1- You´ve gottah present it better:
1 paragraph = 1 idea, otherwise it´s not readable.
2- You claim Gono´s got a prob. with No Rush, but...objectively... look at your technical assessment of the Hughes fight... You literally overrated all the technical sequences in No Rush´s favour...
3- Your 1st narrative was that he was on a "tear" at that time... Now you´re sayin´that "He was very young and green"... That´s a pretty decent qualitative evolution in your narrative, wont you agree?
4- "I already stated I don't know what GSP's gameplan was before the BJ fight and I don't remember what GSP's corner instructed him to do. It also has very little to do with the discussion at hand."
> See the irony... You´re his [obvious] fan, you claim Gono´s a hater, but...You cant even elaborate on such an essential topic..Worse: you´re clueless about it but still consider it a moot point...
5- THE Pedro: again, you can reassess any opponent in any fighter´s résumé & downgrade it at will.
I could play this game with No Rush´s run in UCC, for instance, but Gono doesnt play this game.
4th QUESTION: since you claim that THE Pedro was a 'jobber', can you please give me an assessment of his skill set (2 lines)?
The tear I was talking about was what he went on after Hughes beat him. Sherk, Trigg, Mayhem, Penn, Hughes. That is the definition of a tear. Turst me, that's what I was talking about. Don't go cherry picking on me, take the whole of what I said in proper context.
As far as his gameplan and what happened in the corner during the Penn fight it has nothing much to do with our original discussion of whether GSP/Serra was a bigger upset than Fujita/Kerr. You claim it's an essential topic and I deny it. It also doesn't change the fact that GSP clearly beat BJ there. He was the man at 170 at the time Serra worked him over, in large part because of that victory over BJ. He was the proven real deal and Kerr was an unknown commodity who fell down the first time he faced a recognized top fighter. If you want you can go ahead and explain yourself better as to why this is important and we can move on from there. To quote you, "...there´s no progression in our back & forth."
As for Ze Pedro, I have seen a whopping 6 fights of his total. Assuerio, Amar, Kerr, Goodridge, and the other IVC 1 fights. I vaguely recall seeing him against some jobber named Uruta or something... think he was from Chute Boxe. What Pedro was was a herky-jerky standup fighter that kept his chin directly in the air a la Arona, had bad hands but good kicks, and always looked to take the fight to the ground. Damn good cardio too. On the ground, he was a pretty active GnP'er with a basic understanding of submissions. He was also a complete jobber that got worked over when he fought decent (not great) fighters. Here's him getting killed by a MW:
I understand what you're doing here; I do it myself all the time. I have no problem with you doing a little filtering, but trust me when I say I do know my MMA history from 1993 onward. The old school garbage Brazilian vale tudo before that I can't comment on, but I do know the sport we're discussing right now. Kerr never beat anybody that really mattered and you describing Ze Pedro and Duarte as some of his biggest wins in the OP says more than I ever could about his "illustrious" career.
And there's nothing wrong with paragraphs over a couple sentences in length. Makes it easier to quote and respond to, unlike yours which take up an inordinate amount of space and are just awkward to sift through. You're spelling is odd, grammar's a little off and the impression that I get from your overall posting style is that English is not your first language. Nothing wrong with that per se, mind you, I just think my way is better. And stop changing font colours, bro! That really is just AIDS for the eyes!
Was hardcore, stopped watchin´when my favz slowly retired (last one> B-Hop)
Anyway, do acknowledge that this 'in hindsight' game you´re playin´with Kerr´s legacy is not somethin´new: people have been doin´the same about Tyson´s....
I'm not playing a hindsight game with Kerr. I'm saying point blank that Kerr was not that good back then and despite what Sherdog and Black Belt freakin' magazine said in 2000, knowledgeable fans saw Kerr as an unproven paper tiger, especially after the Vov fight, which made this loss to Fujita, while a huge upset, nowhere near Buster/Tyson. GSP was the proven real deal who had already beaten most of the elites in his div and Serra was a journeyman, relatively new to the WW division, and gifted a title shot after winning a reality show with a bunch of other journeymen on it in unimpressive fashion. That is one of the main points I have been repeatedly making and you're not responding to it while saying I need to bring something else. This is me considering the historical perspective with a minimum of hindsight as you keep asking for (I don't agree with it, but whatever) now tell me directly why I'm wrong for thinking this way.
