Nope, just crime & talking shit. People wanted to see him fight Silva because of the shit talking, NOT because Chael's fun to watch. (He ain't)
Originally posted by batdude123Pettis is one of my faves. I was rooting for him &expected him to win based on his fights against great wrestlers in the past. I'm just not gonna take away from what Guida did.
Why the Pettis hate? At least he goes out of his way to make a fight exciting for the fans. 😬
Originally posted by I-Drop
Nope, just crime & talking shit. People wanted to see him fight Silva because of the shit talking, NOT because Chael's fun to watch. (He ain't)
... and fighting. I really don't see how it's even debatable. Guida will never be able to dominate the number 1 p4p fighter in the world. Hell, he'll never even be able to get a title shot. The top guys that were put in front of him in the lightweight division beat him. He's going to stay at gatekeeper status.
Originally posted by I-Drop
😂 Guida is getting a title shot. He's logically next after Maynard now. Sonnen only dominated because he was fighting a man with a rib injury &in the end his natural suckiness came thru & he tapped like a *****. I don't think Guida'd dominate an injured man for 4.5 rounds & then **** up like that.
Fighters fight less than 100% all the time and never complain about it. The only reason Anderson was crying about it was because he was tossed around like a prison bitch for 4 and a half rounds. And I don't see how anything would have changed if his rib wasn't bruised. He spent the whole fight on his back, and he doesn't have the wrestling to stop Chael from taking him down.
Clay would first have to get a title shot for him to be compared to Chael Sonnen. And he's nowhere near in line for the next spot. Not when you've got guys like Guillard, Siver, and Miller waiting for a shot. And even if Guida ended up getting a shot at Edgar, the ensuing result would =
Originally posted by batdude123
Frankie by murder.
Originally posted by batdude123Silva didn't cry about anything. He mentioned it......after a WIN. If he'd lost then maybe you'd have something. When they were standing up Silva wasn't dominating like he would have if he'd been healthy. If Chael ever fights a healthy Silva, Chael's getting his dumbass snee-snashed. Chael's the runner-up. It's who he is. We can go back & forth about ifs & buts, @the end of the day Chael tapped &that 4.5 rounds of work won't be next to his name in the record books. All you'll see is the "L", same as the other times he got his dumbass caught in a triangle. I've never seen Guida in a boring fight. I've seen Sonnen in one exciting fight & he choked.....even w/'roids backing him up against an injured man. Epic........Fail!!!!!
Fighters fight less than 100% all the time and never complain about it. The only reason Anderson was crying about it was because he was tossed around like a prison b[b]itch for 4 and a half rounds. And I don't see how anything would have changed if his rib wasn't bruised. He spent the whole fight on his back, and he doesn't have the wrestling to stop Chael from taking him down.Clay would first have to get a title shot for him to be compared to Chael Sonnen. And he's nowhere near in line for the next spot. Not when you've got guys like Guillard, Siver, and Miller waiting for a shot. And even if Guida ended up getting a shot at Edgar, the ensuing result would =
Frankie by murder. [/B]
Me being bitter after getting stood up has nothing to do with it......ok, maybe it has everything to do with it. 😂 But you're still wrong. The gloves absolutely, without a doubt made for strikers. You not knowing this shows your ignorance of the sport's history. Gloves were forced by the athletic commission to protect the fighters from harm. If you argue otherwise, you're either ignorant or pretending to be. As for starting on the feet, i'm still right. You counter to my point was deflective. The reason why they start on the feet doesn't change the fact it favors strikers. As for fights being stood up, I'm right about that as well. You never countered my point, but instead deflected again by blaming the ref. Why they are stood up doesn't matter nor does it change the fact it favors strikers. Again I was right about a inactive wrestler being stood up. Your counter was simply a lie. 9 out of 10 they are not restarted on the ground. You know this, but by all means don't let facts get in the way.
As for inactive strikers not being restarted on the ground due to there not being a neutral ground position. You're just wrong. First there is neutral ground positions, they are used in wrestling all the time and second, once again it doesn't matter why they aren't restarted on the ground, all that matters is that they aren't. Which, again, favors strikers. Again I was correct when I said there is no bonus a pure wrestler can get. And again it doesn't matter WHY there isn't one, all that matters is there isn't. And the fact I need to explain that there are more restrictions on the ground than on the feet shows me you don't have an understanding of the sport. At all. If wrestlers could knee, kick, head butt, spike, 12 6 elbow or stomp on the ground, they'd be unstoppable. In fact, those rules were made specifically to de fang the ground and pound from top control i.e wrestlers. Once again your lack of historical knowledge of the sport shines through.
Originally posted by long pig
If wrestlers could knee, kick, head butt, spike, 12 6 elbow or stomp on the ground, they'd be unstoppable. In fact, those rules were made specifically to de fang the ground and pound from top control i.e wrestlers. Once again your lack of historical knowledge of the sport shines through.
