GSP 100% ready to come back and face....

Shaddows said:
well, when was the last time GSP went for the kill? Before he was KO'd?
So no, you are being unfair.
Hendrick, if he gets someone in trouble, he goes for the kill. GSP keeps his strategy and does not deviate from it.
That' the difference.

You can try to hate on Hendricks, but facts simply disagrees with you.
Click to expand...

Your facts are wrong. Hendricks has become the type of fighter he criticized GSP for being. Hendricks is a point fighter who hasn't finished since 2012.

In GSP's first 15 fights in the UFC, he won 8 by TKO, knockout or submission. He then won 7 by decision.

In Hendricks' first 12 fights in the UFC, he won 5 by TKO or knockout. He then went 8 without a finish, winning only 3 fights and all by decision.

Hendricks has 25% finish rate in the UFC.

GSP has a 37% finish rate in the UFC.

GSP won the title from Hughes twice (one interim) by knockout and beat Serra to unify by knockout. As champion he finished one fight (Penn).

Hendricks won the title by decision (many think he lost to Lawler) and never finished or even defended the title.

Tell me again about those facts...
 
Last edited:
DIABOLUS said:
I think GSP gets a hard time because he didn't retire definitively and has been a cock tease about making a comeback for the last three years. Then when he finally decides to come back, campaigns for a fight against an easy opponent outside his weight class instead of the tougher fight in the division he vacated. GSP is just like Mighty Mouse. He doesn't care about his legacy. He only cares about the W's. Doesn't matter who it's against as long as he can beat them.

Guys like Chuck and BJ were at least willing to test themselves and go out on their shield if need be. That will always get more respect in my book.
Click to expand...
I hear what you are saying and think you might have nailed GSP's mentality, but where I do disagree is I do think Bisping is a harder fight than anyone at WW. Even if GSP thinks he is easier.
 
GSP1978 said:
Your facts are wrong. Hendricks has become the type of fighter he criticized GSP for being. Hendricks is a point fighter who hasn't finished since 2012.

In GSP's first 15 fights in the UFC, he won 8 by TKO, knockout or submission. He then won 7 by decision.

In Hendricks' first 12 fights in the UFC, he won 5 by TKO or knockout. He then went 8 without a finish, winning only 3 fights and all by decision.

Tell me again about those facts...
Click to expand...

I don't understand your point.
We were talking about GSP being a point fighter... how did Hendricks join the conversation?
And even if you were right (which you are not), how does proving Hendricks to be a point fighter help you with GSP's argument? (It doesn't).

So all in all, you are trying to point to a different direction just to "protect" GSP? weak man...
This only shows how you don't have any arguments that would make GSP look any better.

Note: and yet another point: I never criticized GSP for winning his fights. I only noted something HE HIMSELF said, that winning (by decision) is more important than finishing someone.
You have a problem with this, go take it with GSP himself...
 
Shaddows said:
I don't understand your point.
We were talking about GSP being a point fighter... how did Hendricks join the conversation?
And even if you were right (which you are not), how does proving Hendricks to be a point fighter help you with GSP's argument? (It doesn't).

So all in all, you are trying to point to a different direction just to "protect" GSP? weak man...
This only shows how you don't have any arguments that would make GSP look any better.

Note: and yet another point: I never criticized GSP for winning his fights. I only noted something HE HIMSELF said, that winning (by decision) is more important than finishing someone.
You have a problem with this, go take it with GSP himself...
Click to expand...

I don't need to protect GSP. 12 straight wins and 8 title defenses do that for himself. He's the best WW ever.

GSP didn't start out as a point fighter. He became one in part because getting a finish became more difficult as the competition increased.

Hendricks is a great comparison. Everyone thinks of Hendricks as a finisher and he himself lambasted GSP for being a point fighter. But in the second half of his career he had similar results, in fact less finishes than St. Pierre, and a worse overall finish rate.

If you don't want to use Hendricks as a measuring stick, use the WW title since GSP vacated it. It has been fought for 7 times, with only 2 finishes - Lawler over McDonald and Woodley over Lawyer or 29% finish rate. Hendrick- Lawyer went to a decision twice, Lawler went to decision over Condit, Woodley and Thompson went to decision twice.

Your argument that Hendricks goes in for the kill when he smells blood is idiotic. Like GSP, he was unable to finish in the upper echelons of the WW division.
 
Last edited:
Not many fighters have the opportunity to go out on top

GSP did

Thats why people hate on him. They wanted GSP to suffer 5 straight KO loses so they can shitpost about it.
 
GSP would probably have to have a weight vest on to be in the same weight class as Hendricks if this keeps going.
 
kingskot said:
You think what GSP did in the WW division was *easy*?
flat,800x800,075,f.jpg
Click to expand...

