No one talking about Rampage vs Machida?
- 11-19-2010, 12:57 PM
No one talking about Rampage vs Machida?
The fight is tomorrow and nobody is even mentioning it. Do people just think Machida will dominate him with his speed kinda like Evans did? Im a big Rampage fan but not very optimistic about this one. This is a must-win for Rampage. Hopefully he can score an explosive knockout.
- 11-21-2010, 01:04 AM
- 11-21-2010, 01:43 AM
Sorry, but Rampage didn't pull it out. Rampage was given the win. He definitely should not have won, and he said so himself. I don't care for Machida, but he should have won the fight.
11-21-2010, 06:17 AM
I think the more pressing issue now is the lack of future for Matt Hughes and that DW announced BJ v. Fitch at 127. I would lov eto see BJ finish Fitch.
TEAM GET DIESEL
GET DIESEL NUTRITION | SINCE 2002 | GETDIESEL.COMLike us on Facebook: GET DIESEL Facebook Page
11-21-2010, 07:08 AM
11-21-2010, 05:44 PM
That leaves round 1.First, Jackson did not even throw anything for the first 2 minutes while he was hit and kicked several times by Machida.After that there were 2 major clinchs.Jackson clearly came out on top in the first,Machida clearly got the better of him in the second.There were a few flouries by Jackson but everything he threw either missed, was blocked or deflected (a few times while being hit by counter shots).I actually do not think round one was close.Machida won it.
11-21-2010, 08:05 PM
i am sorry for those who still feel machida won...compustrike stats even show jackosn cleary outscoring machida with landed shots 25-12 first round and 29-9 second round including a takedown. machida did win round three but the 6 shots he landed on rampage that most people are deeming to have been enough to win the fight..still dont make up for the first two rounds..especially when half of machidas landed strikes were leg kicks...but i guess that fact that for the first two rounds of rampage controlling the cage and cutting machida off contiously forcing the action/being the aggressor/ stalking him around and not counterfighting doesnt count for anything either. but this is my opinion and most mma fans now seem to experts in their own mind as well.
11-22-2010, 09:46 AM
I like both guys, but was pulling for Rampage.
11-22-2010, 11:11 AM
Rounds 1 and 2 were very close for sure. Octagon Control and agression points go to Page as Machida looked scared. Page was pressing action but didn't want punch air. This is why Page won.
11-22-2010, 11:18 AM
4 things need to happen now to end this ****:
1. Knees to the head of a downed opponent
2. .5 point rounds; many are too close to give a full point difference
3. Yellow cards
4. TRAINED judges that are/were fighters and/or trainers
M.Ed. Ex Phys
11-22-2010, 12:40 PM
I like the concept of the yellow cards but I think in Pride it was over done. On the other hand in the UFC they allow way too much stalling. Something has to be done though.
Back in the day when everyone was arguing UFC or Pride rules. IMO I always thought a combination of both was ideal. Thats total fighting. Sadly in the US you wont see knees to a downed opponent.
I thought Machida won the fight because he landed the cleaner blows. I dont think neither guy fought worth a crap though and did anything to improve their position for a title fight.
11-22-2010, 03:21 PM
I was fully expecting Rampage to get decimated and made to look lost & confused and Lyoto's overtly evasive style, so this was a pleasant surprise. I would have put money on Lyoto prior to Saturday.
That being said, in the long haul, I still believe Lyoto has a much, much greater chance at holding the belt again then Rampage.
NSCA - CSCS
11-22-2010, 03:22 PM
NSCA - CSCS
11-22-2010, 06:08 PM
i agree ..but the yellow card needs to also come with a purse fine as well. it would be nice to have overtime rounds like in the tuf show too. or be like old pride with 2 rounds..one ten minute round and a 5 minute overtime. they really need more things to make fighters want to finsh fights instead on the old greg jackson special where you hang on and try not to get beat. soccer kicks/ head stomps should be with knees to the head of a downed opponent.
11-22-2010, 06:19 PM
11-22-2010, 08:24 PM
well they need to implement the purse fine...that way fighters like rashaad earn the money they make...he gets over 400k and doesnt fight to win, but fights fights not to lose.or they need to make point deductions for stalling.
11-22-2010, 09:55 PM
Like I said, a purse fine will never happen and there is plenty of incentive to finish a fight with the bonuses and locker room pay as well.
