What shows just how useless are those crappy stats. Siver put Conor on the mat twice. Was unable to keep him there, but those were takedowns. Conor avoided well a couple of other tries by Siver, tho...Officially, no. Siver scored zero takedowns.
What shows just how useless are those crappy stats. Siver put Conor on the mat twice. Was unable to keep him there, but those were takedowns. Conor avoided well a couple of other tries by Siver, tho...
They may not be "technically" takedowns but the fact is he was on his back, even if it was just for a split second, and he had to stand back up.
I don't know why anyone wouldn't count them as takedowns, I mean... he was down, and siver was the one who took him down.
It doesn't matter if he was only down for 1 second or if Siver couldn't "establish control"
It's a takedown.
But he was never on his back you idiot, where are you people getting this from? Did you watch the fight? He wasn't on his back for even a split second.
He sure as fuck wasn't on his feet, you idiot. Lol
What are you trying to say? He landed on his butt instead of his back so that means it wasn't a takedown?
He was taken down. Like shit
I'm trying to download the fights so I can re-watch them right now but I distinctly remember it.
Or, it is simply a demonstration of what they mean by "takedown". Like grappling tournaments, it does not count unless a favorable position is secured as a result.
What the fuck does "on your back" mean in your vocabulary, that's what I'm wondering right now.
I mean the simple fact that he had to get back up to his feet proves that he was taken down.
That is something that rational people would call "bullshit"
See it's this stuff that's made up in order to obscure the truth, like saying Conor didn't get taken down, when really, he did.
What does that have to do with it?
So being taken down means being put on your back? If you drop someone on their head and their back magically doesn't touch the floor it doesn't count as a takedown?
He sure as fuck wasn't on his feet, you idiot. Lol
What are you trying to say? He landed on his butt instead of his back so that means it wasn't a takedown?
He was taken down. Like shit
I'm trying to download the fights so I can re-watch them right now but I distinctly remember it.
That is something that rational people would call "bullshit"
See it's this stuff that's made up in order to obscure the truth, like saying Conor didn't get taken down, when really, he did.
That's not how it works though. It's like how every time a fighter goes down in boxing it isn't a knockdown. Sometimes it's just a slip. Sometimes you get taken off your feet, but the other guy never establishes position so it's not a takedown. And it definitely doesn't score for the guy attacking.
I mean the simple fact that he had to get back up to his feet proves that he was taken down.
I am sorry that you are ignorant of combat-sport rules and regulations.
I'm trying to download the fights so I can re-watch them right now but I distinctly remember it.