What does this even mean? You don't accumulate losses when you don't fight past your prime.
 
GSP1978 said:
I don't need to protect GSP. 12 straight wins and 8 title defenses do that for himself. He's the best WW ever.

GSP didn't start out as a point fighter. He became one in part because getting a finish became more difficult as the competition increased.

Hendricks is a great comparison. Everyone thinks of Hendricks as a finisher and he himself lambasted GSP for being a point fighter. But in the second half of his career he had similar results, in fact less finishes than St. Pierre, and a worse overall finish rate.

If you don't want to use Hendricks as a measuring stick, use the WW title since GSP vacated it. It has been fought for 7 times, with only 2 finishes - Lawler over McDonald and Woodley over Lawyer or 29% finish rate. Hendrick- Lawyer went to a decision twice, Lawler went to decision over Condit, Woodley and Thompson went to decision twice.

Your argument that Hendricks goes in for the kill when he smells blood is idiotic. Like GSP, he was unable to finish in the upper echelons of the WW division.
Click to expand...
GSP was not unable. he was unwilling.
That is a distinction you fail to see because you are emotionally invested in protecting him.
Examples are easy to pick:
Koscheck - Orbital bone broken in first round. - GSP proceeded to jab for 4 more rounds, never attempting to end the fight.
Hardy - man, he had an armbar locked, Dan didn't tap, he let it go and proceeded to never attempt to sub Hardy.

If you claim Hendrick does not try to end fights, please give some examples, same as I did.

Look, I have no problem with him not finishing guys like DIaz, Condit or Hendricks. Those are durable guys. But you are not only disregarding examples like I provided you, and more importantly, what GSP himself said and repeated about how he rather not take risk and lose....
 
Shaddows said:
GSP was not unable. he was unwilling.
That is a distinction you fail to see because you are emotionally invested in protecting him.
Examples are easy to pick:
Koscheck - Orbital bone broken in first round. - GSP proceeded to jab for 4 more rounds, never attempting to end the fight.
Hardy - man, he had an armbar locked, Dan didn't tap, he let it go and proceeded to never attempt to sub Hardy.

If you claim Hendrick does not try to end fights, please give some examples, same as I did.

Look, I have no problem with him not finishing guys like DIaz, Condit or Hendricks. Those are durable guys. But you are not only disregarding examples like I provided you, and more importantly, what GSP himself said and repeated about how he rather not take risk and lose....
Click to expand...

You should probably provide better examples and watch the fights.

Koscheck - GSP doesn't know the orbital is broken in the first round, he's not a doctor. He certainly knew there was some damage and opened up with right crosses and left hooks and tried to take Kos out. The suggestion that he only jabbed after round 1 is laughable. Kos stayed back and didn't engage after round three. But Kos was throwing the right wildly and no sense in GSP running into a punch. But GSP threw some vicious rights, lefts and kicks to Kos' head.



Hardy - Again you have your facts incorrect. GSP had an armbar in the first round and and a kimura in the fourth round. He had 11 takedowns, 13 guard passes and took Hardy's back 5 times. Hardy is slippery and quite frankly GSP's BJJ is sloppy. I don't know where you get this nonsense that "man, he had an armbar locked, Dan didn't tap, he let it go and proceeded to never attempt to sub Hardy." Obviously you missed the kimura and don't know what you are talking about.





https://www.mma-core.com/videos/GSP_vs_Dan_Hardy_UFC_111_Gracie_Breakdown/10017264

http://www.mmatorch.com/artman2/publish/ukscene/article_4733.shtml#.WVGEJOvyupo

As for examples of Hendricks not trying to end fights, I'll cite 5 great examples:

(1) Hendricks v. Condit - Hendricks took Condit down repeatedly and never did any damage. Once he figured out Condit couldn't stop the takedown he was content to repeatedly take him down and do nothing more.

(2) Hendricks v. Lawler #1 - Hendricks never went for the kill. Tied 2 rounds each he got a sloppy takedown late in round 5 for the WW belt.

(3) Hendricks v. St. Pierre - Hendricks had GSP hurt badly in round 3. And what did he do? He clearly smelled blood - it was all over GSP's face. He didn't go in for the kill (your words, not mine). He spat out his mouthpiece, wrestled in round 4 with no ground n' pound just lay n' do not'in, and took the 5th round off to allow GSP to steal the decision.

(4) Hendricks v. Matt Brown - 3 rounds of Hendricks holding Brown down, doing no damage, happy to hump out a decision.

(5) Hendrick v. Lawler #2 - Hendricks never pushed the pace, never had Lawler in trouble, never went for the kill.