In hindsight, Kerr was really not that good a fighter at all and has a tendency to be grossly overrated by those on here who want to seem knowledgeable about the old days yet clearly haven't actually watched him fight. GSP is the WW GOAT and one of the best, if not the best, P4P fighters ever. That's how I see it.
Now explain what you mean about the "in hindsight" game being played with Tyson's legacy. Be specific and try to condense your responses into an easily quotable format... like this!
The tear I was talking about was what he went on after Hughes beat him. Sherk, Trigg, Mayhem, Penn, Hughes. That is the definition of a tear. Turst me, that's what I was talking about. Don't go cherry picking on me, take the whole of what I said in proper context.
As far as his gameplan and what happened in the corner during the Penn fight it has nothing much to do with our original discussion of whether GSP/Serra was a bigger upset than Fujita/Kerr. You claim it's an essential topic and I deny it. It also doesn't change the fact that GSP clearly beat BJ there. He was the man at 170 at the time Serra worked him over, in large part because of that victory over BJ. He was the proven real deal and Kerr was an unknown commodity who fell down the first time he faced a recognized top fighter. If you want you can go ahead and explain yourself better as to why this is important and we can move on from there. To quote you, "...there´s no progression in our back & forth."
As for Ze Pedro, I have seen a whopping 6 fights of his total. Assuerio, Amar, Kerr, Goodridge, and the other IVC 1 fights. I vaguely recall seeing him against some jobber named Uruta or something... think he was from Chute Boxe. What Pedro was was a herky-jerky standup fighter that kept his chin directly in the air a la Arona, had bad hands but good kicks, and always looked to take the fight to the ground. Damn good cardio too. On the ground, he was a pretty active GnP'er with a basic understanding of submissions. He was also a complete jobber that got worked over when he fought decent (not great) fighters. Here's him getting killed by a MW:
I understand what you're doing here; I do it myself all the time. I have no problem with you doing a little filtering, but trust me when I say I do know my MMA history from 1993 onward. The old school garbage Brazilian vale tudo before that I can't comment on, but I do know the sport we're discussing right now. Kerr never beat anybody that really mattered and you describing Ze Pedro and Duarte as some of his biggest wins in the OP says more than I ever could about his "illustrious" career.
And there's nothing wrong with paragraphs over a couple sentences in length. Makes it easier to quote and respond to, unlike yours which take up an inordinate amount of space and are just awkward to sift through. You're spelling is odd, grammar's a little off and the impression that I get from your overall posting style is that English is not your first language. Nothing wrong with that per se, mind you, I just think my way is better. And stop changing font colours, bro! That really is just AIDS for the eyes!
.
> Your assessment on his skill set:
"think he was from Chute Boxe."
Well, you got it all wrong, my good friend, and this alone disqualifies your knowledge on his career.
He was from the Luta Livre school, Budokan style.
QUESTION: Can you define this school?
> You quoted his fight against a certain MW... well, that MW was Suloev, & this fight was at the very end of his career. Not a really sound choice, right?
If someone like Suloev kills you, there´s absolutely no shame in it, especially when you´re on your way out.
> "I have seen a whopping 6 fights of his total"
.... I mean... Puh-lease... He had 27 fights... Your assessment is basically based on his final run, & a "whoopin´" 6 fights.... Imagine assessin´ No Rush´s career solely on his UCC run...
> You claimed he should have gotten the win over Big Daddy, which is true, but then said that Gary was "raw", conveniently forgettin´that he would get his signature win over Oleg 2 months later.
OVERALL:
No dishespect, mate... but you´re not qualified to assess his career. Simple as that.
You dont know much or have zero knowledge about:
> his skill set
> his lineage
> his career (6 fights out of 27...)
A fighter´s legacy/career is like a book: you have to acknowledge all its parts, cant pull one.
The W/L criterion is a mediocre one when it comes to assessin´a fighter. The fighter´s performance is what truly matters.
Conversely, GSP was on an absolute tear and looking unbeatable when Serra happened. No WW fighter had done what he did to the division after his loss to Matt Hughes years before. He made guys like Sherk, Mayhem, Trigg, and Hughes look like they didn't even belong in the ring with him. The toughest fight he had there against BJ is listed as controversial but it really shouldn't be at all. He clearly won 2 rounds against a fading BJ and took that one handily.