M.Ed. Ex Phys
11-23-2010, 12:13 AM
yeah but what about the guys who just hold there opponent on the fence or who hold for a 5 minute takedown attempt??? its a fighting sport, am i not wrong? what most wrestlers have been doing im mma trying not to lose instead of winning would be like a wreslter in a match not doing anything but circle because he doesnt want to get taken down or his shot stuffed...but dont they get penalized for things like that though...but i do agree with the lack of skill that needs to be addressed...but that also is due to the fact that any body at any time can be a pro mma fighter..any random person can go fight and i they get any compensation for the showing...then they are now pro fighters.
11-23-2010, 01:43 AM
I know Machida's style, but I wish he brought more of the brutality he can do like he did to Evans... when he wants to he can kick ass, he made Evans look like a 1st time amateur and beat the living **** out of him. Thats the Machida I want to see back.
11-23-2010, 06:43 AM
11-23-2010, 09:48 AM
M.Ed. Ex Phys
11-23-2010, 11:48 AM
well learning how to clinch and hold onto someone legs for 5 minutes is easier to learn than bjj. especially developing an effective guard .and cage tactics are hard to implement when you are fighting someone who doesnt want to really fight back other than clinch and attemp takedowns.
11-23-2010, 11:59 AM
In all seriousness, though, this is the beauty of MMA. It's so dynamic that the runs of most fighters only last 3-5 years before the sport passes them by due to new training, integration, etc. Wrestlers have always had success in MMA and this will likely not change soon as more Olympians, D1 Champs, etc. are crossing over into MMA.
The key word in your statement is attempt. It takes serious conditioning to press for 3 full rounds and not get caught. I personally have no problem if someone can constantly get a TD because it is up to the other fighter to counter and implement his strategy. There's no secret to Shields, GSP, Rashad, etc. gameplan and their opponents should also make a tactical plan to effectively counter.
M.Ed. Ex Phys
11-23-2010, 12:22 PM
11-23-2010, 01:53 PM
yeah but your not going to out wrestle a wrestler if they are better than you are..especially the caliber of olympians and d1 champs like you say..so with that in mind..how do you figth someone who is merely trying to wreslte their way into not getting beat...do you not take the fight..my point is if your not the better wrestler and your opponent only is wanting to wrestle i n the fight..how does one counter that..if the wreslte thows no punches and just clinches and holds..what do you do..even a bjj expert can get nulified with that tactics becuase even if they drop guard, the wreslter stills contiues to hold on and do nothing...then what, is it the bottom guys duty to let a guard pass or a mount happen just to further the action in attempt to get the obviously stalling wrestler to move??
11-23-2010, 02:04 PM
M.Ed. Ex Phys
11-23-2010, 03:51 PM
im not saying wrestlers are in fallible...but rosholt loses are do to him losing fights that he actually fights back in..he doesnt lay in pray are hold legs for round after round against the cage...he actually fights..as its mma or ultimate fighting, not ultimate wreslting. there are alot of great wreslters who get beat because they lose the fight like randy, hendo, coleman, king mo, kos, hammil, rashaad, simpson, dollaway etc...but they actually fight..but look at rashaad after his lose to machida now and king mo...they have both stated that they will go back to wrestling to win the point game...which is winning..but not fighting...with all of your new rules to implement for the sake of judging and fight finishing..then also include elbow strikes to the neck and back/ traps of an opponent laying on the legs of a 5 min takedown attempt...its no different than a knee to the head of downed opponent as far as serious injury concern, and it will make the praying wreslter either finish the takedown or transition to something else. ..i know back of the head shots are illegal..but then why is it ok for a wreslter to slam a guy down on the back of his head and neck, usually knocking them out, and that not be illegal??? its a back of the head strike..right? so allow those elbow strike defenses and see how that guy standups .
11-23-2010, 04:03 PM
The reason for no 12-6 strikes to that area is paralysis. If there is a stalled position like the one you're citing, the ref is supposed to be the one that breaks up the stall.
A slam is not a back of the head strike. Why not ban all throws then if you're using this parameter as a back of the head strike? It's not the concussive force that is illegal as that would be stupid; it's the risk of paralysis.
I seriously don't see what your gripe is about all of this. Like I said, either accept wrestling as a huge part of MMA or stop watching.
