Media RDR's thoughts on DDP vs. Khamzat after having trained with both.

[rjmbrd]

Everything I wrote is objectively true.

You're looking at it in the most negative light possible, you're including Whittaker's teeth injury in the equation since it suits your argument, but you're completely ignoring Khamzats injury vs Usman since it doesn't suit your argument.

Bullshit. Whittaker verbatim said he had a bone injury from his fight with DDP he didn't take care of. Having your entire gums and upper bone PUSHED IN is not a submission and is not a thing in MMA. That is a freak injury. Khamzat didn't hurt Whittaker and did not get a submission, he back packed him.

Against Usman he looked like absolute shit after the first round. This is against Usman who was coming off back to back losses, had NEVER fought at middleweight, and had no camp. None of this is my opinion.

Dricus has been taken down and been mounted, given up his back, etc, against worse grapplers. It's objectively true.
He was also reversed by Darren Till.

He's literally undefeated in the UFC middleweight division and has put away the best fighters in the world. What exactly would you like me to say? Zero people have out grappled him to victory, and he did just fine on the ground against specialists like Brunson.

There is NO REALITY where DDP doesn't M U R D E R guys like Usman and Burns.

Do you think that would happen to Khamzat, who has never been taken down?

He was knocked down by an undersized Burns, and had 50/50 exchanges with Usman on the feet. If anything he looked fairly timid in the exchanges with Usman and that is why he eeked by with a majority decision.

He also has considerably worse top control, given that he could not keep Strickland down.

Who has kept Strickland down at middleweight? He is WORLD FAMOUS for his ability to get up and difficult to grapple. He was a grapple who transitioned to striking.

Why would we need to compare Dricus vs Usman or Dricus vs Burns?

Because DDP would not have controversial decisions with those guys and Khamzat did

Which fighter has Dricus beat that Khamzat wouldn't beat easier?

So far? He's fought Whittaker and back packed him. He got a non-locked submission because the guy had an injury and his teeth all pushed in.

DDP beat him standing, tossed him to the ground, beat the shit out of him on the mat. He then KO's him standing. Its not even close.

Do you think Izzy would last 4 rounds vs Khamzat? Till 3 rounds? Tavares 5 rounds?
Strickland 10 rounds? Would he lose a round to old Brunson and be on the bottom for 2 minutes?

In his prime? If Burns knocked Khamzat down, what do you think world class strikers would do? Khamzat couldn't even out strike losing streak Usman.

 

[188912345]

Bullshit. Whittaker verbatim said he had a bone injury from his fight with DDP he didn't take care of. Having your entire gums and upper bone PUSHED IN is not a submission and is not a thing in MMA. That is a freak injury. Khamzat didn't hurt Whittaker and did not get a submission, he back packed him.

Against Usman he looked like absolute shit after the first round. This is against Usman who was coming off back to back losses, had NEVER fought at middleweight, and had no camp. None of this is my opinion.




He's literally undefeated in the UFC middleweight division and has put away the best fighters in the world. What exactly would you like me to say? Zero people have out grappled him to victory, and he did just fine on the ground against specialists like Brunson.

There is NO REALITY where DDP doesn't M U R D E R guys like Usman and Burns.



He was knocked down by an undersized Burns, and had 50/50 exchanges with Usman on the feet. If anything he looked fairly timid in the exchanges with Usman and that is why he eeked by with a majority decision.



Who has kept Strickland down at middleweight? He is WORLD FAMOUS for his ability to get up and difficult to grapple. He was a grapple who transitioned to striking.




Because DDP would not have controversial decisions with those guys and Khamzat did



So far? He's fought Whittaker and back packed him. He got a non-locked submission because the guy had an injury and his teeth all pushed in.

DDP beat him standing, tossed him to the ground, beat the shit out of him on the mat. He then KO's him standing. Its not even close.



In his prime? If Burns knocked Izzy down, what do you think world class strikers would do? Khamzat couldn't even out strike losing streak Usman.

If your arguments were more relevant and not just magnifying every potential Khamzat-flaw while downplaying Dricus's flaws, the odds would probably be at least -500 in favor of Dricus.


You're judging Khamzat by standards that you're clearly not using while judging fighters you like.

Let me try to enlighten you about what we can find if we employ the same standard to DDP.

Dricus lost a round to 39 year old Brunson who was on a 14 months layoff after getting KO'd. Getting controlled on the ground and hurt on the feet.

He had a 3 round war vs Tavares who was nowhere near the ranking of a Burns or Usman.

Dricus lost a round 2 to Darren Till, who went 1-3 at MW, with the win a split decision against Gastelum, going 1-5 in his last 6 UFC-fights. Also got reversed on the ground.

He was their last opponent before leaving UFC.

Burns won the next 2 fights after Khamzat, Usman defeated 6-0 streaking Buckley at WW in his next fight. Buckley was coming off finishes vs Wonderboy and Colby.

If we're being even more petty; Dricus has been finished twice in the later rounds, and was KO'D in his last outing at WW, against someone outside UFC.