"If you watch those fights with the last two mentioned it was GSP's quickness and technique as much as his size and strength that carried the day there."
.
Assessment : "GSP was on an absolute tear and looking unbeatable when Serra happened."
That´s a pretty weird understandin´of his run b4 that fight, tbh...
2 fights b4 the Serra one, he had a controversial split dec. win over an undersized opponent [natural LW].
He arguably won, not necessarily because he was the better fighter (qualitatively weak assessment), but because the UFC´s Scorin´System tend to favour some 'neutral' technical sequences...
You said: "He clearly won 2 rounds against a fading BJ and took that one handily"
But, in terms of skill set bein´ 'exposed', this is what truly happened:
This is a problematic performance from a bigger opponent, @ OW. And this is not supposed to happen in Modern MMA [>2000].
Moreover, bein´bigger & with a longer reach, he was supposed to outstrike him, & this is definitely not what happened.
But... let´s double-check your claim & see if he was in any 'danger' in that fight:
QUESTION 1: What was his camp´s gameplan leadin´to that fight?
QUESTION 2: What happened in his corner at the end of the 1st Round?
The answer to these 2 questions will give us a pretty good idea of that 'aura' you claim he had after that fight.
And you seem to forget the relatively bad showin´in the 1st Hughes fight...
Consequently, you´re indeed the one who brought up the 1st BJ fight in the debate, claimin´he "handily' beat him, while I claimed that even though he won (mainly thanks to UFC´s Scorin´System, arguably not because he was the superior fighter that night), his skill set was exposed.
Now you´re claimin´ that: "what happened in the corner during the Penn fight it has nothing much to do with our original discussion"
after I asked you the 2 followin´questions:
QUESTION 1: What was his camp´s gameplan leadin´to that fight?
QUESTION 2: What happened in his corner at the end of the 1st Round?
The irony here is that, while bein´a clear No Rush fan (& Gono [apparently] a shameless hater...), you hardly know about his evolution.
This is what happened:
No Rush vs BJ 1 - Gameplan:
a- b4 the fight, his camp assessed that, because of the size difference [LW vs WW] & other tangibles (like much longer reach), it would be appropriate to keep it on the feet & outstrike him.
Everybody agreed on this gameplan, except... his BJJ coach.
p.75:
MASTER: "When Georges was named as [Penn’s] opponent, most people assumed that if the
fight went to the ground, Georges was essentially done for. Georges at that time was fairly
average on the ground, and Penn had some excellent Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu in some areas (but
quite limited skills in others)."
p.77:
MASTER:
“No, that’s crazy—we’re going to win on the feet,” the others said in response to my
strategy.
But Penn is an extraordinarily gifted boxer, and his style of counterpunching was
very badly matched versus Georges who, at that stage of his career, had a rather naive,
straight-punching left-right combo.
I really wasn’t confident that Georges could win in a boxing exchange against Penn.
b- problem is... durin´the 1st Rd:
> BJ started to check his kicks & negate this weapon
> despite the reach advantage, BJ clearly outboxed him
c- End of the 1st Rd, No Rush goes back to his corner:
p.77:
MASTER: "Of course, I was the new guy and didn’t want to appear disrespectful, so I responded: “How about we use your strategy for the first round, and if it works, we’ll keep going with it? If it doesn’t work, we’ll switch to my strategy.” They agreed.
Now, as history recalls, Georges took a terrible shellacking in that first round.
He got poked [Gono > this is a fallacy] very severely in the eye early in the fight, and his straight style of punching was easily countered with Penn’s jabs and counterpunching."
This simply disqualifies your narrative about a supposedly "invincible, literally on tear" No Rush b4 the Serra fight.
B- vs Hughes 1:
Your original assessment:
"GSP was young and raw in that fight, but it was a good performance from him right up until Hughes countered his garbage kimura attempt with the straight armbar right as time was expiring. He'd taken Hughes down and he'd landed a beautiful spinning back kick to the solar plexus that had Hughes panic wrestling immediately. It was a good showing in defeat."
