Reply to Thread

Post a reply to the thread: UFC 154 Aftermath: So much for 'boring GSP'

Your Message

Click here to log in

What is the last name of UFC's President?

 
 

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)

  • 11-21-2012, 05:48 PM
    Kimbo> Rampage
    Definitely dont think Condit won, but he was doing better in the standup in the later rounds... He was very tentative early on... He was worried about GSP's takedowns and got outstruck as a result... But later on when he became loose he was landing some good shots on GSP... Carlos snuck in a few rights and some decent kicks...

    Carlos was also very aggressive off of his back... not to the point of scoring a lot of points, but GSP had to be on point and he wasnt landing huge GNP shots....

    Quote Originally Posted by goodtimes View Post
    I think this is the mindset one needs to enjoy GSP. He's not a brilliant striker; everyone saying he's a fantastic striker are kind of overlooking his weaknesses. He will never box like JDS or have the muay thai strength of Anderson Silva or Jose Aldo. Also, he's not a brilliant grappler either. He's got a great double leg and a suffocating top game, but he's not a BJJ wizard like Maia or a master of the clinch like Sonnen. He's just really good at everything.

    What he's really great at is misdirection. He's good enough everywhere that people have to guess what he's going to do. His striking looks better the other guy is watching for the takedown. His wrestling looks better when they are wary of the jab. He's such a tough opponent because he forces his opponent to be better almost everywhere.
    Agree.... the guys at WW need to be careful of GSP's striking... because he is a good technical striker... but Anderson is several levels ahead of him... How much would he even have to respect GSP's striking at all...

    We all know that GSP has a cookie cutter gameplan of striking with his opponent early on, keeping it safe, then goes for a takedown later on to secure the rounds... His game revolves around Jabs, rights, leg kicks and an occasional superman punch... Would he even dare take that approach with Anderson, he probably looks for the takedowns right away.
  • 11-21-2012, 05:16 PM
    goodtimes
    Quote Originally Posted by joeodd2 View Post
    After GSP got rocked and almost finished, I can't blame the guy for not playing on the feet for a long period of time during the rest of the fight. He did go for some descent GNP, but he said it himself, he doesn't have the same kind of power other fighters do. Personally I don't believe he likes to commit too much to his punches and kicks, he likes to confuse his opponent with strikes and take downs. Either way he's the most exciting non finisher in MMA.
    I think this is the mindset one needs to enjoy GSP. He's not a brilliant striker; everyone saying he's a fantastic striker are kind of overlooking his weaknesses. He will never box like JDS or have the muay thai strength of Anderson Silva or Jose Aldo. Also, he's not a brilliant grappler either. He's got a great double leg and a suffocating top game, but he's not a BJJ wizard like Maia or a master of the clinch like Sonnen. He's just really good at everything.

    What he's really great at is misdirection. He's good enough everywhere that people have to guess what he's going to do. His striking looks better the other guy is watching for the takedown. His wrestling looks better when they are wary of the jab. He's such a tough opponent because he forces his opponent to be better almost everywhere.
  • 11-21-2012, 01:07 PM
    joeodd2
    Quote Originally Posted by Adambomb View Post
    Honestly, I find it funny how people actually think GSP changed anything about his style or general philosophy in this fight with Condit. Condit was better than Koscheck, Shields, or Hardy, so he was actually able to make the fight competitive.

    However, GSP was still content to play it safe. Several times during the fight GSP landed combos which had Condit reeling back into the cage. Instead of continuing to throw strikes, GSP went for the takedown which he easily achieved. He continued his G&P assault even though it was clear that probably wasn't going to finish the fight, as Carlos had continually done a good job defending himself despite eating a lot of shots. Carlos couldn't stop GSP's takedowns but had good enough BJJ to make a submission very difficult, so Georges focused on G&P. GSP simply found Condit's biggest weakness and continued to exploit it.

    That's the exact same thing GSP did in his previous fights. Hardy had horrendous grappling, so GSP went for submissions all day instead of mixing up striking or G&P. Koscheck couldn't stop the jab, so Georges just used that instead of throwing any combos or kicks in pursuit of the finish.

    GSP always takes the safest route to victory. It's a credit to his skillset that he's versatile enough to exploit even the tiniest weakness in an opponent's game, but let's not pretend he's actually changed. If GSP wanted to stop Condit he probably could have by continually throwing combos once he had Carlos backing up. But that would've come with the risk of getting Ko'd, so he again chose not to.
    After GSP got rocked and almost finished, I can't blame the guy for not playing on the feet for a long period of time during the rest of the fight. He did go for some descent GNP, but he said it himself, he doesn't have the same kind of power other fighters do. Personally I don't believe he likes to commit too much to his punches and kicks, he likes to confuse his opponent with strikes and take downs. Either way he's the most exciting non finisher in MMA.
  • 11-21-2012, 06:47 AM
    Adambomb
    Quote Originally Posted by Sniggles View Post
    It is still strategy. People don't watch a chess game and scoff at how he chose to be safe 1/2 way through the match despite a win. Is GSP never supposed to perform takedowns anymore so that he loses his rep for being safe or should he continue to use the techniques that has made him one of the best fighters in the world? Takedowns are GSP's main tool.

