Reply to Thread

Post a reply to the thread: Seth Petruzelli fought his ASS off!

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)

  • 10-12-2006, 05:10 PM
    Boo
    Quote Originally Posted by Luis Cruz
    It wasn't Seth that told me about the cut, i actually didn't even ask him. If you have a tivo put it in slow motion when Matt gets on top in round 1 and you'll see the exact spot of when the cut took place, it was definately the rubbing not a strike. The one on the bridge of the nose i didn't see happen later in the fight but Seth did say he got butted a couple times. Yes the blood was a huge factor for him and it affected him. I'm one of the people that questioned his heart and i told him why, he didn't answer rigth away when they said if he wanted to continue which means he was leaning towards yes. Then asked again he asked how much time was left. He let the blood take him out of the fight mentally, having a strong heart and a will to win you say fuck that right away and fight on. He did fight on, so he still gets props but he hesitated a lot. He'll be back way better, i guarentee it.
    The blood in his eye was clearly effecting his vision. He kept rubbing his eye throughout the fight to clear it. Really, I thought they were going to stop the fight whether Seth wanted to continue or not. I was surprised when they didn't. It seems that lately the refs/doctors are being more lenient in this area. This isn't the first fight that I thought was going to be stopped and wasn't. Could be a trend.

    I believe ya that Seth is going to come back better than eva.
  • 10-12-2006, 04:57 PM
    Luis Cruz
    Quote Originally Posted by Boo
    ^^^This sums up what I think with a few additional comments.

    I did as Luis suggested and watched the fight again with more of an analytical eye.

    In the first round right after Matt took Seth down, Matt lands a hammer strike on the right eye that could have caused the cut. If Seth says it wasn't that strike, but instead the glove rubbing across his face, I would believe him. It's just not clear from the film.

    The 30-27 score was BS IMO. I think Seth won the second round and Matt wasn't dominant enough in either the 1st or 3rd rounds for a 10-8 score. The third round was fairly close, but as Boone states above I think Matt squeaked a win.

    I did not get the impression that some of you have that Seth was ready to give up. He seemed more frustrated than anything. When asked if he could see, I did hear him say, yeah blood. Maybe he was actually just being honest. Imagine that.

    Error2k5, props to you for being willing to rewatch the fight and change your opinion.
    It wasn't Seth that told me about the cut, i actually didn't even ask him. If you have a tivo put it in slow motion when Matt gets on top in round 1 and you'll see the exact spot of when the cut took place, it was definately the rubbing not a strike. The one on the bridge of the nose i didn't see happen later in the fight but Seth did say he got butted a couple times. Yes the blood was a huge factor for him and it affected him. I'm one of the people that questioned his heart and i told him why, he didn't answer rigth away when they said if he wanted to continue which means he was leaning towards yes. Then asked again he asked how much time was left. He let the blood take him out of the fight mentally, having a strong heart and a will to win you say fuck that right away and fight on. He did fight on, so he still gets props but he hesitated a lot. He'll be back way better, i guarentee it.
  • 10-12-2006, 04:42 PM
    Boo
    Quote Originally Posted by Matt Boone
    Honestly I think Hamill won, but Petruzelli had a very good showing. 29-28 for Hamill seems appropriate, although one or two very slight changes by Seth and it was his fight - no excuses from anyone. I really think the moments the fight really mattered for him, he failed to capitalize - for whatever reason, not running him down, and because of that Hamill grinded out a decision based on him being in control and winning the fight more of the time than Seth, even though Seth had the more spectacular moments in pretty much every round.
    ^^^This sums up what I think with a few additional comments.

    I did as Luis suggested and watched the fight again with more of an analytical eye.

    In the first round right after Matt took Seth down, Matt lands a hammer strike on the right eye that could have caused the cut. If Seth says it wasn't that strike, but instead the glove rubbing across his face, I would believe him. It's just not clear from the film.

    The 30-27 score was BS IMO. I think Seth won the second round and Matt wasn't dominant enough in either the 1st or 3rd rounds for a 10-8 score. The third round was fairly close, but as Boone states above I think Matt squeaked a win.

    I did not get the impression that some of you have that Seth was ready to give up. He seemed more frustrated than anything. When asked if he could see, I did hear him say, yeah blood. Maybe he was actually just being honest. Imagine that.

    Error2k5, props to you for being willing to rewatch the fight and change your opinion.
  • 10-12-2006, 04:16 PM
    Luis Cruz
    Quote Originally Posted by error2k5
    I have it on TIVO, I will give you the fact that it was a much closer fight than most think...there were a lot of strikes seth got in that I didn't really pay attnetion to due to hammill's "beached whale" technique, i'm not sure, honestly...perhaps it could have gone either way, my opinion could have been a bit swayed by the cut and paying to much attention to it, and you were correct it wasn't caused by a strike and hammill did go down hill from round 1. I still give it to hammill by just a little bit...seth did get in more strikes than I noticed the first time around I watched it. A lot closer than I originally though, I can see your arguement though
    That's all i asked, is for everyone to watch the fight again. I'm not trying to make anyone say Seth won but if they watch again i think most will be like you and see it was closer than everyone first thought and was by no means Matt dominating him. Sometimes you miss things the first time. When i first seen Tito/Forrest i was sure Forrest got robbed but after watching again, Tito clearly won the 3rd round so the right decision was made and i took back what i initially had said.
  • 10-12-2006, 03:55 PM
    error2k5
    Quote Originally Posted by Luis Cruz
    First the cut, it was caused by Matt rubbing his glove across his face not any kind of strike, i seen the exact spot it happened so no credit for that.

