Matt Serra was outstriking GSP before he hurt him and made GSP tap to strikes. Fight was not a fluke

Status
Not open for further replies.
Fight wasn't a fluke.

GSP didn't take into account that Serra could punch hard as fuck.
 
Or avoided them for four years, then returned as a middleweight.

1) Pretty sure he beat Johny...Google it if you don't believe me.

2) Johny is probably a 205er at this point so not sure about your point of GSP going to MW.
 
If it wasnt a fluke, how come he couldn't do it again and got dominated in the rematch? Plus it was the back of gsp head
GSP took into account that a wild exchange could leave him sleeping so he took the easiest path too victory.

Actually GSP the decision machine was born because of Serra 1. He stopped taking chances and just looked to win.
 
You know it's not 2007 anymore right? A rematch happened, and GSP beat Serra's ass.
 
Serra knows what's up. Someone asked him on Dana's looking for a fight "so when's the trilogy fight with GSP?" He started laughing and said "shut the fuck up."
 
Guess it depends on your definition of fluke. Serra is under-rated a bit these days, but it's pretty clear who the better fighter was.
 
I don't think anyone called Serra's win a fluke... rather, the onus was passed on to GSP and underestimating his opponent... but I don't think anyone felt that Matt was lucky, he was clearly the better-prepared fighter that night.

GSP has spoken often of the fact that he took Serra lightly because he let his hype get into his head. That is not on Matt. Some will hold that against GSP, as a lame excuse, but rather he holds it as a reason on why he became a better fighter.

Full props to Serra that night.. he took his shot and seized the moment. Ability and talent are only part of the equation, that night in Houston GSP was very beatable and Matt took care of business.. if it hadn't been in the first, it would have come eventually.
 
No such thing as a fluke. Serra was better that night. GSP was better the second time. Kids act like Serra was a terrible fighter. He was a good fighter. A world champion BJJ practicioner, with heavy hands.
 
It was a fluke because Serra's odds of winning were astronomically small, and if given 100 chances, Serra would not be able to replicate this feat a significant number of times.
 
Men go into cage to throw fists at each other. One man lands hard punches on other. Other goes down. Loses. Not a fluke.
 
Ok, so Serra was at his all-time best that round and GSP was really off his game. The rest of Serra's career absolutely pales to GSP. After winning the belt, Serra lost 3 of his final 4 fights, including his rematch to GSP.
 
I often call it a "fluke" myself, but I agree with your assessment. Serra was winning that fight before the KO. At the very least, it was very close. They fought for a solid 3 minutes, too. That's not too much, but it's not nothing. Same goes for Rockhold/Bisping 2.
 
This is the real winner of the fight.
 

Attachments

  • winner.png
    winner.png
    723.3 KB · Views: 10
If it wasnt a fluke, how come he couldn't do it again and got dominated in the rematch? Plus it was the back of gsp head
How come JDS couldn't do it again twice? It was a fluke in the fact that, no one expected that.
 
How did the rematch go? Anytime Gsp has lost he came back and destroyed the guy he lost to.

And Serra lost every rematch he had. He first beat Shonie Carter (TUF), Chris Lytle and GSP...the proceeded to lose to each of them later. That's not exactly the mark of a champion.
 
Ok, so Serra was at his all-time best that round and GSP was really off his game. The rest of Serra's career absolutely pales to GSP. After winning the belt, Serra lost 3 of his final 4 fights, including his rematch to GSP.
I think you may have taken this thread too personally as a GSP fan. There is no doubt about anything you posted, but this isn't a battle of "Who's better?" or "Who had the better career?" This thread only concerns UFC 69. No one is questioning GSP's greatness.
 
Matt Serra vs GSP 1 was not a fluke.

Matt Serra was outstriking GSP before GSP got rocked by Serra's right. Serra was landing good punches (to the head and body) and leg kicks before hurting GSP with the right. Serra landed more significant strikes than GSP before he rocked GSP. Rewatch the fight and tell me I'm wrong.

http://m.espn.com/extra/mma/fightstatistics?fightId=151836

Serra landed a total of 20 significant strikes

GSP landed a total of 6 significant strikes.

Some people, especially GSP fans, say that the first fight was a fluke but the stats and strikes landed say otherwise.

Thoughts?

You are wrong. Even if we take all you said about the first fight as true, it was a fluke. Watch GSP Serra 2. Serra on his best night beat GSP on his worst night. The fluke was GSP showing up that unfocused. If they fought 1000 times Georges wins 999
 
We were so innocent in those far gone years.
 
It was a fluke because Serra's odds of winning were astronomically small, and if given 100 chances, Serra would not be able to replicate this feat a significant number of times.
Bisping's chances of beating Rockhold in the rematch was even smaller.

Serra was like +900 vs GSP in the first fight. I can't remember what GSP was but I'm guessing like -750. It was 10 years ago and I didn't start betting and paying attention to lines until 2013.

Rockhold was -900 and Bisping was +1200 for their rematch. I know that for a fact because I wanted to bet on Rockhold but I wasn't going to wage $2k to win $220. Good for me.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top