Anderson didn't have a k1 background. However prime Andy would KO Jan. How is this possible.

Anderson does not deserve to share the cage with a natural champion like Jan.

There is a very solid argument, since DC was not a real LHW champion, that Jan is the only natural LHW champion in the history of the UFC.

So the first real champion.

Jan making history every fight, the guy can do no wrong.
 
Azazyah said:
I also think that him being 3rd-degree black belt in BJJ helped him, since he didn't have to worry about going to the ground which allowed him to open up more in his striking.
Click to expand...

This right fookin’ here.
 
Minnja said:
Anderson would NOT have fought like Izzy. He would have been more content with countering. Izzy is better at being offensive compared to Anderson so he's more willing to do it which also gave Jan opportunites to land because Izzy was putting himself in Jan's jab and punch range. Anderson likely would have just kept circling away and maybe force Jan to overly commit.

Anderson on the bottom also is better at stalling BUT I think Izzy might have a bit better takedown defense and is less willing to give up takedowns.

Idk if Anderson would win against Jan but I don't think he would have fought like how Izzy fought.



How can you be so sure of that? Jan bit on most of Izzy's feints as mentioned 100000x by the commentary team (btw the commentary was pretty biased against Jan BUT they were right in saying Jan was reacting to most of the feints). Izzy was getting jabbed because he was willing to come forward against Jan and be offensive. Anderson I don't think would even try to do that too much. As we know, Anderson is pretty content with just circling away all fight if he really wants to/feels like he needs to. I think it's possible Anderson could win in a lacklustre fashion or even frustrate Jan enough to walk into a counter. I'm not confifdent in saying that Anderson would win but I do not think it would look much like the Izzy fight at all and that could be good or bad for Anderson.
Click to expand...
If he was biting, he wouldnt have landed as much as he did. Just because you use a feint doesnt mean the guy is biting on it. If he was biting on them he would have thrown and missed shots. The purpose of a feint is to draw out offence. Izzy didnt draw it out on his terms.

Regards to Anderson, he was more of a counterstriker forsure. Thats why with the way Jan was step feinting he would have bit and gotten out of position more often than not, imo. Also his defense was very reactive and reflex based so Jans combos ending with kicks would have beem very effective. Along with his ability to stay grounded as we saw in the Izzy fight. Izzy was more willing to go forward which is what gave him more success than I think Andy would have. Just my opinion.
 
PurpleDrank said:
If he was biting, he wouldnt have landed as much as he did. Just because you use a feint doesnt mean the guy is biting on it. If he was biting on them he would have thrown and missed shots. The purpose of a feint is to draw out offence. Izzy didnt draw it out on his terms.

Regards to Anderson, he was more of a counterstriker forsure. Thats why with the way Jan was step feinting he would have bit and gotten out of position more often than not, imo. Also his defense was very reactive and reflex based so Jans combos ending with kicks would have beem very effective. Along with his ability to stay grounded as we saw in the Izzy fight. Izzy was more willing to go forward which is what gave him more success than I think Andy would have. Just my opinion.
Click to expand...

I consider biting on feints to be reacting to it and in Jan's case he often was bringing guard way up or slipping/moving away in reaction to the feints. I could be wrong in using the term and if so the more appropriate term would be reacting I suppose. Also, feinting can be used to get them to react defensively in a certain way in order to land something else. I never heard of feinting only being used to draw out offense, maybe that's the strict definition for the term but from my understanding and use of the term a feint is just a fake and does not take into account specifically an offensive or defensive reaction.
 
Easy, Silva didn’t want to do k1. Went to mma.
 
Jan could probably take Silva down. He’s not as good a wrestler as Sonnen but he is a better striker and a larger man.

Jan has better submission defense than Chael. On the flip side Anderson has better bjj than Izzy does. Who knows how it would play out
 
Thats because prime anderson is one of the goats while izzy watches too much naruto
 
Anderson fought kickboxing/muay thai.

Lost twice to Pele. No footage exists of it that I know of but Pele was a badass.

 
Minnja said:
I consider biting on feints to be reacting to it and in Jan's case he often was bringing guard way up or slipping/moving away in reaction to the feints. I could be wrong in using the term and if so the more appropriate term would be reacting I suppose. Also, feinting can be used to get them to react defensively in a certain way in order to land something else. I never heard of feinting only being used to draw out offense, maybe that's the strict definition for the term but from my understanding and use of the term a feint is just a fake and does not take into account specifically an offensive or defensive reaction.
Click to expand...
Theres many uses of a feint, you are not wrong in that. It comes down to purpose though. While it can be good to use alot of feints to get them to react, you have to also land shots from them. Izzy uses alot of feints but as we've seen from the Romero fight and this one, he doesnt make you pay for them. If you simply dont react you can negate alot of his effectiveness. So yes you can feint and get them to say slip to a certain side or get a certain reaction if you dont make them pay they will just ignore it.

