Why do MMA fans struggle to accept reality?

[MPD-Psycho]

Because reality sucks. We all do it.

"Remember Sammy Jankis?"

 

[RagingBeringola]

im talking more like in that moment they are the better fighter by UFC standards, im not saying they are the better fighter, or have the better resume, but you have to give credit to the win. If you don't give credit to win you may as well not have the fights and just give the win to who ever fans deem the favourite. Serra was better than gsp that night, GSP has a better resume, struve better than stipe that night, not a better resume

Then I guess I pretty much agree with you.

In the fighting business you have to show you're the best on THAT given night.

And that's also why we have a good bunch of overachievers in MMA. With guys managing to do great things despite having no noticeable superiority over their peers

 

[Steve-French]

MMA has a very delusional fandom for some reason ... Somehow out of all people their favorite fighters are clean and too righteous to use PEDs lmao

This 100% To count out any high level professional athlete for PED use is just being naive.

 

[Steve-French]

MMA has a very delusional fandom for some reason ... Somehow out of all people their favorite fighters are clean and too righteous to use PEDs lmao

This 100% To count out any high level professional athlete for PED use is just being naive.

 

[bigmacbub]

Probably more than you think. People were claiming it's incredibly rare when it happened to Silva but it happened again within a month or two after that.

For me a freak accident is a light falling off the ceiling and knocking out the fighter. Not an injury as a result of a fight.

I hear ya but to me a freak accident is something that will rarely ever happen. An injury that would occur with the probably of less than 1% to me is a freak accident. I've wrestled for ten years BJJ for ten years soccer(yes I'm American) for 15 yeara and from watching UFC and MMA at the age of 6 I've seen my fair share of injuries and have incurred many my self. Some accidents are caused by the opponent but accidents certainly do happen. I'm not taking away credit from Woodly or Weidman. They won fair and square. I have a question though in football say a running back tears his ACL because the safety was in his way so the running back jukes left and tears his ACL. Do you give the credit to the safety for making the running back juke causing him to have that injury?

 

[MusterX]

Notice they didn't say knee cap. Maybe that they thought that would be obvious to the audience but they were wrong. Forget Longo and Weidman for a second. Link me to any credible martial arts source that specifically says to use the knee cap when checking a kick. Just one.

All I can do is let you know what Longo himself said about it, Longo is Weidman's coach. You can read it, or not.

In this interview, Longo discusses his martial arts background, the origin on the moniker, why he believes the technique is perfectly appropriate, how he came to employ the shin-on-knee check and why having it happen to Anderson Silva brought everything under the microscope.

What is the origin of the 'destruction' moniker?

The origin, I'll give you for how it came to be for me. I was a Jeet Kune Do (JKD) practitioner under, technically, the lineage of Dan Inosanto, who was under Bruce Lee. And I think Bruce, or at least Dan, had incorporated a lot of Filipino martial arts.

There's a thing called 'destructions' where - and it's been around forever, I didn't make it up. I'm just giving it to you the way I learned it. I think Paul Vunak at the time was the guy that was really pitching it. This was back in the 80s. From the waist up, anything that comes in your elbow takes care of and anything from the waist down your knee takes care of.

When your knee is in a flex position, it can withstand a lot of pain. So, more the concept is if a guy is punching at you, you can parry the punch or slip the punch. That's a defensive maneuver. With the term 'destructions', it kind of takes a defensive posture and makes it an offensive posture. When a guy is coming to punch, you now look at that as a target, not as a 'get out of the way'.

No matter how big your fist is, you'll never beat my elbow. And the same thing applies to the low line with the knee because I've been through this before, clanging shins with anybody stings. I never had good shins. If you place your knee on the guy's shin the right way, it's going to be a deterrent.

When you break a guy's leg any time, that's not really the objective. It's just really to make them think twice about kicking you. That's really it. It's not really like you can look at it as a mystery. Even at the basic level of Thai boxing, you want to get the highest part of your shin on the lowest part of the guy's shin that's kicking you.


The downside with doing the destruction is you need the attribute of really good accuracy and awareness because instead of blocking with your whole shin, you now have to take your knee tap and point it on the guy's shin. That's not easy to do.
https://www.mmafighting.com/2014/1/12/5301074/technique-talk-ray-longo-deconstructs-the-destruction

 

[ortizgnp]

The knee cap check is known for the possibility of breaking legs and Weidman took some heat after the fight because he said he and his coaches worked on it in camp and everyone thought it was kinda assholish.

Which further proves that MMA fans are special.

 

[The Natural Born Runner]

@Ragnus what's your opinion on controversial decisions?