    The people that play the "safe" card just have an inability to appreciate the skill.

    This isn't boxing. This isn't kickboxing. This is MMA.
    This is a straw man argument if there ever was one, & it makes no sense whatsoever.

    Understanding GSP's skill & being entertained by his style are not mutually exclusive. If anything, my respect for his striking ability is the chief reason why I'm disappointed when he chooses no to utilize it's full potential.

    Also, if takedowns are GSP's main tool as you claim, why didn't he use them against Koscheck & Shields?

    I made it a point to mention specifically how impressively skilled GSP is. In fact, I'd call him the most complete fighter in MMA. However, that doesn't mean I'm always entertained by the style he chooses to employ, which is taking the safest path to victory at all times. It's smart, but not necessarily the most entertaining option he has.

    For example, GSP was getting the better of the standup exchanges against Condit. One he had Carlos backed up against the cage why not continue to throw strikes to try to earn a stoppage? At certain points it seemed clear GSP had a striking advantage, yet decided not to pursue it further as takedowns were a safer way to win a round, even if it seemed clear they weren't going to lead to a finish.
  • 11-21-2012, 06:39 AM
    Sniggles
    Quote Originally Posted by goodtimes View Post
    I never said the fight should have gone to Condit.



    Chess is not a spectator sport. People don't pay hundreds or thousands of dollars to watch the best chess players compete in person. Similarly, if a fan of a sport doesn't like a popular fighters style, it's not really your place to criticize them for it.

    In my opinion, disliking GSP for his "boring" style makes a lot more sense then people who dislike Jones or Silva because of their attitudes.
    I dislike Jones for his attitude but enjoy watching GSP. Hah!
  • 11-21-2012, 06:17 AM
    m1ckeykn0x
    Quote Originally Posted by v3xi View Post
    Winning and losing isn't based off of what someones face looks like at the end of a fight.
    Yeah, ask Diego and Edgar.
  • 11-21-2012, 04:17 AM
    goodtimes
    Quote Originally Posted by v3xi View Post
    Winning and losing isn't based off of what someones face looks like at the end of a fight.
    I never said the fight should have gone to Condit.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sniggles View Post
    It is still strategy. People don't watch a chess game and scoff at how he chose to be safe 1/2 way through the match despite a win. Is GSP never supposed to perform takedowns anymore so that he loses his rep for being safe or should he continue to use the techniques that has made him one of the best fighters in the world? Takedowns are GSP's main tool.

    The people that play the "safe" card just have an inability to appreciate the skill.

    This isn't boxing. This isn't kickboxing. This is MMA.
    Chess is not a spectator sport. People don't pay hundreds or thousands of dollars to watch the best chess players compete in person. Similarly, if a fan of a sport doesn't like a popular fighters style, it's not really your place to criticize them for it.

    In my opinion, disliking GSP for his "boring" style makes a lot more sense then people who dislike Jones or Silva because of their attitudes.
  • 11-21-2012, 01:55 AM
    CtGreat
    Quote Originally Posted by Sniggles View Post
    It is still strategy. People don't watch a chess game and scoff at how he chose to be safe 1/2 way through the match despite a win. Is GSP never supposed to perform takedowns anymore so that he loses his rep for being safe or should he continue to use the techniques that has made him one of the best fighters in the world? Takedowns are GSP's main tool.

    The people that play the "safe" card just have an inability to appreciate the skill.

    This isn't boxing. This isn't kickboxing. This is MMA.
    Boxers, kickboxers, MMA; all of their respective sports have fighters that play it safe more often than they take risks. GSP is one of those people. Just because you find their strategy boring doesn't mean you dont appreciate skill. I can appreciate the skill of an Obo player, however I dont give a fuck about listening to a musician play one.
  • 11-21-2012, 01:35 AM
    lwbrewer
    Quote Originally Posted by CtGreat View Post
    Since Condit is most dangerous on the feet, putting him on his back would be taking the safest route
    Corect safest route to be able to afflick the most damage is more of what IMO most of us want.
  • 11-21-2012, 12:58 AM
    Sniggles
    Quote Originally Posted by CtGreat View Post
    Since Condit is most dangerous on the feet, putting him on his back would be taking the safest route
    It is still strategy. People don't watch a chess game and scoff at how he chose to be safe 1/2 way through the match despite a win. Is GSP never supposed to perform takedowns anymore so that he loses his rep for being safe or should he continue to use the techniques that has made him one of the best fighters in the world? Takedowns are GSP's main tool.

    The people that play the "safe" card just have an inability to appreciate the skill.

    This isn't boxing. This isn't kickboxing. This is MMA.
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
  •