So many of anderson silva's losses are "illegitimate" or excusable

Anderson has always goofed around when he fights. Funny how the one fight where he gets knocked out doing it is the one people call a fluke lol.
 
I know it's hard to accept Silva lost the belt to the mediocre Weidman but it is what it is man...
 
Agent Mulder's Hair said:
yes there really is
Click to expand...
nah, you get KTFOd thats on you. now I would understand if there was water in the octagon causing a fighter to slip or something along the lines of that. but If a guy trying to punch you knocks you out. and you're completely aware that he is trying to punch you... thats on you
 
Drake said:
{<jordan}{<jordan}{<jordan}



These threads always pop up every now & again & it's funny every time...
Click to expand...
I bet they watch the weidman fights hoping it will change this time for some reason. If anderson clowned like he did,as he does in many of his fights,and won..finished weidman with kicks...no one would have shit to say. But since he clowned and LOST. ohhh anderson could have won but he clowned.
 
silus_2000 said:
I'm sure he was roided even then. No chance that getting his leg snapped off pushed him to PEDs. None.
Click to expand...

“When the guys test for the steroids, (they should have) no more fights,” Anderson Silva told MMAjunkie in October. “When you use the steroids, you use them for a long time. When you use the steroids for a long time, you have a problem. It’s a drug, and it’s not good for the sport.”



Too bad not even Anderson agrees with you.
 
fatlipjesus said:
“When the guys test for the steroids, (they should have) no more fights,” Anderson Silva told MMAjunkie in October. “When you use the steroids, you use them for a long time. When you use the steroids for a long time, you have a problem. It’s a drug, and it’s not good for the sport.”



Too bad not even Anderson agrees with you.
Click to expand...
You're quoting the guy that doesn't believe he used PEDs to begin with. You've kicked yourself in your own nuts.
 
ive been very critical of Anderson . Sometimes i find his personality to be fake,his arrogance beyond belief,and sometimes his style unadaptable to certain situations,which makes the fight a chore to watch. PED's? eh i dont bother adding that to the equation. The guy is an amazing fighter,who eventually declined,and met guys who were able to deal with his skills with their own (weidman/bisping) I think his clowning/lack of aggression has to do with his age,conditioning AND troubles dealing with his opponents styles. Yes its hard to swallow for his fans the way he lost the first Weidman fight,but the guy been on top for so long,he was bound to run into some tough times. Hes an all time great,but hes not invincible. If anything would tarnish his image,its you guys not accepting his losses. Fedor is my favorite fighter,and he's lost but i never felt embarassed by him. He always fought with courage and thats all that matters.
 
silus_2000 said:
You're quoting the guy that doesn't believe he used PEDs to begin with. You've kicked yourself in your own nuts.
Click to expand...

Yeah, and everyone in jail thinks they're innocent too

lol

His NSAC hearing was a farce and everyone knows it lol
 
fatlipjesus said:
Yeah, and everyone in jail thinks they're innocent too

lol

His NSAC hearing was a farce and everyone knows it lol
Click to expand...
You're just making my point. You brought up an Anderson quote as if it refuted my initial point. I only inserted doubt into what he says so you would stop being a bitch and accept my initial point.
 
silus_2000 said:
You're just making my point. You brought up an Anderson quote as if it refuted my initial point. I only inserted doubt into what he says so you would stop being a bitch and accept my initial point.
Click to expand...

What the fuck are you even talking about


I still didn't accept your initial point. It was retarded. Apparently so are you for attempting some form of autistic social engineering on Sherdog.
 
Good point TS, everyone talks about how his chin is shot and whatever but it's only Weidman that KO'D him. Everything else was questionable.
 
anderson "goofed" and " clowned" with forrest, bonnar, maia, leites, cote, and a bunch of other guys and it worked out in his favor. its a part of his style its part of what made him successful hes a counter striker. yet when it backfires you want to call it a "fluke"? live by the sword and die by the sword.
 
silus_2000 said:
If you're too dumb to understand that then this discussion is just boring.
Click to expand...

No I understand that you're an idiot just fine.

"Anderson's innocent because he thinks he never did steroids."

Oh...

well that just settles it then.