 

[daniel san]

if you beat a fighter in the UFC you are a better UFC fighter, you may not have a better resume, you may not be the favorite in the next fight but you are the better fighter by UFC standards

So if you beat someone, you're the better fighter but you might not be the favourite in a rematch? If you are the favourite, it means that you likely the better fighter. Everyone knew GSP was better than Serra and rematch showed that. MMA is such a delicate sport that one mistake can result in a loss. Other sports have a far higher leniency towards mistakes and the winner of the match usually means the individual/team is better than the other individual/team. I agree with everything else that you wrote, but coming out with a win does not by default mean you are the better fighter.

 

[Ragnus]

@Ragnus what's your opinion on controversial decisions?

you have to accept the reality of the decision, i encourage people to disagree with it if they believe so, i will be the first to create a thread disagreeing with a decision. so lets say fighter A gets the decision over fighter B but i disagree with the decision and someone asks me my thoughts id reply "well fighter A got the decision but i strongly disagree and this why..."

 

[IamStryker]

All I can do is let you know what Longo himself said about it, Longo is Weidman's coach. You can read it, or not.

In this interview, Longo discusses his martial arts background, the origin on the moniker, why he believes the technique is perfectly appropriate, how he came to employ the shin-on-knee check and why having it happen to Anderson Silva brought everything under the microscope.

What is the origin of the 'destruction' moniker?

The origin, I'll give you for how it came to be for me. I was a Jeet Kune Do (JKD) practitioner under, technically, the lineage of Dan Inosanto, who was under Bruce Lee. And I think Bruce, or at least Dan, had incorporated a lot of Filipino martial arts.

Again he is referring to the bottom of the knee which is the top of the shin bone. Here is an article that explains in detail what I am talking about. http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1904314-ufc-168-how-chris-weidman-buried-the-legend

"Something to consider when talking about checking kicks is that there are, as with any technique, several approaches to it (and probably many more which I haven't even heard of). Some check with the center of shin because it provides the largest surface on either side of the checking point in case of a miscalculation.

Some like to push their shin toward the opponent's kick and meet it earlier in its path. This is something Duke Roufus talked about in his old instructional series.

And some like to check as close to the knee cap as possible because of its destructive effects on a shin bone. This is something I especially love seeing in fighters because I have always had a great affinity for limb destructions which actually work."

Again the only point I am making is no one is recommending using your knee CAP.

 

[Ragnus]

So if you beat someone, you're the better fighter but you might not be the favourite in a rematch? If you are the favourite, it means that you likely the better fighter. Everyone knew GSP was better than Serra and rematch showed that. MMA is such a delicate sport that one mistake can result in a loss. Other sports have a far higher leniency towards mistakes and the winner of the match usually means the individual/team is better than the other individual/team. I agree with everything else that you wrote, but coming out with a win does not by default mean you are the better fighter.

yes if you are the favourite you are likely the better fighter, "LIKELY". no people didnt know GSP was better than serra, they "ASSUMED" he was based on their resumes. Coming out with a win quite literally has to mean your'e the better fight if this wasn't the case we would just pick the favourite as the winner and we wouldn't have the fight. Everyone agrees with me and thats why they watch fights because they want to find out whos better, they're just writing dribble to rationalise their biases.

 

[The Natural Born Runner]

you have to accept the reality of the decision, i encourage people to disagree with it if they believe so, i will be the first to create a thread disagreeing with a decision. so lets say fighter A gets the decision over fighter B but i disagree with the decision and someone asks me my thoughts id reply "well fighter A got the decision but i strongly disagree and this why..."

I don't really believe that we should lie to ourselves though.

It's not like there are stages in fighting, it's not like you can get robbed by referees in the quarter-final and then talk about how you could have won it all if you didn't get screwed, those waters are too muddy. That said, in MMA it's one on one, and if you beat the other dude and everyone else knows that you did, but the judges screw you, we must sit here and "accept reality that he lost". Well Wikipedia says he lost, but he didn't really.

It's like shitting on Shogun for "losing" to Hendo in their first bout, anyone with a brain knows that it was a draw, so why must we mark that as a loss against Shogun? I believe that real fans, hardcore fans, who watch the fights and don't just read fight records can apply context to these fights.

We going to sit here and act like Diego Sanchez beat Ross Pearson?

 

[Ragnus]

I don't really believe that we should lie to ourselves though.

It's not like there are stages in fighting, it's not like you can get robbed by referees in the quarter-final and then talk about how you could have won it all if you didn't get screwed, those waters are too muddy. That said, in MMA it's one on one, and if you beat the other dude and everyone else knows that you did, but the judges screw you, we must sit here and "accept reality that he lost". Well Wikipedia says he lost, but he didn't really.

It's like shitting on Shogun for "losing" to Hendo in their first bout, anyone with a brain knows that it was a draw, so why must we mark that as a loss against Shogun? I believe that real fans, hardcore fans, who watch the fights and don't just read fight records can apply context to these fights.