    The 2nd round you're obviously giving to Matt for surviving by laying on Seth instead of the guy who landed the kick dropped him then threw strikes afterwords that landed??? In 3, Seth rocks him bad again and cuts him (since you score cuts) and he wasn't taken down after that, he fell back and matt just jump in his guard it wasn't a takedown, Matt does get a real good takedown but does nothing again, Seth locks in a standing guillotine for a couple seconds and tries another sub. He also landed some more strikes when they were stood up 3 times. How does Matt win a round he got 1 solid takedown and did nothing to attempt to finish the fight or anything that did no damage, he barely threw anything? People really need to go back and watch cause you could've been fooled by the first viewing of this fight, it's happened to me before like the Tito/Griffin fight. I changed my opinion after rewatching it. This was a much closer fight than people seem to think. You may think the same, but watch again and come back and be honest and tell me what you thught.
    I have it on TIVO, I will give you the fact that it was a much closer fight than most think...there were a lot of strikes seth got in that I didn't really pay attnetion to due to hammill's "beached whale" technique, i'm not sure, honestly...perhaps it could have gone either way, my opinion could have been a bit swayed by the cut and paying to much attention to it, and you were correct it wasn't caused by a strike and hammill did go down hill from round 1. I still give it to hammill by just a little bit...seth did get in more strikes than I noticed the first time around I watched it. A lot closer than I originally though, I can see your arguement though
  • 10-12-2006, 03:51 AM
    Matt Boone
    Honestly I think Hamill won, but Petruzelli had a very good showing. 29-28 for Hamill seems appropriate, although one or two very slight changes by Seth and it was his fight - no excuses from anyone. I really think the moments the fight really mattered for him, he failed to capitalize - for whatever reason, not running him down, and because of that Hamill grinded out a decision based on him being in control and winning the fight more of the time than Seth, even though Seth had the more spectacular moments in pretty much every round.
  • 10-12-2006, 03:42 AM
    Luis Cruz
    Quote Originally Posted by error2k5
    I just don't understand. Was everyone watching the same fight, Seth put on a hell of a good fight but he DID NOT win. He didn't get screwed by the judges. The only round he could have gotten would have been the third because it was fairly close. The 1st round was hammill hands down, he put in the ground and pound and actually threw damaging punches and elbows instead of just laying there in his guard like a beached whale. He also cut open seth. The second round, yes, he landed a good kick that rocked him but he didn't take advantage, yes he landed a few punches, but for the majority of the round he was on his back with hammill on top of him.

    Let's be honest, at the end of all 3 rounds, seth was on his back. He let hammill control him with his "lay in your guard and do basically nothing" ground game. He was on his back taking the same old shitty punches and elbows from hammill in round 2. In round 3 seth got busy, got in a few strikes, could have finished matt, actually had him rocked for a bit with a spinning kick that cut him open but once again he didn't take advantage and was taken down...at one point he went for an armbar but hammill escaped...the round ended like the rest with hammill laying in his guard. Seth had many chances to get hammill out of there, hammill's striking is awful, he also holds his hands down to low, he's an open target after each of those slow sloppy punches and he should have been knocked out.
    First the cut, it was caused by Matt rubbing his glove across his face not any kind of strike, i seen the exact spot it happened so no credit for that.

    The 2nd round you're obviously giving to Matt for surviving by laying on Seth instead of the guy who landed the kick dropped him then threw strikes afterwords that landed??? In 3, Seth rocks him bad again and cuts him (since you score cuts) and he wasn't taken down after that, he fell back and matt just jump in his guard it wasn't a takedown, Matt does get a real good takedown but does nothing again, Seth locks in a standing guillotine for a couple seconds and tries another sub. He also landed some more strikes when they were stood up 3 times. How does Matt win a round he got 1 solid takedown and did nothing to attempt to finish the fight or anything that did no damage, he barely threw anything? People really need to go back and watch cause you could've been fooled by the first viewing of this fight, it's happened to me before like the Tito/Griffin fight. I changed my opinion after rewatching it. This was a much closer fight than people seem to think. You may think the same, but watch again and come back and be honest and tell me what you thught.
  • 10-12-2006, 02:53 AM
    alahyousious
    Quote Originally Posted by Hypergit
    Hamil vs Rashad - that would be a fierce battle.
    LOL I think Rashad would give him a boxing lesson.
  • 10-12-2006, 01:20 AM
    error2k5
    I just don't understand. Was everyone watching the same fight, Seth put on a hell of a good fight but he DID NOT win. He didn't get screwed by the judges. The only round he could have gotten would have been the third because it was fairly close. The 1st round was hammill hands down, he put in the ground and pound and actually threw damaging punches and elbows instead of just laying there in his guard like a beached whale. He also cut open seth. The second round, yes, he landed a good kick that rocked him but he didn't take advantage, yes he landed a few punches, but for the majority of the round he was on his back with hammill on top of him.

    Let's be honest, at the end of all 3 rounds, seth was on his back. He let hammill control him with his "lay in your guard and do basically nothing" ground game. He was on his back taking the same old shitty punches and elbows from hammill in round 2. In round 3 seth got busy, got in a few strikes, could have finished matt, actually had him rocked for a bit with a spinning kick that cut him open but once again he didn't take advantage and was taken down...at one point he went for an armbar but hammill escaped...the round ended like the rest with hammill laying in his guard. Seth had many chances to get hammill out of there, hammill's striking is awful, he also holds his hands down to low, he's an open target after each of those slow sloppy punches and he should have been knocked out.
  • 10-12-2006, 12:56 AM
    duran
    I think it boils down to Hamill having an answer for everything Seth had and not enough vice versa.

    Seth still will be pissed when he sees all the lost opportunities. I hope he comes back bigger, better, badder.
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
  •