how much was Anderson affected by his "performance enhancer" vs Nick Diaz

revoltub

Steel Belt
@Steel
Joined
Jun 10, 2016
Messages
28,920
Reaction score
18,745
I recently watched the fight again. I think you can make a case Diaz actually did enough to win.

Anyway, anderson failed a test for that fight for a banned substance.

The question is, how much did it affect his performance? Did it give him an unfair edge in the fight?
And if it did, does anyone else think a rematch would go a different way, and would anyone like to see a rematch?
Personally i thought the fight sucked, but i wouldnt mind seeing a rematch just to answer some questions.
 
I don't see how anyone can think Diaz did enough to win that fight. I gave Diaz one round. It was a boring fight but Anderson did more damage AND won more rds
 
I don't see how anyone can think Diaz did enough to win that fight. I gave Diaz one round. It was a boring fight but Anderson did more damage AND won more rds

I thought it was close.
 
The question is, how much did it affect his performance?

He would have landed 2 jabs and 1 leg kick less per round without steroids.

Did it give him an unfair edge in the fight?

Yes.

And if it did, does anyone else think a rematch would go a different way, and would anyone like to see a rematch?

I don't want to see a rematch. It's a boring and pointless fight. I'd prefer to see Diaz vs Lawler and Anderson vs Rockhold.
 
It was one of his worst performances. He looked bad in there. He's just still better than Diaz.
 
I don't see how anyone can think Diaz did enough to win that fight. I gave Diaz one round. It was a boring fight but Anderson did more damage AND won more rds
It felt like Nick Diaz did not come in there determined to win over Anderson, he lacked hunger and was not at all aggressive as he used to be. Not one would question that Anderson won it.
 
It didn't look like it helped him too much.

Thought both fighters looked poor in that scrap.
 
It felt like Nick Diaz did not come in there determined to win over Anderson, he lacked hunger and was not at all aggressive as he used to be. Not one would question that Anderson won it.

STRIKE FORCE Diaz was a thing to behold. When he got robbed against Condit it completely demoralized him for the rest of his fights.
 
I recently watched the fight again. I think you can make a case Diaz actually did enough to win.

That was the most clearcut 50-45 fight I've ever seen. Nicky did not win a single round in that fight.

Diaz fanboys.
 
Both guys had ring rust, hard to tell if PED's helped Silva, it was mostly a feeling each other out fight, the fight never really got going. In general Anderson doesn't need a PED to beat Diaz, Silva is a better fighter. But I almost forgot that fight happened because it was really uneventful sparring session for both lol
 
You must be one of those guys who think nick would beat gsp in a rematch because gsp was over .8lbs
 
That was the fight that ended my dad's interest in mma.
We watched it together, and he wasn't too impressed. Then when Andy popped, the only thing he said was, "Anderson needs to retire."
 
It obviously helped him a lot. That's the whole point of PEDs.

Today, with Anderson's Mir-esque speed and low output, I see Nick Diaz boxing him up to a UD or late stoppage. If it's a 5 rounder, Diaz all day. Maybe in a 3 round fight Anderson can squeeze out another decision.
 
It was dick pills right? So probably chubbed him up a bit.
 
I recently watched the fight again. I think you can make a case Diaz actually did enough to win.

Anyway, anderson failed a test for that fight for a banned substance.

The question is, how much did it affect his performance? Did it give him an unfair edge in the fight?
And if it did, does anyone else think a rematch would go a different way, and would anyone like to see a rematch?
Personally i thought the fight sucked, but i wouldnt mind seeing a rematch just to answer some questions.

He fought better against tougher competition in Bisping. His PED's clearly did nothing. It was one of the worst fights of his career and Diaz didn't do enough to even come remotely close to winning. It was a clear 50-45 for a 40 year old man in his first fight after a leg break.

All it proved was that Diaz is even close to the level of old man Anderson, let alone Anderson in his prime.
 
Nick probably would have KO'd Anderson if he wasn't roided. Anderson looked a broken man after Weidman destroyed him back to back
 
It obviously helped him a lot. That's the whole point of PEDs.

Today, with Anderson's Mir-esque speed and low output, I see Nick Diaz boxing him up to a UD or late stoppage. If it's a 5 rounder, Diaz all day. Maybe in a 3 round fight Anderson can squeeze out another decision.

Yeah thats about where i stand on the issue.

Although i think a 3 rounder can favor diaz as well. It depends how aggressive he comes out early
 
It was a piss poor fight, anderson lacked confidence you can tell, he really didn't want to go into nicks world, but then I think the Diaz brothers are over rated in that when somebody doesn't play their game then can't impose their style on the fighter, they just start cursing and whinge post fight.

Overall it was a shit fight.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
1,234,241
Messages
55,267,270
Members
174,714
Latest member
F5CHAMPIONSHIP
Back
Top