The only other legit scorin´in that Round was:
- the spinnin´shit @ 2mn, technical sequence that you´re a lil bit overratin´ since Hughes was not goin´forward, he was actually anticipatin´it & goin´backwards.
"Hadn't watched GSP/Hughes in a couple years so I just hit up Fightpass and I can agree that Hughes won that round before the armbar but it was most certainly not a poor performance from GSP either. He was very young and green on the biggest stage of his life"
Overall: pretty safe to say that your original [biased] technical assessment suffered a rather drastic qualitative evolution, right?
But... still, you keep tryin´to hype him.
Technically, durin´those 5 mns, No Rush had:
1- ONE TD
2- 10 sec. of Ground Control
3- ONE left jab
4- ONE spinnin´shit (that you conveniently overrated...)
And there's nothing wrong with paragraphs over a couple sentences in length. Makes it easier to quote and respond to, unlike yours which take up an inordinate amount of space and are just awkward to sift through. You're spelling is odd, grammar's a little off and the impression that I get from your overall posting style is that English is not your first language. Nothing wrong with that per se, mind you, I just think my way is better. And stop changing font colours, bro! That really is just AIDS for the eyes!
Anyway, Im doin´my best to make those TLDRs 'readable'.
No offense, but yours are a pain in the azz to read, and the fact that more often than not you keep repeatin´the same arguments only makes it worse.
Use titles, fonts, real paragraphs, express yourself clearly, avoid unnecessary repetitions.
Meanwhile, the use of different font colours was necessary since you were literally duckin´the questions.
lol. Except him, with his obscure 90's MMA knowledge. He hates GSP so much, he even had to write out this long history of why GSPs one big loss doesn't really mean anything.
lol. Except him, with his obscure 90's MMA knowledge. He hates GSP so much, he even had to write out this long history of why GSPs one big loss doesn't really mean anything.
I'm not playing a hindsight game with Kerr. I'm saying point blank that Kerr was not that good back then and despite what Sherdog and Black Belt freakin' magazine said in 2000, knowledgeable fans saw Kerr as an unproven paper tiger, especially after the Vov fight, which made this loss to Fujita, while a huge upset, nowhere near Buster/Tyson. GSP was the proven real deal who had already beaten most of the elites in his div and Serra was a journeyman, relatively new to the WW division, and gifted a title shot after winning a reality show with a bunch of other journeymen on it in unimpressive fashion. That is one of the main points I have been repeatedly making and you're not responding to it while saying I need to bring something else. This is me considering the historical perspective with a minimum of hindsight as you keep asking for (I don't agree with it, but whatever) now tell me directly why I'm wrong for thinking this way.
In hindsight, Kerr was really not that good a fighter at all and has a tendency to be grossly overrated by those on here who want to seem knowledgeable about the old days yet clearly haven't actually watched him fight. GSP is the WW GOAT and one of the best, if not the best, P4P fighters ever. That's how I see it.
Now explain what you mean about the "in hindsight" game being played with Tyson's legacy. Be specific and try to condense your responses into an easily quotable format... like this!
They're better examples, with GSP vs Serra being the least comparable of the five as Serra wasn't very good.
Despite the odds Douglas was no scrub. He beat Berbick and McCall to get the shot and he was a better opponent than any Tyson had fought since Tucker a couple of years before and like Tucker and Bonecrusher, Douglas had a style and the size which Tyson seemed to find more difficult.
He has limited who can view his profile, but i'll remember what you've said and try to pay attention, thanks man!
And certainly a fan of the "deconstructing MMA-myths"-series, although i donÄt even know if they're all by him alone, but from what i remember reading from him, he definitely seems like a really knowledgeable person when it comes to MMA.
I want you to directly address the points I've made right there in that last post. Directly address them and we can move on. You haven't done that yet.
I want you to directly address the points I've made right there in that last post. Directly address them and we can move on. You haven't done that yet.
It is really an honor in having @gono btw as a user of this forum. Best threads, best responses, almost always polite* - *but when he needs to put some "connoisseurs" in their places, he has no mercy.
He has limited who can view his profile, but i'll remember what you've said and try to pay attention, thanks man!
And certainly a fan of the "deconstructing MMA-myths"-series, although i donÄt even know if they're all by him alone, but from what i remember reading from him, he definitely seems like a really knowledgeable person when it comes to MMA.