I disagree on the context your using the term 'biting'. If Jan was truly biting he wouldve thrown a shot at the improper time, or have been feinted out of position, which you claim he was at times. Thats fair, i cant deny he didnt react to any. However he would time his entry right after Izzy was expecting him to bite using his jab, 2-3. Also he was doing a very good job, even if he was reacting, never to get out of position to return fire, slip, parry or step out of range. So the reactions werent on Izzys terms.
 
Fedor Emelianenko said:
Anderson really is a phenom, there is nothing I saw yesterday that would make me beleive that Jan could beat Anderson.

Jan is almost tailor-made for Anderson, slow plodding biting at every feint. Anderson would work Jan. Jan could not Sonnen silva, Sonnen is an absolute beast of a wrestler.

Andy also has a much better ground game than Izzy.


How could Anderson pretty much be the most effective MW striker without ever fighting K1?
Click to expand...

Because most K1 fighters aren't very good at punching they are good at kicking. If they could throw hands they would be in boxing making real money.
 
MMAALLDAYBAYBAY said:
Cherry picked? Forrest Griffin was a pretty dang good fighter at that point in time. I honestly think that Forrest vs current Jan would be a good competitive fight. Anderson just found a way to enter the Matrix on that specific night and make Forrest look like he'd never fought a day in his life. Hate him or not, he was usually incredibly entertaining and had some spectacular fights and finishes.
I honestly thought Izzy would enter the Matrix vs Jan and win at least a decision, but he looked incredibly hesitant and nothing like he did during the Costa fight or Whittaker fight.
Click to expand...

Forrest was a big can with a decent ground game.. and he was on pain medication for that fight so look into it.
 
PurpleDrank said:
Theres many uses of a feint, you are not wrong in that. It comes down to purpose though. While it can be good to use alot of feints to get them to react, you have to also land shots from them. Izzy uses alot of feints but as we've seen from the Romero fight and this one, he doesnt make you pay for them. If you simply dont react you can negate alot of his effectiveness. So yes you can feint and get them to say slip to a certain side or get a certain reaction if you dont make them pay they will just ignore it.

I disagree on the context your using the term 'biting'. If Jan was truly biting he wouldve thrown a shot at the improper time, or have been feinted out of position, which you claim he was at times. Thats fair, i cant deny he didnt react to any. However he would time his entry right after Izzy was expecting him to bite using his jab, 2-3. Also he was doing a very good job, even if he was reacting, never to get out of position to return fire, slip, parry or step out of range. So the reactions werent on Izzys terms.
Click to expand...

Fair enough, even though Jan was reacting to the feints I don't believe it was really bad on his part. As you said Izzy didn't do anything with those reactions so I don't believe Jan was really making a mistake at all since he clearly was still defending a lot of actual strikes and landing his own and countering. Commentary team definitely tried to make it out as if Jan was making mistakes by reacting despite Izzy not gaining much at all from it.
 
A lot of the bums Anderson fought did not have basic striking fundamentals. They ran chin first into his fist.

Jan has great fundamentals and solid TD's/Grappling. He also has great power and it looks like he learned from that Santos loss, as seen against Izzy.
 
mkt said:
Nope, not an early 30s Anderson. It would've been a good fight until Anderson went into matrix mode, though. Izzy is overrated (a poor man's Anderson at best) and I've been saying it long before the Jan fight.
Click to expand...
Yeah. I wasn’t surprised Jan won at all and would’ve bet cash on him if I bet the event.

Jan also beats Anderson.
 
Final Say said:
Yeah. I wasn’t surprised Jan won at all and would’ve bet cash on him if I bet the event.

Jan also beats Anderson.
Click to expand...
Staph infection said:
Revisionist history, please Shogun was in horrible shape in that fight and took a rematch from him and Rampage has always been susceptible to low kicks and is overrated. Everyone praised him but in the end he got lazy and went on a major skid. Anderson’s fight last at 205 were perfect fights for him.
Click to expand...

Talk about revisionist history. That was the best version ever of Rampage and Forrest simply beat him. Everyone talked constantly about how powerful Rampage was and how great his hands were...yet in 25 minutes he couldn't do to Forrest what Anderson did in seconds. Prime Anderson would undoubtedly matrix Jan, especially a 38-year old version of him. He may not do it as quickly as he did to Forrest, but anyone with a modicum of objectivity knows he'd finish him.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

K
What are the chances that Pavlovich is going to use his wrestling background in this fight?
Replies
18
Views
815
HI SCOTT NEWMAN
HI SCOTT NEWMAN

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,237,016
Messages
55,461,209
Members
174,787
Latest member
Santos FC 1912

Share this page

Back
Top