rakic s one decent win is the ghost of smith

What's your point TS?
 
Volkan getting a win people disagree with doesn't mean we're not allowed to be impressed by that fight.
 
Anthony Smith is only 32, he's got a lot of fight mileage but he's not a ghost. And he just won by first-round sub
 
[



Volkan outstroke rakic impregnated his leg put the pressure and defended takedowns so the nod was correct regardless of what the bias media saysView attachment 818148
You cant look at total strikes and judge a fight off that.. Why dont we look at the 8 takedowns defended? My post was a far better indicator over who won the fight. Multiple media scores even had the fight 30-27 for Rakic but none had it 30-27 for Volkan.
 
some desagree not all

Fair. But especially in a 3 rounder these sort of 2-1 ambigious decisions are a wash where losing doesn't really do anything bad to your reputation. Same with Volkan and Reyes(that one I agreed with). Volkan was best fighter Rakic had fought and doing so well against him made it clear he's the real deal.
 
It started good, but then he made the weird decision to stop leg kicking and lay on top of Smith.

Very weird, and other than that yeah, Rakic is pretty untested.
Him being top 5 or w/e is laughable.
 
Fair. But especially in a 3 rounder these sort of 2-1 ambigious decisions are a wash where losing doesn't really do anything bad to your reputation. Same with Volkan and Reyes(that one I agreed with). Volkan was best fighter Rakic had fought and doing so well against him made it clear he's the real deal.

Volkan is mediocre at best, so getting past him says very little.
 
Fair. But especially in a 3 rounder these sort of 2-1 ambigious decisions are a wash where losing doesn't really do anything bad to your reputation. Same with Volkan and Reyes(that one I agreed with). Volkan was best fighter Rakic had fought and doing so well against him made it clear he's the real deal.
i agreed dat rakic had grate performance that night but volkan won
 
Back
Top