Reply to Thread

Post a reply to the thread: Is anybody even giving Robbie a chance against Hendricks?

Your Message

Click here to log in

What Is Georges St-Pierre's 3-Letter Nickname?

 
 

You may choose an icon for your message from this list

Additional Options

  • Will turn www.example.com into [URL]http://www.example.com[/URL].

HTML

Topic Review (Newest First)

  • 03-15-2014, 12:46 PM
    Rise
    Quote Originally Posted by dbader08 View Post
    Technically it isn't...
    And that's the point we are trying to make. No one is claiming that Hendricks didn't land significant strikes the point is cumulative damage to someone's face isn't a true indicator of the final result of a fight.

    Shields only started having success vs GSP after he severely and blatantly eye poked him...which lead to some pretty clean strikes being landed. Anybody who payed attention to that fight knows that. BJ busted him up too their first fight but...that's BJ...before GSP improved.
    Point was that Shields did damage to GSP's face despite the fact he's not exactly regarded as being a heavy hitter and that GSP is prone to showing more damage then others.
  • 03-15-2014, 09:25 AM
    rivethead
    You know what's interesting, I can make peanut butter and jelly sandwiches and I can admit that you can't accurately assess damage by looking at someone, anymore than you can tell if they're juicing by looking at their abs or some shit.


    But you're always welcome to your opinion.

    rh
  • 03-15-2014, 08:31 AM
    dbader08
    Technically it isn't...but if your smart enough to know how to make a peanut butter/jelly sandwich you should be able to put 2 and 2 together here. Damage is such an obvious barometer for significant strikes (what a shocker), which is a massive part of judging criteria. Sometimes one big strike or only a few can cause alot of damage but usually you can tell if that's the case. GSP had several cuts and bruising all over his face, not just one bad cut or area of swelling...nope, damage everywhere. In a case like that, you can't deny that it shows that Hendricks was consistently landing more significant strikes to the face...and what happened in the fight as far as attacks to the body? Not much at all.

    Plus, this is an extreme case where fighter A clearly had WAY more wrong with his face than fighter B. It's not like I'm saying a fighter should win a fight just because he had done a tiny bit more damage...who knows, the guy could have gotten slightly outgrappled or maybe there was some good striking to the body or legs...but in this case, in a fight where a good majority of the striking was done to the face, and there was a huge disparity in what their faces looked like. And I know GSP can hurt and damage people, he's done it before. Like I said, you just have to know how to use your brain and you can't just give a fighter a round based off of one clean strike to the eye that instantly causes alot of swelling or something like that. For instance, in Dunham vs Grant, I thought Dunham won the round where he got a bad cut on his eye (1st or 2nd), but he got the cut and I think it definitely influenced the judges. This is the type of case where this point is more appropriate to bring up and also those types of scenarios are likely the main reason such things even need to be clarified in the scoring criteria imo.

    Shields only started having success vs GSP after he severely and blatantly eye poked him...which lead to some pretty clean strikes being landed. Anybody who payed attention to that fight knows that. BJ busted him up too their first fight but...that's BJ...before GSP improved.

    This is fighting, guys. Striking someone hard and effectively is going to cause damage, period. To not use it as a barometer for something it goes hand in hand with (significant striking) is pure ignorance. You just have to watch very closely if your a judge, and also have to know that it definitely isn't an automatic deciding factor.
  • 03-14-2014, 11:26 PM
    Rise
    Quote Originally Posted by dbader08 View Post
    But man, I was unaware that damage means absolutely nothing in fighting lol. What a dilemma that seems to be...
    Guess you should re-read the judging criteria then cause it means nothing in a sport that involves fighting

    People act like someone slapping GSP would give him a horrible cut or something. NEWSFLASH: Hendricks hits WAY harder than him, so quit with the "GSP has such a delicate face" bullshit, please. You hit way harder than someone-then your average strike is more significant and therefore should be rewarded more than your opponent's average strike.
    Look at GSP's face after the shields fight he's pretty banged up there. Are you going to argue that's because Shields is known for his powerful striking ?
  • 03-14-2014, 06:08 PM
    optimusjoel
    Holy shit does Johnny look bad, it was sad seeing him shaking then the look of defeat when he came up over. Bet the house on Robbie.
  • 03-14-2014, 05:33 PM
    dbader08
    Quote Originally Posted by initial_zen View Post
    I think Jones' best takedowns have always been against the cage. Gus did a good job of keeping his distance, so Jones didn't really have a chance to utilize that strategy.
    Another thing is just that Gus doesn't have to come in hard/aggressive just to get inside Jones' reach...which would leave him more open for a TD...and it's something most of his other opponents have had to do. That's why Machida got dropped...and alot of guys could barely touch Jones on the feet (Rampage, Sonnen, Belfort, Shogun).

    But man, I was unaware that damage means absolutely nothing in fighting lol. What a dilemma that seems to be...

    People act like someone slapping GSP would give him a horrible cut or something. NEWSFLASH: Hendricks hits WAY harder than him, so quit with the "GSP has such a delicate face" bullshit, please. You hit way harder than someone-then your average strike is more significant and therefore should be rewarded more than your opponent's average strike.

    If your gonna sit here and try and debate that a GSP jab or lead inside leg kick should be rewarded the same as a Hendricks overhand left I just don't know what to say, other than to chuckle.

    And sometimes round by round scoring works great, but sometimes it's a bullshit technicality that guys get lucky/barely and undeservedly skim by with. Hendricks did more in one round than GSP did the whole fight lol but people add up GSP's 2 close rounds that he won and some give him the coinflip round one and say he's the rightful winner. It's clear you can make a case for GSP with the way MMA fights are scored but it's also clear to me that this is a fight that showed the scoring system still needs some tinkering with. A half point scoring system and more 10-10 rounds are something the sport needs imo...because there's just no way in hell GSP should get round 1 10-9 and Hendricks should get the same exact score for round 2...that's a crock of shit and all you GSP fans know it.
  • 03-14-2014, 05:27 PM
    1inthechamber
    Robbie is so goddamn humble and confident. How can you bet against him.

    And Hendricks looks a bit dry already and cutting that extra 1.5 lbs is gonna be even harder on him
  • 03-14-2014, 01:31 PM
    The Return Of......
    Quote Originally Posted by initial_zen View Post
    I think Jones' best takedowns have always been against the cage. Gus did a good job of keeping his distance, so Jones didn't really have a chance to utilize that strategy.
    I think it was a combination of Gus size and skill combined with the fact that Jones was coming off facing a MW and a Fringe LHW at best in back to back fights. Kinda the old your only as good as you competition kinda thing. I think the rematch would go much different.
  • 03-14-2014, 08:34 AM
    CRisCO
    I think the +300 that robbie is high.

    If i had a bookie I'd throw 20 bucks on robbie to take it.
  • 03-14-2014, 07:28 AM
    initial_zen
    Quote Originally Posted by 1inthechamber View Post
    Gus also stuffed quite a bit of his tds. I honestly think Jones wrestling might be a bit overrated. He's probably just always been used to wrestling guys smaller than him given how freaking huge but skinny he is. I always thought his wrestling and clinch game was top notch but Gus that's far from a wrestler doing what he did made me question that.
    I think Jones' best takedowns have always been against the cage. Gus did a good job of keeping his distance, so Jones didn't really have a chance to utilize that strategy.
This thread has more than 10 replies. Click here to review the whole thread.

Posting Permissions

  • You may post new threads
  • You may post replies
  • You may post attachments
  • You may edit your posts
  •