M.Ed. Ex Phys
11-23-2010, 04:31 PM
well as much as i appreciate your professional opinion...these are just opinions. and referees only break up stalling psotions like that when its a not a known wreslter doing it. but your saying that if a guy is in north south position and throws a knee to the head, that it doesnt have the same potential of an elbow to cause paralysis? and if its not for the back of the head hitting the ground from a downward slam, then what causes the knockout? its not the power of the slam i am questioning its the point of impact on the back of the head from the slam..and im not really griping..im just debating my opinion for conversation.
11-23-2010, 04:40 PM
As far as knees and slams go, knees to the head, which I am using as a general statement since most of them would be to the face from side mount, would not only increase the rates of finish, but also helps to expand the techniques that can be used. Obviously, a knee to the back of the head would have to be illegal, but knees a la Mark Kerr would be a nice change. Basically, the crown of the head would be fair game, but blows to the occipital would not be.
A slam does have risk of concussive force, but so does a punch, kick, knee, etc. Also, you cannot spike a person on the top of the head a la Sapp/Nogueira. With a slam like Rampage/Arona, the force is not 100% on the head and Arona had the chance to let go of the submission. Machida was aware of this and smartly let go, but Dave Branch held onto guard against Gerald Harris and was slammed down resulting in a KO. The rationale for this is that the fighter knows the risk of holding onto the sub/position and chooses to put themselves into danger.
M.Ed. Ex Phys
11-23-2010, 11:03 PM
then wouldnt the same rationale go for a person laying on someones legs for a neverending takedown attempt??? if those strikes were allowed, then they would also too be in danger on their own accord. i agree about the referees as referees change their gameplan form fight to fight..they will let rashaaad for example have a 5 minute takedown attemp on the cage, but then make a fighter like kristoff sosynzski(mis-spelled) standup after 30 seconds and even while he is throwing knees to the legs and such. and as far a the point deduction for timidity...gerald harris has been cut form the ufc..and i think the third round stare off is why.
12-01-2010, 03:35 AM
12-01-2010, 12:50 PM
Excuse the rant, but srs!
Why is everyone talking about changing the rules and asking for yellow cards and stuff?
If you ask for more rules and regulations you will turn MMA into the joke NFL is becoming! There are more and more rules and regulations being brought into NFL and it is ruining a sport that has been around for centuries!
There doesnt need to be more rules and regulations and fines and yellow cards, there needs to be fighters who dont leave **** on the table, they fight to win!!! Take Diego Sanchez for instance, he pushes every fight, no matter what, if he is getting his ass beat he will still take the center of the octagon!
I am sick of all the old school fighters coming back to try and win a fight in the octagon! Tito is washed up, Rampage isnt far behind (as much as I loved him in pride and it kills me to say, because I still think he is badass!), and I just saw a fight with Karo and another one with Gonzaga! These guys are behind the times now! You have fighters like Jones, and Cain who are setting a new bar!
It is what it is, you have exciting fights and ones that are less exciting. We as MMA fans are not happy unless someone is KO'd or choked the hell out!
But as it goes, if you leave it to the judges (agreed most are not fit for the job) there will be speculation! So knock the clown out or tap him, end of story! No questions of who won the fight!
Orrrrrr is there still question? Brock clearly tapped Carwin and people still say "oh well he was getting his ass beat before that soooo...." who cares, of course he was going to take some punches, Shane is a bad mofo who loves to knock people out, Brock took them and still choked a bitch! So all who hate him and say he should have lost..... I disagree! He took all Shane could give him, bide'd his time and took advantage of the situation to get an arm raise at the end!
Rules are fine the way they are, MMA fighters need to do their DAMN! job! They train to finish fights, finish them!
12-01-2010, 01:24 PM
I think everyone with a brain will disagree with you about the rules. The scoring system is based off of outdated concepts presented by Jeff Blatnick, who was a wrestler. Based upon these, you have many judges that see a TD as the highest point scorer outside of a knockdown. The current rules don't take into effect things that can change the fight such as leg kicks, near submissions, etc. They need to change and not to overly regulate. In fact, I argue to de-regulate several of them such as knees to the head of a downed opponent.
As far as old school fighters go, you don't see Kimo, Frye, Royce, etc. on the big stage anymore. They may fight locally, but there are only a handful of fighters that started in the 90's that are still relevant: Wand, Couture, Vitor, Hendo, Babalu, and very few others. The fact is that the sport is rapidly evolving and it makes no sense to not have the rules change along with it.
