Answer my question if you have nuanced understanding of striking:
Pinpoint an aspect of Gegard's striking that is technically deficient. I dare you.
With Anderson, as brilliant as he is, his striking is not as technical as Gegard's although I believe Anderson is the better overall fighter. Here is Anderson's weakness with respect to striking illustrated: http://www.mixedmartialarts.com/mma.cfm?go=forum.posts&forum=1&thread=2022204&page=1
Also of note: left hands are what I believe Anderson is most vulnerable too on the feet - Franklin landed some good lefts, as did Maia, and of course Chael caught him with a couple. It's one of the reasons I thought Vitor dangerous for him, but alas that fight ended all too quickly.
I would also like a rematch between Anderson and Vitor. However, answer my question first- look at his last three fights in SF- the loss to King Mo, Draw with Jardine, and subpar performance against OSP. Where was his technical striking in those fights? A lot of people are great strikers, but if they can not stop a takedown, what good is their technical striking? What good is your technical striking if you are damn near exhausted like Mousasi was in the third round against OSP? He would get
slaughtered by Jones. Maybe i am harsh on him, because i was very disappointed in his last 3 SF fights. Anderson would have finished all three guys at 205. Who cares about Anderson's weaknesses? His weaknesses have resulted in him being undefeated for damn near 7 years and the greatest MW of all time. I still can not get the image of Mousasi being schooled by King Mo on the ground. Maybe that is why it might seem i am critical of Mousasi. He is a very good fighter, but he needs to prove it in the Big Leagues against a top 5 guy in the UFC first.