All in all, that's probably why Dricus is an underdog, there are things to look at negatively in both of their records if we look close enough.

 

[Dr. Stoppage]

Something crazy could happen like DDP subbing Khamzat in round 1 knowing it will likely go to the ground early.

 

[rjmbrd]

If your arguments were more relevant and not just magnifying every potential Khamzat-flaw while downplaying Dricus's flaws, the odds would probably be at least -500 in favor of Dricus.

DDP isn't going to controversial split or majority decisions in literally 2/3rd of his ranked fights.

Dricus is putting away the best fights in the world and he's doing it everywhere MMA goes. He's undefeated in the UFC with a strength of schedule so much more impressive than Khamzat they are not in the same UNIVERSE.

You're judging Khamzat by standards that you're clearly not using while judging fighters you like.

Because he laid eggs in his two coming out parties. You can explain away Burns and you can explain away Usman but in context its absurd to explain away both. He appears to less threatening after the first round. That is demonstrably true and everyone here will say that is reasonable and non-controversial.

Dricus lost a round to 39 year old Brunson who was on a 14 months layoff after getting KO'd. Getting controlled on the ground and hurt on the feet.

Right but unlike Khamzat with Burns, he didn't eek to a decision after getting in trouble. DDP is a finisher and he put Bruson away. It speaks to his qualities, this is like pants on head backwards.

Dricus lost a round 2 to Darren Till,

If the Queen had balls she'd be the King. He stopped Till. Seems to me you don't seem to get the idea that DDP is the problem in the cage.

Burns won the next 2 fights after Khamzat, Usman defeated 6-0 streaking Buckley at WW in his next fight. Buckley was coming off finishes vs Wonderboy and Colby.

Wonderboy and Colby. Wonderboy is 42? I forget and is on a 5 fight losing streak. Do you not stop and think before you type this shit up?

If we're being even more petty; Dricus has been finished twice in the later rounds, and was KO'D in his last outing at WW, against someone outside UFC.

All in all, that's probably why Dricus is an underdog, there are things to look at negatively in both of their records if we look close enough.

Dricus is on an 11 fight win streak and undefeated at middleweight and undefeated in the UFC.

He's 1-1 against the guy he lost against and clearly in the wrong weight class, a dog's life ago.

Khamzat laying an egg against Usman is contemporary. Its one fight back.

 

[188912345]

DDP isn't going to controversial split or majority decisions in literally 2/3rd of his ranked fights.

Dricus is putting away the best fights in the world and he's doing it everywhere MMA goes. He's undefeated in the UFC with a strength of schedule so much more impressive than Khamzat they are not in the same UNIVERSE.



Because he laid eggs in his two coming out parties.



Right but unlike Khamzat with Burns, he didn't eek to a decision after getting in trouble. DDP is a finisher and he put Bruson away. It speaks to his qualities, this is like pants on head backwards.



If the Queen had balls she'd be the King. He stopped Till. Seems to me you don't seem to get the idea that DDP is the problem in the cage.



Dricus is on an 11 fight win streak and undefeated at middleweight and undefeated in the UFC.

He's 1-1 against the guy he lost against and clearly in the wrong weight class, a dog's life ago.

Khamzat laying an egg against Usman is contemporary. Its one fight back.

"Laid an egg", lol.

He won those fights, after facing adversity.
He came close to finishing Usman in round 1, 10-8ing him. Then eeked out the decision with a torn hand ligament. Not bad, when most talented fighters have had actual LOSSES against way lesser fighters.
Dricus being one example, and the Brunson fight is more recent than the Burns fight.

He came close to finishing Burns in round 1 and 3, after getting dropped in round 2, which goes against the narrative that he can't win if he doesn't finish in round 1.

You're magnifying a few competitive rounds vs tough stylistic matchups while you ignore Dricus having competitive fights against much lesser fighters.

Your ignoring/dismissing 12/14 fights where Khamzat just steamrolled his opposition.

I'm well aware of Dricus being extremely dangerous, that's why I'm not dismissing the chance of him finding a finish or winning, but I'm also not ignoring the possibility of Khamzat finishing past round 2 or winning a decision.

Dricus is undefeated in the UFC and is on an 11-fight winstreak.

Khamzat is undefeated in the UFC and is on a 14-fight winstreak.

You're obviously extremely salty about Khamzat, why even engaging in a discussion when you can't be objective?

*rhetorical question, no need to waste more time.

 

[gosuasus]

RDR, DDP...sounds like some type of memory in a computer.

 

[gosuasus]

I want fight of the year type fight that will make this a trilogy instead of one-off occasion.

 

[TheNewGame]

There is NO REALITY where DDP doesn't M U R D E R Burns.

He was knocked down by an undersized Burns, and had 50/50 exchanges with Usman on the feet. If anything he looked fairly timid in the exchanges with Usman and that is why he eeked by with a majority decision.

