Angela Hill vs Randa Markos at UFC Nashville, March 23, 2019

Who wins?


  • Total voters
    114
Definitely taking the over on 2.5 rounds
 
pexels-photo-128639.jpeg

44492734-rope-knot-isolated-on-a-white-background-as-a-strong-nautical-marine-line-tied-together-as-a-symbol-.jpg

(both)
 
Easy win for Randa imo
 
I watched Hill fight twice then swore a dying oath to never watch her again.
 
Negative 13 fights 9 decisions
She Ko’d a 4-3 chump great example. She also likes to punch air. Have fun watching awful wmma lol
3 KO/TKO out of 8 wins
Hill won the Invicta FC strawweight championship

Egginck, who got KO'd there, was no chump. In her fight before Hill it was an Invicta FC championship title fight that she lost, and she was clearly winning going into the 5th round of that title fight when she got caught in a submission.
 
Last edited:
Over nobodies thanks for proving my point.
As I showed above, Stephanie Egginck was not a nobody. And Hill didn't win the Invicta FC strawweight championship beating nobodies. Your statement is obviously ridiculous.
Just because you are too ignorant to know who fighters are doesn't make them nobodies.
 
As I showed above, Egginck was not a nobody. And Hill didn't win the Invicta FC strawweight championship beating nobodies. Your statement is obviously ridiculous.
Just because you are too ignorant to know who fighters are doesn't make them nobodies.
Eggink 4-3 again thanks for proving my point. It’s not my fault you’re too ignorant to notice high level mma.
 
Eggink 4-3 again thanks for proving my point. It’s not my fault you’re too ignorant to notice high level mma.
Still insisting that a 4-3 record, including the loss to Hill, is evidence of a chump or a nobody is just evidence of your low level of analysis. Egginck went into the fight with Hill with only two losses, 4-2, and one of those losses was a title fight that she almost won.

Case in point to illustrate how lame your argument is:
Current strawweight champion Rose Namajunas once had a record of 2-2. Did that make her a chump or a nobody? A sensible analyst would take into account that one of those two losses was for the UFC strawweight championship! But the way you analyze things, all that matters is 2-2. That isn't smart. That is thinking like the most ignorant of casuals.
 
Not to be a prick but is anyone actually excited for this?
 
Still insisting that a 4-3 record, including the loss to Hill, is evidence of a chump or a nobody is just evidence of your low level of analysis. Egginck went into the fight with Hill with only two losses, 4-2, and one of those losses was a title fight that she almost won.

Case in point to illustrate how lame your argument is:
Current strawweight champion Rose Namajunas once had a record of 2-2. Did that make her a chump or a nobody? A sensible analyst would take into account that one of those two losses was for the UFC strawweight championship! But the way you analyze things, all that matters is 2-2. That isn't smart. That is thinking like the most ignorant of casuals.
Lmfao your av explains everything. Stay a white knight sjw. Angela is extremely awful to watch end of story bye
 
Lmfao your av explains everything. Stay a white knight sjw. Angela is extremely awful to watch end of story bye
The fact that you can't actually answer my analysis in terms of MMA reasoning, and resort to name-calling like "white knight" and "sjw" to try distract from your inability to do so, "explains everything" as you put it.
You lost.
 
Over nobodies thanks for proving my point. 13 fights 9 decision sugarcoat and fluff it up all you like. Like I said have fun watching her punch air
too funny
 
Back
Top