A Brutally Honest Review UFC 319’s Main Event.

[TheNewGame]

Don't watch fights involving wrestlers, or just stop watching MMA completely for kickboxing, maybe.

Crying on social media about it is crazy.

 

[fzoid4454]

Nah.

The onus was on Khamzat, who had every technical advantage in this fight, to finish the fight. He refused to take any risks when he probably could have finished DDP 10 times over. He was afraid of going for the finish and gassing out.

DDP, at technical disadvantage had two choices for almost the entire fight. 1) Try to get out and back to his feet, and take risks in order to do so. 2) Concede lopsided defeat, but don't get finished, and basically turtle up on the bottom so he doesn't get finished, but has zero chance of changing the status quo.

He chose option 2. When you are winning in dominant fashion, there's no onus on you to take additional risks, it's the other guy who needs to try and change the course of events.

 

[Alpha_T83]

DDP, at technical disadvantage had two choices for almost the entire fight. 1) Try to get out and back to his feet, and take risks in order to do so. 2) Concede lopsided defeat, but don't get finished, and basically turtle up on the bottom so he doesn't get finished, but has zero chance of changing the status quo.

He chose option 2. When you are winning in dominant fashion, there's no onus on you to take additional risks, it's the other guy who needs to try and change the course of events.

You are simply wrong. The onus is always on the guy with the advantage to make something happen and take risks.

Saying that the guy already at the disadvantage must take a risk to escape is just stupid, childish, asinine logic.

 

[fzoid4454]

You are simply wrong. The onus is always on the guy with the advantage to make something happen and take risks.

Saying that the guy already at the disadvantage must take a risk to escape is just stupid, childish, asinine logic.

That's so fucking stupid.

So, why would the guy guaranteed to ride out a win, as things are, need to change ANYTHING? Other than you'd like the fight better. The fucking MW belt is on the line, and he's guaranteed to walk away with it, as the new champ, and you're saying that requires him to take risks to change the dynamic? That's just moronic, and completely devoid of any logic.

Saying that a person who is guaranteed to lose, if nothing changes, has no impetus to take risks and change the situation is completely backwards. If he takes no risks, and plays out the string to not get finished, he loses the fight. Of course it's non him to risk submission or finish to get out of the guaranteed loss.

 

[r-harper-1]

 

[r-harper-1]

You are simply wrong. The onus is always on the guy with the advantage to make something happen and take risks.

Saying that the guy already at the disadvantage must take a risk to escape is just stupid, childish, asinine logic.

You can’t be that dumb ….., why would the guy dominating be expected to change tactics……I think you’re trolling

 

[Alpha_T83]

You can’t be that dumb ….., why would the guy dominating be expected to change tactics……I think you’re trolling

You can't be that dumb to blame a boring fight on a guy that's being dominated.

 

[Alpha_T83]

That's so fucking stupid.

So, why would the guy guaranteed to ride out a win, as things are, need to change ANYTHING? Other than you'd like the fight better. The fucking MW belt is on the line, and he's guaranteed to walk away with it, as the new champ, and you're saying that requires him to take risks to change the dynamic? That's just moronic, and completely devoid of any logic.

Saying that a person who is guaranteed to lose, if nothing changes, has no impetus to take risks and change the situation is completely backwards. If he takes no risks, and plays out the string to not get finished, he loses the fight. Of course it's non him to risk submission or finish to get out of the guaranteed loss.

Because you have to choose between being boring, or winning guaranteed and having it be your fault that the fight was boring.

Your problem is that you're facing cognitive dissonance. You don't want it to be Khamzat's fault that the fight was boring, but it was. Accept it.

 

[chinarice]

You are simply wrong. The onus is always on the guy with the advantage to make something happen and take risks.

Saying that the guy already at the disadvantage must take a risk to escape is just stupid, childish, asinine logic.

This logic is absolutely ridiculous. The onus is 100% on DDP or in some cases Goddard to change the course of the fight.

 

[r-harper-1]

Because you have to choose between being boring, or winning guaranteed and having it be your fault that the fight was boring.

Your problem is that you're facing cognitive dissonance. You don't want it to be Khamzat's fault that the fight was boring, but it was. Accept it.

If DDP was able to keep the fight standing ….. would it be more entertaining? Clearly yes


If DDP were able to get back up after being taken down , would that make it more entertaining? Clearly yes

The guy dominating has no obligation to change what’s working

I’ve seen you on here , you know your stuff

Obvious troll imo

 

[fzoid4454]

Because you have to choose between being boring, or winning guaranteed and having it be your fault that the fight was boring.

Your problem is that you're facing cognitive dissonance. You don't want it to be Khamzat's fault that the fight was boring, but it was. Accept it.

Not sure why you imagine that, if both are playing it safe, risk-wise, why the loser is less at fault than the winner.

It's more DDP's fault. Khamzhat was happy to finish it, but didn't take any extra risks to do so, because he was winning easily.

DDP was losing, and chose to play it safe, knowing he was going to lose.

Again, if you have a fighter willing to accept easy, boring victory, and a fighter willing to accept safe, boring defeat, professionally, and as competitors, if you think the first has more of an onus to take risks, you're just another stupid Sherdog idiot.

 

[Brca031]

Dude got stood up from side control..that tells you everything. Leg humping at the first title main event since signing a 8bn deal is damaging to the company.

 

[pick999]

If you should be upset at anyone, it's DDP, not Khamzat.

He's tough as nails and has consistently found a way to win - but there was nothing he could do against Khamzat. And neither could probably any other MW in UFC history.

I would be curious to see how a prime Yoel Romero might have done

Yoel has nothing for him he got a robbery win vs jacarce

 

[Bowel-forged Stool]

We’ve got to get a gofundme setup so we can elicit the expertise of longtime vet Harold Howard to develop a system that neutralizes dagastani grappling

 

[mkess101]

I was at this event . It was a great card till the main event . The main event you had to watch the TVs to watch fight and I had good seats. Just wasnt a fun fight n extremely boring. For a 50 42 fight and no damage is sad.



However it was a grest event to be at so many great fights and finishes - but the fight that was promised grest ended up a terrible main an just boring . Kept thinking it would get good any second but never did.

Going to re watch the fight now with my coffee to see better on TV - only saw live in Arena . Maybe its more impressive on tv but live in person it sucked .

I had $ on Khamzat so I was happy about how the main event went but aside from that--

I was there too and got the hookup with crazy good seats in 113. Then my hookup got me and my buddy backstage. Met Tracy Cortez back there and got a pic with her (her outfit was fire).Said what's up to MVP (was right after his fight). Watched Prates and Neal walk past us and then followed them out the fighter tunnel back into the arena. Very cool night for me.

 

[SoberAwakening]

I was extremely impressed. 50-44ing a champion is not easy to do. His grappling and wrestling is on a different level than most. I enjoyed it quite a bit.

 

[Captain Herb]

The rules already favor the striker by standing them up every 5 minutes.

The rules clearly reward the wrestler/ground specialist over the striker and it's not close. Wrestlers get points for takedowns but strikers don't get points for standing back up. Wrestlers get points for keeping the fight on the ground but strikers don't get points for keeping the fight standing. Wrestlers can win fights just by literally laying on them without doing any damage. Strikers have to actually punch and kick their opponent to earn points

 

[Streeter]

I had $ on Khamzat so I was happy about how the main event went but aside from that--

I was there too and got the hookup with crazy good seats in 113. Then my hookup got me and my buddy backstage. Met Tracy Cortez back there and got a pic with her (her outfit was fire).Said what's up to MVP (was right after his fight). Watched Prates and Neal walk past us and then followed them out the fighter tunnel back into the arena. Very cool night for me.

Lol.i was likely not 25 feet away from you then lol. Yeah they were great seats . But noine had good seats for main you had to watch the screens. Whole point of getting good seats is to watch it not the screens . But cant bitch was a great night with lots of action an great kos . Cool tou got to meet some of the fighters and yeah Cortez is cute.

 

[TrueBias]

Don't watch fights involving wrestlers, or just stop watching MMA completely for kickboxing, maybe.

Crying on social media about it is crazy.

Dummy, we tuned in to see a mma fight, not a grappling fest.

The new lay n pray blanket tactic seems to be to get to a dominant position and STAY. You won't be stood up typically because you're in full mount, back, crucifix (which is the saddest) and just keep the position! Voila! You win.

yay

 

[Rampage_Jackson]

DDP, at technical disadvantage had two choices for almost the entire fight. 1) Try to get out and back to his feet, and take risks in order to do so. 2) Concede lopsided defeat, but don't get finished, and basically turtle up on the bottom so he doesn't get finished, but has zero chance of changing the status quo.

He chose option 2. When you are winning in dominant fashion, there's no onus on you to take additional risks, it's the other guy who needs to try and change the course of events.

"the onus was on Khamzat" is fucking insane lmfao. People just forgiving DDP for accepting defeat while being mad at Khamzat for ragdolling him. Absolute fucking retards man