M.Ed. Ex Phys
12-01-2010, 03:54 PM
You can disagree all you want, it is an opinion, neither yours nor mine is correct, that is the beauty of everyone's varying in one way or another.
As far as the scoring system, are you trying to tell me that leg kicks and near submissions arent taken into account? I beg to differ, matter of fact that is all you hear about during fights, how Joe Rogan (if UFC) or Frank Mir and others (if WEC) talk about a fight being skewed in one way or another if the fight is close due to leg kicks or near submissions. Are light leg kicks going to be credited, hell no, but hard landing leg kicks that are not checked most certainly, cautious or sub-cautious are taken into account!
Also near submissions will also skew a judges decision if it is close, much like a late take down. If a fight is very close come the end of a round and you score a take down and not even necessarily do anything while in side mount, the take down at the end can and will get you a W for the round every time, let alone a take down and a near submission.
Near submissions and leg kicks rank right up there with pushing the fight, you may not be throwing many kicks or punches but as long as you are not getting hit, and you push the fight and are constantly trying to cut the octagon off on your opponent, it gets you points in the eyes of a judge.
I do agree that the judges are a work in progress and do not always see things as others may, but your claims are inaccurate, and again I say...... knock them out or tap them and this discussion never even happens.
12-01-2010, 04:09 PM
the rule changes are needed for the fighters who do not fight, but play the point game so they do not get beat. you cannot finish a fighter that will not engage in the fight. and i dont care how many leg kicks you land, if you get taken down once then the judges will score the round against you, even if you pop right back up...and have the jugdes dont know any submissions, so how can they score an attempt? they are no more knowledgeble than the fans that boo if there is not continuos action or if the fight is on the ground....the only thing they can identify is punch, a ko, and a takedown.
12-01-2010, 04:32 PM
Some guys are notorious (McKee) for merely winning fights based on points, you know it, Dana knows it, Zuffa knows it, and they continue to set up fights for them.
Now if you were to say they need to enforce their point deduction system a little better then yes I could agree. But handing someone a yellow card like they are in soccer and then they receive a fine for it is not the right approach!
Fact is, some people want to fight and love to be hit, and others are in the UFC because they think they are fighters and until the real deal fighters knock them around, they will be in it until their fight card is filled then get rid of them.
Oh and I completely disagree with the comment that you can not defeat a fighter who wont engage, that is an excuse. Does it frustrate you, yes, but there are ways of training for those types of fighters and you can beat them, if you are better then them!
Paulo Tiago is a guy who comes to mind, if you wanna waltz around the outside of the octagon and play games, he will come in after you and make you fight HIS FIGHT!
12-01-2010, 04:43 PM
I've talked to a few TX judges backstage at some events were I was a cornerman and I never get a consensus agreement about the rules and which weighs more heavily. The refs are just as bad if not worse.
You can have the romantic view of fighting were it always ends in a stoppage, but the fact is there will always be decisions especially as the talent gap becomes more and more narrow. When you have fighters constantly expanding their skills, they will inevitably cancel out some of their strengths (e.g. Munoz/Simpson).
M.Ed. Ex Phys
12-01-2010, 04:54 PM
I think near submissions play a factor for the individual placing it if it is a close fight and you lock something in and that was pretty much the highlight of the round, however..... multiple attempts resulting in failure looks bad on the individual placing the attempt because then it appears you can not get the job done with numerous opportunities. This leads the judges to believe there is a weak area in your submission attempts.
I do agree that some change may be good as you make a good debate and seem to know your stuff and have access to the "behind the curtain" scene.
I do not think the UFC and their management is perfect but I think they do a pretty good job, and with change things dont always turn out better.
12-01-2010, 06:16 PM
M.Ed. Ex Phys
Similar Forum Threads
- By Bendiesel in forum MMAReplies: 69Last Post: 04-10-2009, 04:20 PM
- By maurice02 in forum MMAReplies: 42Last Post: 03-20-2009, 12:50 PM
- By AE14 in forum MMAReplies: 41Last Post: 07-28-2008, 03:38 PM
- By Mulletsoldier in forum MMAReplies: 27Last Post: 01-25-2008, 04:15 PM
- By Beowulf in forum MMAReplies: 6Last Post: 08-04-2007, 09:52 PM