Clearly he's innocent.... along with every other PED user in history.
 
MMA__Analyst said:
Anderson Silva may have 8 losses, and while its not good to make excuses so many of them are not "real" losses if you know what I mean.

His first 3 losses are legit. One by decision like 20 years ago, and two submissions (one oof them being one of the best submission victories of all time IMO).

Then he has a "loss" to Okami, for an illegal upkick. It wasn't a real loss, and should just be a DQ. Plus SIlva knocked him out with that kick lmao. Not only that but Silva proved the "loss" to be a "fluke" or meaningless since Silva destroyed Okami in the rematch.

His next two losses came from Weidman. The first KO, was a KO in every sense of the word. However, IMO there is a difference between KO'ing someone while they havee high guard, and KO'ing someone while they are goofing around. Silva was acting too ridiculous, and payed for it bg time. Weidman capitalized on it, and rightfully won. However. therre is a difference between KO'ing someone off balance with their chin up, and neck back with no support at all, and KO'ing silva with his guard up. Because Silva has never been knocked out while fighting serious. However, weidman rightfully got the win, but a win over a careless goofing around silva.

The 2nd KO from weidman, cannot b considered a legitimate KO. The "TKO" when silva broke his leg has mroe to do with Silva than with weidman. That 2nd "KO" is not something to brag about, since Silva simply broke his leg from a leg kick that he threw...

Then Silva "loss" to Bisping. Silva gave bisping a terrible beating. Silva was busting his face up, to the point where bisping wasn't even recognizable. Whereas Silva looked like he came out of a serious sparring session. Silva also landed one of thee most devastating "picture perfect" flying knees on Bisping. Bspiing was essentially knocked out. If Silva landed that knee just 5 seconds before the bell, and then followed up with punches it would be a KO for sure. After the knee, Silva kind of just didnt care, and bisping edged rounds 4 and 5. But silva not only did more damage, have better moments in the fight, but he also essentially knocked bisping out. But he still lost to a close decision in Britan. Bisping is the king of getting undeserved decisions, especially if its in Britan. If that fight were anywheere else dana white, joe rogan, weidman, and etc... all agree that he wouldvee easily went to Silva.

Then he has his loss to Daniel Cormier. However, you have a prime Daniel cormier against a slow 41 year old Anderson Silva; who took the fight on two days notice... Its also key to point out that silva was outstriking him in the 3rd round, and had the best moment of the entire fight when he landed a very hard body kick on cormier. I honestly think that had the fight gone two more rounds, that silva could've taken it. Seeing cormier's weakness to body shots, Silva would just be landing body kicks and liver shots for the rest of the fight.

So while he may have more losses than GSP, Jon Jones, Fedor, Aldo, MM, Cruz, and etc... Many of his losses can b "excused" or are not "real losses". I know I'll get flack for coming up with excuses but its true.

BTW sorry if spelling is terrible. My laptop keys are all messed up and jammed.
Click to expand...


Saying Silva's loss to Weidman isn't a legitimate KO is ridiculous!! Silva's style his entire UFC career was just doing that cocky, taunting nothing to get into his opponents head. It worked for a long time and one day everyone knew it would catch up to him. By your definition, since Anderson always fought in that style , if he did get KO'D repeatedly then none of them would have counted? That's crap. You play the game , get tagged ,get KO'D it counts. End of story.

Same as the kick. Checking a kick takes much practise to get it right .... It's a defence that turns on the offence. By all means it was legit. Just as counter strike landing first for the KO.. It's all in the reflexes
 
Silva was undefeated in the cage until almost 40. That speaks for itself.

Unlike MMA fighters today, he never had a true prime either.

By that I mean, guys like Anderson or Hendo who were fighting Pre 2000, didn't have the advantage of modern MMA (training, game planning etc) - until their 30s...

So imagine if these guys were debuting today. They would arguably have the skill set they had in their 30s, in their 20s and would potentially have an even more impressive highlight reel.
 
All my favourite fighters are actually undefeated, and all the ones I hate have lost every fight as far as I am concerned.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,236,688
Messages
55,434,608
Members
174,775
Latest member
kilgorevontrouty

Share this page

Back
Top