Quitting To Illegal Strikes With No KO Is The Same As

[Franc Mittelo]

tapping to strikes. No?

I have read all the "he/she tapped to strikes" rationale, and the central idea is, if you have the cognition and strength to tap, then you should go out on your shield.

Well, this exact logic can be applied to "tapping" to illegal strikes. If you look at the ref and doc and answer their questions, then the only answer should be "yes, give me 5 minutes, and I am good to go."

If I am wrong, give me a better perspective.

 

[Toner]

What about Weidman acting hurt against Mousasi when he thought the Mousasi knees were illegal?

 

[capnlarge]

Losing to an illegal strike is BS. I don't agree TS. The biggest difference is that an illegal strike is a sucker punch because you are not going to be defending for them.

 

[Kyler Ruxin]

talking about going out on your shield is much easier than actually doing it. When you know that you are beat, and have almost no chance of winning, it makes sense that you just throw in the towel. Getting your jaw broken to prove how tough you are doesn't gain you anything.

 

[TheGrouch]

What about Weidman acting hurt against Mousasi when he thought the Mousasi knees were illegal?

There was only one correct response to that...

 

[Franc Mittelo]

What about Weidman acting hurt against Mousasi when he thought the Mousasi knees were illegal?

Classic example. The guy quit, and then when he was told the strikes were legal, he changed his mind. LOL

 

[Franc Mittelo]

talking about going out on your shield is much easier than actually doing it. When you know that you are beat, and have almost no chance of winning, it makes sense that you just throw in the towel. Getting your jaw broken to prove how tough you are doesn't gain you anything.

I firmly believe in "live to fight another day," The percentage of fighters who take a serious beating, and the come back is very low.

Even if you come back, how many years of your life will you lose due to accumulated damage? Is it worth to accomplish fits that you will not remember if you live to an old age?

These are deep philosophical questions. LOL

 

[blewgums]

THE OTHER DAY I RUBBED BUTTER ALL OVER MY COCK!

I did, it's true.

 

[RampageFaction]

tapping to strikes. No?

I have read all the "he/she tapped to strikes" rationale, and the central idea is, if you have the cognition and strength to tap, then you should go out on your shield.

Well, this exact logic can be applied to "tapping" to illegal strikes. If you look at the ref and doc and answer their questions, then the only answer should be "yes, give me 5 minutes, and I am good to go."

If I am wrong, give me a better perspective.

If a fighter is already concussed from strikes you can't say that fighter "has cognition" when they tap. Have you ever heard some of the things fighters SAY when they're concussed? It's the reason Rogan lobbied against in cage interviews with fighters who have just been kayoed. That's AFTER a concussion and they've had a few minutes to collect themselves...now imagine during a concussion when blows are still raining down and your brain is scrambled.