He knows a lot about, and appears to be obsessed with, earlier Japanese MMA. He's got this thing he does - he'll try to take anybody's statement on any topic and ask them if they knew the conditions of some obscure fight prior to the fight or event in discussion, then ask about their personal assessment of the obscure fight or fights he mentions. Then he'll go on and on randomly about how you couldn't possibly make any other assessment unless you knew the color of some Japanese wrestler's shit before his 3rd fight in June on the second solstice of the bloodmoon during the resurgence of a 5th rate Japanese promotion's Quanza reunion tour.
> Your assessment on his skill set:
"think he was from Chute Boxe."
Well, you got it all wrong, my good friend, and this alone disqualifies your knowledge on his career.
He was from the Luta Livre school, Budokan style.
QUESTION: Can you define this school?
> You quoted his fight against a certain MW... well, that MW was Suloev, & this fight was at the very end of his career. Not a really sound choice, right?
If someone like Suloev kills you, there´s absolutely no shame in it, especially when you´re on your way out.
> "I have seen a whopping 6 fights of his total"
.... I mean... Puh-lease... He had 27 fights... Your assessment is basically based on his final run, & a "whoopin´" 6 fights.... Imagine assessin´ No Rush´s career solely on his UCC run...
> You claimed he should have gotten the win over Big Daddy, which is true, but then said that Gary was "raw", conveniently forgettin´that he would get his signature win over Oleg 2 months later.
OVERALL:
No dishespect, mate... but you´re not qualified to assess his career. Simple as that.
You dont know much or have zero knowledge about:
> his skill set
> his lineage
> his career (6 fights out of 27...)
Alright, all the other shit you posted notwithstanding what I said in this particular instance was that I vaguely remember him fighting a guy named Umuratu or something like that from Chute Boxe. I wasn't saying Pedro was from there; I knew he wasn't. Umuratu was from Chute Boxe, not Otavio. And what about Otavio's skillset specifically did I get wrong? And how many of Ze Pedro's fights have you seen? And he never fought anyone of note before Goodridge and when Gary fought him he wasn't really anyone of note either, so the fact that I haven't seen him piece up a bunch of Brazilian taxi drivers doesn't negate what I've seen from him when he faced decent guys. Feel free to prove me wrong though and while you're at it put me onto a a way for me to watch those fights. While you're at it throw in a lesson on the illustrious Budokan Luta Livre school. Not luta livre in general, this particular school. See, you're not the only one who can ask endless amounts of questions!
The sheer amount of time you put into these posts is impressive and you clearly know your stuff but you are amongst the most irritating posters on here. The overall tone of your posts is invariably condescending (and awkward as hell to read), you cherry pick and misquote people in order to fit your particular narrative, and you just basically use any thread you create as a chance to wave your e-dick around showing everyone how much you know about MMA/Vale Tudo/NHB. You seek argument instead of enlightenment and are guilty of the exact same offenses you repeatedly accuse others of making.
He knows a lot about, and appears to be obsessed with, earlier Japanese MMA. He's got this thing he does - he'll try to take anybody's statement on any topic and ask them if they knew the conditions of some obscure fight prior to the fight or event in discussion, then ask about their personal assessment of the obscure fight or fights he mentions. Then he'll go on and on randomly about how you couldn't possibly make any other assessment unless you knew the color of some Japanese wrestler's shit before his 3rd fight in June on the second solstice of the bloodmoon during the resurgence of a 5th rate Japanese promotion's Quanza reunion tour.
That didn't address the arguments I made in a 5 line post. You claim I'm evading your questions while I'm clearly answering some of them(you throw out about 5,000 per post) why can't you answer what I posted in a concise manner?
He knows a lot about, and appears to be obsessed with, earlier Japanese MMA. He's got this thing he does - he'll try to take anybody's statement on any topic and ask them if they knew the conditions of some obscure fight prior to the fight or event in discussion, then ask about their personal assessment of the obscure fight or fights he mentions. Then he'll go on and on randomly about how you couldn't possibly make any other assessment unless you knew the color of some Japanese wrestler's shit before his 3rd fight in June on the second solstice of the bloodmoon during the resurgence of a 5th rate Japanese promotion's Quanza reunion tour.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
