionless heavyweight killer that Fedor Emelianenko was in his prime.

As far as bloodbaths hurting the sport's ability to gain acceptance goes, that idea needs to be put to rest right now. Obviously, the sight of blood is going to be off putting to the average person, but so are concussions and bone breaks. That doesn't stop the UFC from hyping fights with the promise of unconscious athletes and bone breaking submissions, though, does it?

There are obviously people out there who don't care for MMA and will use fights like Velasquez-Silva to make their case, but at the end of the day this is a sport based around fighting. The truth is that last Saturday night's bloodbath only raised Velasquez's stock and adds buys to whatever event he headlines next. MMA has grown into what it is today by promising violence and delivering it in spades. That's what has carried the sport to this level and regardless of however it may be packaged in the future, that's what will take it to the next level as well (whatever that may be).

Mandeep writes: What do you think of the match making for the TUF finale? The two most interesting guys (who also have the most potential) have been matched together in Daron Cruickshank and Chris Tickle. Whereas Sam Sicilia has been given an easy ride. Doesn't make sense to me.

A: Admittedly, I didn't follow this season of TUF as I have some of the others, but I know enough about Cristiano Marcello to know that he isn't an "easy ride" for someone of Sam Sicilia's level.

But more to your point, for the most part guys who lost in the preliminary round of competition were paired up together and ditto for the quarterfinalists. Sam Sicilia and Cristiano Marcello both lost in the preliminary round, so they're matched up together. Chris Tickle and Daron Cruickshank both lost in the preliminary round, so that explains that matchup.

From a sporting perspective, those matchups make perfect sense.

Feel free to follow me on Twitter @JasonAmadi and direct your "Ask the Torch" questions to mmatorch@gmail.com

Source: http://www.mmatorch.com/artman2/publish/Ask_the_Torch_41/article_13480.shtml

Pat Barry  Vitor Belfort  Robert Berry David Bielkheden