I don't take away that Hendricks had two great knockouts against Fitch and Kampmann. But both were on single punches, Hendricks essentially rushing in and clipping fighters who don't know how to move. In fight after fight, Condit, GSP, Lawler x 2, Hendricks is happy to wrestle and ride out a decision.
 
Shaddows said:
Heh, I find it odd.
half the threads in here are bashing Wandi, Sonnen, Fedor & BJ for fighting beyond their prime... but GSP stopped before that, and gets a hard time as well....

people need to realise that there's no exact answer, and fighters have to pay their bills after they retire, reason why some hang on for a few extra years.
Click to expand...
You just encapsulated sherdog logic nicely with this post.
 
Im not sure who has fallen from grace more: GSP or Bigg Rigg. Big Pigg atleast shows up to the scale, albeit overweight, while GSP just blue balls us to keep in the news "Ill be back this summer, no next fall, no the falling spring, no the summer....I got hurt, it will be October.....I need more time, it will be January" pfft....
 
GSP1978 said:
You should probably provide better examples and watch the fights.

Koscheck - GSP doesn't know the orbital is broken in the first round, he's not a doctor. He certainly knew there was some damage and opened up with right crosses and left hooks and tried to take Kos out. The suggestion that he only jabbed after round 1 is laughable. Kos stayed back and didn't engage after round three. But Kos was throwing the right wildly and no sense in GSP running into a punch. But GSP threw some vicious rights, lefts and kicks to Kos' head.



Hardy - Again you have your facts incorrect. GSP had an armbar in the first round and and a kimura in the fourth round. He had 11 takedowns, 13 guard passes and took Hardy's back 5 times. Hardy is slippery and quite frankly GSP's BJJ is sloppy. I don't know where you get this nonsense that "man, he had an armbar locked, Dan didn't tap, he let it go and proceeded to never attempt to sub Hardy." Obviously you missed the kimura and don't know what you are talking about.





https://www.mma-core.com/videos/GSP_vs_Dan_Hardy_UFC_111_Gracie_Breakdown/10017264

http://www.mmatorch.com/artman2/publish/ukscene/article_4733.shtml#.WVGEJOvyupo

As for examples of Hendricks not trying to end fights, I'll cite 5 great examples:

(1) Hendricks v. Condit - Hendricks took Condit down repeatedly and never did any damage. Once he figured out Condit couldn't stop the takedown he was content to repeatedly take him down and do nothing more.

(2) Hendricks v. Lawler #1 - Hendricks never went for the kill. Tied 2 rounds each he got a sloppy takedown late in round 5 for the WW belt.

(3) Hendricks v. St. Pierre - Hendricks had GSP hurt badly in round 3. And what did he do? He clearly smelled blood - it was all over GSP's face. He didn't go in for the kill (your words, not mine). He spat out his mouthpiece, wrestled in round 4 with no ground n' pound just lay n' do not'in, and took the 5th round off to allow GSP to steal the decision.

(4) Hendricks v. Matt Brown - 3 rounds of Hendricks holding Brown down, doing no damage, happy to hump out a decision.

(5) Hendrick v. Lawler #2 - Hendricks never pushed the pace, never had Lawler in trouble, never went for the kill.

I don't take away that Hendricks had two great knockouts against Fitch and Kampmann. But both were on single punches, Hendricks essentially rushing in and clipping fighters who don't know how to move. In fight after fight, Condit, GSP, Lawler x 2, Hendricks is happy to wrestle and ride out a decision.
Click to expand...


LOL could you do something for me?
GO back and read what you wrote.
then go watch GSP fights, and tell me you are not being overly hard on Hendricks (which again, makes no sense why he is in this conversation as it was only about GSP).
If you are that picky about Hendricks 3 wins, why exactly are you trying to explain GSP's 9 decisions?
I mean either you should be hard on both, or lenient on both. But you are just showing a strong bias pro GSP and against Hendrick (which once again has no reason to be in this conversation).

Bottom line: proving hendricks is not a finisher does NOTHING to improve GSP's standing as a non-finisher as well..

So contrats. At max, what you got, is adding Hendricks to the halls of decisioners...
 
DIABOLUS said:
What does this even mean? You don't accumulate losses when you don't fight past your prime.
Click to expand...
Well there you go, every fighter should just not fight past their prime. Then they wouldn't accumulate losses and retain perfect records. Like you said, easy!
 
DIABOLUS said:
Not a fan of Hendricks, but it's easy to keep your record unblemished when you quit before you start losing definitively.
Click to expand...

Is it easy to go 3 years without losing a round? Or to have 9 title defense?

How about avenging every loss you've ever had? Is that easy?

I had no problem with GSP retiring when he did. He had cleaned out his division twice...I was ready for new blood to take the throne.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,236,708
Messages
55,436,270
Members
174,774
Latest member
kilgorevontrouty

Share this page

Back
Top