MMA thread

Not heard of it, I'll check it out. I love TUF so thanks for mentioning this, Coopz.

Edit: I really like the format where the fighters choose the coaches, and four coaches at that! The commentary from the coaches is great during the fights too. I've watched MMA for a few years now but it's still great hearing proper coaches discussing. Joe Rogan knows his stuff more than most but I dunno, hearing Greg Jackson discussing is kind of another level I guess
 
Last edited by a moderator:
No worries peeps

Choose your own destiny is the tag line and its a refreshing change from TUF. As you say the coaches are a lot better than in TUF but i can see Jackson doing my head in further in because he over praises his fighters quite a bit for very little. It would be great if you had that support in the Cage don't get me wrong, but for listening on TV its annoying :LOL:

Listening to the technical side is amazing though
 
Does it annoy anyone else when fighters say they've won the belt X times? Surely it's better to have won it once but held it for years, rather than win it X times but also get beaten each time to lose it?
 
True but realistically your always going to slip up at some stage, even Anderson as we found out. It shows real character to lose and comeback from that to be Champion again.
 
Got my tickets for October 26th in Manchester :)

Looking forward to the weekends event, stacked card imo
 
Tomorrow's UFC card looks brilliant. Especially looking forward to seeing Uriah Hall and Joe Lauzon.
 
There's quite a few that's a good watch

Lauzon and Hall as you said then you have Max Holloway, Matt Brown, Michael Mcdonald, Diego Brandao and all the more recognised fighters.

Fingers crossed the card delivers.
 
This card on paper is one of the best ever. Brown, Pickett, Shogun, Lauzon and McGregor always bring it. Should be fantastic.
 
Jones won 2,4 and 5.

Rounds 2 and 3 were close though. No argument if one or both were 10-10's, but think Jones won 2 and Alex 3.
 
Very very close but Jones took it 3-2 imo

I think the commentary has a massive factor on who you think is winning as well, do what Review did and watch it without sound and see what a difference it makes.
 
Coopz said:
Very very close but Jones took it 3-2 imo

I think the commentary has a massive factor on who you think is winning as well, do what Review did and watch it without sound and see what a difference it makes.
Click to expand...

Commentary can defn sway your opinion of a fight. I do the exact same thing for boxing. Don't think for one second that the commentators are always objective.
 
I went to this.

What are the chances that there is a injury and disqualification on the same event. You rarely see either but to have both on the same card is just my luck :LOL:

Absolute bullshit decision from Mark Goddard, when was the last time a fight ended like that without a warning or point taken off or something? He spoiled what would have been a cracking fight.

Great to see Machida live and to see a KO from him as well, enjoyed Sakara/Musoke, Barnett/Craig, Linekar/Harris thats about it missed the first 4 prelims.

I watched it back as well on BT Sports and i agree its fucking awful.
 
I think the doctor stopped the Pearson fight because of the cut. Goddard was only warning Guillard.
 
YouTube - UFC Fight Night 30: Pearson/Guillard Recap

Goddard did actually warn Gullard about it then. That's the part i didn't understand i thought he just stopped it, so the ref got if 100% right.

Fucking shit doctor, bet he was from the UK and wasn't as versed in UFC cuts like the Americans. It was in the middle of his forehead so i can't see why he stopped it. Nob :LOL:
 
UFC 167 was a good show overall. 8/10. All of the top fights delivered. The ending left a sour taste in my mouth. That said, this is the fight game so I'm not surprised by anything I see.
 
it was clear rounds 2 and 4 to Hendricks, 3 and 5 to GSP.

Round 1 could go either way, and GSP probably did slightly more.

The issue is with how fights are scored, it should not be round by round, and 10 points must, but like Pride on the whole fight, with damage the main criteria to win. If it was, clearly Hendricks wins. But it isn't.

St Pierre shows a lot of courage in that fight, could have been done after 7 or 8 minutes. Hendricks should have stopped him.
 
Yeah after watching the fight for the first time, I had Hendricks winning by a big margin. I watched it again and could see where the judges were coming from with their scores. GSP edged the chess match but Hendricks clearly did more damage.

How about Tyson Woodley? Vicious punch and KO!!
 
vondave said:
it was clear rounds 2 and 4 to Hendricks, 3 and 5 to GSP.

Round 1 could go either way, and GSP probably did slightly more.

The issue is with how fights are scored, it should not be round by round, and 10 points must, but like Pride on the whole fight, with damage the main criteria to win. If it was, clearly Hendricks wins. But it isn't.

St Pierre shows a lot of courage in that fight, could have been done after 7 or 8 minutes. Hendricks should have stopped him.
Click to expand...

It wasn't highway robbery like most make it out to be. I had it 3-2 for Hendricks, not 4-1 like Dana White. Hendricks clearly won round when you consider the amount of strikes he landed when GSP was holding him and trying to take him down.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom