• Xenforo Cloud has scheduled an upgrade to XenForo version 2.2.16. This will take place on or shortly after the following date and time: Jul 05, 2024 at 05:00 PM (PT) There shouldn't be any downtime, as it's just a maintenance release. More info here

Adesenya was never really good...

Anyone can get KO'ed, even fighters that are better than their opponents.

why has francis ngannou or jon jones never been knocked out? i mean yeah if you just stand there anyone can get KO'd. even sean o'malley can KO stipe if he just stood there
 
And yet just several days ago, OP and most others thought he was going to light Strickland up something fierce.

Half will deny it today.

i will admit i lost some money because i thought strickland would get starched. i guess the fight game is the fight game --- anything can happen
 
or Islam Makhachev.
bait.gif
 
i will admit i lost some money because i thought strickland would get starched. i guess the fight game is the fight game --- anything can happen
Exactly ;)

I lost more than I like to admit on a Tavares-Sterling parlay. By the end of the 2nd round of Weidman v Tavares I figured I had it in the bag.

Most everyone is wondering how and why they missed that Strickland use of a strong defense and sound fundamentals would be too much for Israel.

But hey. After 4 rounds of Silva v Sonnen, most of us were just as confused. It happens.
 
He lost by underestimation. Hes gonna dominate the rematch.

After an utter shutting down and one-sided domination (of the will) there should absolutely not be an immediate rematch. Close fight, controversial decision, lucky shot, etc., sure. But losing a one-sided clinic where by the end of the fight your opponent is hands down in front of you screaming in victory and daring you to throw a punch.....and then being too mentally defeated to even go for broke...... no. We don't need an immediate rematch, and he doesn't deserve one.
 
Is my analysis wrong though? He is a great fighter but he fights like a risk-averse pacifist

If you're summarizing it as the headline to the thread, yes, you're analysis is wrong. Of course he's a good fighter. Better than good.

Now if you want to get into some deeper looks on his lack of certain skills in relation to being a well rounded MMA fighter that's another story. Both can be true.
 
He was never going to be the GOAT or even the best MW of all time (this Strickland loss all but confirms Anderson as #1) but he's still in the top 5% of fighters, which is an incredible feat.
 
These salty nonsense posts of a clearly talented and accomplished fighter and fan favourite to many, are such a pathetic circle jerk of denial and we’re laughing at you.
 
Izzy has never been some unbeatable fighter, he's lost 3 times in the last 2 years and had some very close fights..
he's a really good fighter

"never really good" - compared to who??
No one has ever been an unbeatable fighter.
 
TS makes some valid points about Izzy's deficiencies, but loses all credibility by saying he "was never really good." You're not going to be taken seriously after spewing that kind of nonsense.
 
I wouldn't call him not good, but a lot of his defences were uneventful nor dominant, just barely winning rounds by a small margin
 
Not enough apparently

probably. the guys I train with are other casuals (who are in decent shape). we watch the pros practice during our breaks which is the main point though.
i have actual first-hand live experience watching high-level scrambles, which is a lot better than the average sherbro who only watches fights on the PPV
 
This thread sucks ass, he is arguably the second best MW fighter in MMA history.
 
Back
Top