We going to sit here and act like Diego Sanchez beat Ross Pearson?

yeah what I would say is fighter A won the fight, Fighter B was given a decision. You have to disclose this information just in case the person you are discussing the decision with is unaware that a robbery occurred, you have to acknowledge the judges decision but you don't have to accept it, acknowledging it can be simple as saying I respect their authority in the decision of the fight but i think they are a rat piece of shit incompetent donkey.

 

[MusterX]

Again he is referring to the bottom of the knee which is the top of the shin bone. Here is an article that explains in detail what I am talking about. http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1904314-ufc-168-how-chris-weidman-buried-the-legend

"Something to consider when talking about checking kicks is that there are, as with any technique, several approaches to it (and probably many more which I haven't even heard of). Some check with the center of shin because it provides the largest surface on either side of the checking point in case of a miscalculation.

Some like to push their shin toward the opponent's kick and meet it earlier in its path. This is something Duke Roufus talked about in his old instructional series.

And some like to check as close to the knee cap as possible because of its destructive effects on a shin bone. This is something I especially love seeing in fighters because I have always had a great affinity for limb destructions which actually work."

Again the only point I am making is no one is recommending using your knee CAP.

I don't know what more I can say on the topic. The technique comes from Bruce Lee's Jeet Kune Do and from Filipino martial arts. It falls under the category of a "destruction" and its not a typical mixed martial arts technique. It was taught to Longo by a man named Dan Inosanto who is an expert on Filipino martial arts and who trained under Bruce Lee.

 

[yeguiza]

Why do POEPLE struggle to accept reality?


FIXED, TS!!!

 

[Nimrod]

I agree man the problem is the semantics people are using, i love to debate things that arent in reality, i love theology, metaphysics and philosophy, people need to be saying things like " I think if anderon see's a sports psychologist and learns that showboating is not effective I think he could win the rematch" or "if anderson takes come calcium supplements and does some physio I think he can beat wiedman" or "i think nate would be the best fighter in the world if there werent rounds" instead people say "anderson is better than wiedman" and "nate destroyed conor twice he is a way better fighter than conor"

You're posting an opinion on a forum... ?!? Thats what this is.. millions upon millions of little alternate universes all in one place..

 

[Nimrod]

your missing my point completely, i want to discuss hypothetical things, i think its great to do so. But these people are trying to change reality, they like don't understand semantics or something. Its fine to say I think a younger anderson would have beat weidman but its wrong to say anderson was a better fighter than weidman in those 2 fights and freak misfortune is why he lost.

Nobody is changing anything, i think you miss the point of a forum.

 

[Paolo Delutis]

I've been seeing it far to often and have been replying to numerous comments on this forum on the matter and have decided to create my own discussion about it. I am going to paraphrase but i constantly see comments such as "if anderson didn't show boat he would have beat wiedman", "if anderson had strong legs he would have beat wiedman the 2nd time", "if the first round in tj vs cody was 10seconds longer cody would have won", "if there were no rounds nate would have beat conor", "jones would have been good regardless of steroids" and "if conor didn't land that one punch against aldo he would have won". I can think of like a billion more examples. The reality is anderson did show boat, anderson does have weak legs, there wasnt 10second more in the round in tj vs cody, there are rounds and steroids are against the rules and give massive advantages. Accept reality folks there is objectivity in the UFC, if you beat a fighter in the UFC you are a better UFC fighter, you may not have a better resume, you may not be the favorite in the next fight but you are the better fighter by UFC standards.

TLDR; It doesn't matter how you lose whether its by injury, it doesn't matter if you were close to winning the fight, it doesn't matter if you looked better in the last round, it matters if you win. A fighter needs to be evaluated on actual accomplishments not theoretical possibilities.

PS: a few more examples is tyron woodley's win over condit being debated when he clearly won the fight by leg kick and michael chandlers loss to Brent Primus wasn't a legit loss when it was, he was injured and it was decided that he couldn't continue

I understand your point when people take there "what if " point and fight really really hard to some how make it a reality...That sets me off too. .but What if convos can be fun if the people in them are open minded to people's counters or what if statements. .I find its just butt hurt people trying to stand up for there guy.. I usually go back and forth a bit with these kinds of people till they prove they cant think further then there own mindset and I just leave the thread..people like that are the same type of people who thought the world was flat and argued that point to there graves lol.. even when people have gone past the horizon and back..so you can't beat or change these people..just chirp em and be gone

 

[Myrddin Wild]

This is a very important moment in Sherdog history. Now that TS has pointed out the flaws involved in speculating the "What Ifs"... I seriously doubt anyone will do that any more.

Timez they are a Changin'

Spoiler