Originally posted by I-Drop
Silva didn't cry about anything. He mentioned it......after a WIN. If he'd lost then maybe you'd have something. When they were standing up Silva wasn't dominating like he would have if he'd been healthy. If Chael ever fights a healthy Silva, Chael's getting his dumbass snee-snashed. Chael's the runner-up. It's who he is. We can go back & forth about ifs & buts, @the end of the day Chael tapped &that 4.5 rounds of work won't be next to his name in the record books. All you'll see is the "L", same as the other times he got his dumbass caught in a triangle. I've never seen Guida in a boring fight. I've seen Sonnen in one exciting fight & he choked.....even w/'roids backing him up against an injured man. Epic........Fail!!!!!
If they fought again, it would probably go the same way. Chael taking Anderson down at will, with Anderson eventually submitting him.
Guida will never get a title shot. And every upper tier fighter he's faced in the LHW division has beaten him. Talk about epic fails.
Oh, and...
Originally posted by I-Drop
I've never seen Guida in a boring fight.
Originally posted by long pig
Me being bitter after getting stood up has nothing to do with it......ok, maybe it has everything to do with it. 😂 But you're still wrong. The gloves absolutely, without a doubt made for strikers. You not knowing this shows your ignorance of the sport's history. Gloves were forced by the athletic commission to protect the fighters from harm. If you argue otherwise, you're either ignorant or pretending to be. As for starting on the feet, i'm still right. You counter to my point was deflective. The reason why they start on the feet doesn't change the fact it favors strikers. As for fights being stood up, I'm right about that as well. You never countered my point, but instead deflected again by blaming the ref. Why they are stood up doesn't matter nor does it change the fact it favors strikers. Again I was right about a inactive wrestler being stood up. Your counter was simply a lie. 9 out of 10 they are not restarted on the ground. You know this, but by all means don't let facts get in the way.
If the gloves were specifically made for strikers, they'd be boxing gloves. 😐 Instead, they have the fingers exposed so that grappling isn't hindered in any way. I feel like I shouldn't have to point this out for even the most simple-minded.
I never tried to pretend like a fight being stood up didn't favor strikers. But you have to understand that's like trying to argue that women had it better in the 1920's because they didn't have to work, even though they still couldn't vote. In any case, it's the job of the wrestler/judoka/grappler to be active on the ground. In a real life scenario, just like he wouldn't be stood back up if it went to the ground, he also wouldn't be content to just lay there in someone's guard listening to other guy's heartbeat either. It goes both ways.
How exactly was my "counter simply a lie"? When fights are on the ground, and the fight gets stopped to check on someone, afterward, the fight gets restarted in the same position. I even gave you an example from the most recent event. 😂
Originally posted by long pig
As for inactive strikers not being restarted on the ground due to there not being a neutral ground position. You're just wrong. First there is neutral ground positions, they are used in wrestling all the time and second, once again it doesn't matter why they aren't restarted on the ground, all that matters is that they aren't. Which, again, favors strikers. Again I was correct when I said there is no bonus a pure wrestler can get. And again it doesn't matter WHY there isn't one, all that matters is there isn't. And the fact I need to explain that there are more restrictions on the ground than on the feet shows me you don't have an understanding of the sport. At all. If wrestlers could knee, kick, head butt, spike, 12 6 elbow or stomp on the ground, they'd be unstoppable. In fact, those rules were made specifically to de fang the ground and pound from top control i.e wrestlers. Once again your lack of historical knowledge of the sport shines through.
In wrestling, you're not allowed to punch someone in the face, so your "point" is entirely moot. This is a fight, and your entire argument seems to hinder on the fact that you think this is some sort of glorified wrestling match. It isn't. I mean... Jesus, son. facepalm Your bias is making this laughable.
Again, you can't have a neutral position on the ground when one guy is in a better position to rain down strikes than the other. I'm sorry, that's just the way it goes. On the feet, a wrestler is able to shoot for a double/single, a judoka is able to clinch and trip/throw, and a striker is able to throw punches and kicks. It's even... neutral.
You talk about my lack of "historical knowledge" about the sport and then proceed to list rules that were all deemed legal at one point or another. 😂 And guess what? When all of those were legal, the wrestlers didn't dominate the sport. Far from it, actually. Btw, I hope you realize that all of those strikes are illegal on the feet, too. ermm There's no biting, hair pulling, or nut slappin' ($5 to anyone who gets the reference) either. And wrestlers should thank their lucky stars that there are no knees to the head of a grounded opponent. How many times do we see someone in the sprawl position that's able to rain down knees to the other guy's head with a furious vengeance, but can't due to him having one or more of his "four points" touching the ground?
Epic fail, lp... epic fail. 😂
And you seem to have forgotten the crux of the matter...
Originally posted by batdude123
Wrestlers have absolutely no room to bitch when takedowns with no offense hold more weight than strikes in the judges' eyes. Judges will also completely ignore any amount of offense a fighter has while on the bottom. That's why there are so many terrible decisions in the UFC nowadays.
But you're right. Even though judges score more points for grappling with absolutely no damage dealt whatsoever than strikes in a fight, wrestlers are clearly at a disadvantage in MMA today.
Originally posted by long pig
batdude almost fooled me into thinking he knew what he was talking about. Almost. Sometimes being right about everything is tiresome.
No, I just embarrassed your ass for a second time now, when this all should have just stopped after my last post. 😂