If Burns knocked Khamzat down, what do you think world class strikers would do? Khamzat couldn't even out strike losing streak Usman.

I'm sure alot of people would favor 2022 Burns to beat Dricus at 170lbs. Can see Burns dropping him as well.

Khamzat had a grade 3 ligament tear in his right hand for 2/3 of the Usman fight. A Grade 3 ligament tear is said to feel just like a broken bone (Khamzat even said in a post fight interview that he thinks he has a broken hand), so of course he was timid. His right hand is his most dangerous weapon striking.

 

[Conan the K-9]

Luke Rockhold has also trained with both of them and he agrees with RDR.

Luke Rockhold breaks down Dricus Du Plessis vs. 'f*cking beast' Khamzat Chimaev at UFC 319

After training with both Dricus Du Plessis and Khamzat Chimaev, Luke Rockhold shared some insight on the UFC 319 headliner.

mmajunkie-eu.usatoday.com

 

[chinarice]

Usman round 2 was an anomaly compared to other fights where he dominated round 1 and didn't get a finish. He seemed to have to spend less energy to take down and control Whittaker than Usman.

Also, Rob didn't show any ability to attack off his back like Burns to keep Khamzat preferring to strike.
Even vs Burns where he lost round 2, he still fought at a high pace and went 1/1 on takedowns.

The other 3 fights he got taken to round 2 are less mentioned since he finished his opponent. His gas tank isn't that bad, in my opinion, it's blown out of proportion.

His gas tank being "bad" shows that the majority of people who post here don't actually know wtf they're watching.

Right so we saw the Usman fight, there is absolutely zero evidence of Khamzat being the same fighter in rounds 2-3 even at middleweight. A freak injury is not a submission win (by common sense standard) and getting back-packed didn't look like a big deal frankly.



- controversial split decision with Burns, a much smaller guy, who dropped him

- majority decision with Usman, coming off the couch, at middleweight, off back to back losses

- 'submission' over Whittaker, who DDP beat the absolute shit out of, and it was a freak injury


It is what it is. DDP is more tested and proven by miles and he's a better MMA grappler than all the above, setting aside he's bigger and more physical.



DDP would - and I cannot stress this next part enough - M U R D E R everyone Khamzat has ever fought. Murder. Call the cops murder.

This is not a serious point of view. DDP going to controversial decisions with Burns and Usman... are you on mushrooms?




FFS

FFS bro FFS' others while replying with literally factually incorrect shit...... i just can't with this place lol

1. It was not a split decision


2. It was only "controversial" because the neckbeard tards who post here post with their feelings instead of with facts. Only Sherdog's own dumbass mod posted their dumbass scorecard thinking Burns won. Imagine giving Burns the 3rd round and thinking your opinion should ever be taken seriously lol


I shouldn't really be surprised though from a guy who was all onboard putting 2FA on a fucking MMA forum

 

[rjmbrd]

His gas tank being "bad" shows that the majority of people who post here don't actually know wtf they're watching.

He's fought 3 ranked opponents, and the two fights that got out of the first round, he looked (and demonstrably was) less dangerous. This is a fairly uncontroversial and broadly accepted opinion. So we're run into the thing here where one guy has an oddball opinion and is mad at everyone else.

FFS bro FFS' others while replying with literally factually incorrect shit...... i just can't with this place lol

1. It was not a split decision

Sorry I conflated his majority decision with Usman. I only meant to type, controversial decision re: Burns. What a rocking update/correction.

I shouldn't really be surprised though from a guy who was all onboard putting 2FA on a fucking MMA forum

You are confusing me with someone else, no idea wtf you are talking about.

 

[rjmbrd]

"Laid an egg", lol.

He won those fights, after facing adversity.
He came close to finishing Usman in round 1, 10-8ing him. Then eeked out the decision with a torn hand ligament. Not bad, when most talented fighters have had actual LOSSES against way lesser fighters.
Dricus being one example, and the Brunson fight is more recent than the Burns fight.

He came close to finishing Burns in round 1 and 3, after getting dropped in round 2, which goes against the narrative that he can't win if he doesn't finish in round 1.

You're magnifying a few competitive rounds vs tough stylistic matchups while you ignore Dricus having competitive fights against much lesser fighters.

Your ignoring/dismissing 12/14 fights where Khamzat just steamrolled his opposition.

I'm well aware of Dricus being extremely dangerous, that's why I'm not dismissing the chance of him finding a finish or winning, but I'm also not ignoring the possibility of Khamzat finishing past round 2 or winning a decision.

Dricus is undefeated in the UFC and is on an 11-fight winstreak.

Khamzat is undefeated in the UFC and is on a 14-fight winstreak.

You're obviously extremely salty about Khamzat, why even engaging in a discussion when you can't be objective?

*rhetorical question, no need to waste more time.

This is all bullshit.

Khamzat is a freak talent and I'm excited for his fight, and I think he has a very solid chance at pulling off an early win. You are conflating me not being biased for Khamzat - I judge fighters on their body of work, not their potential that lives in our heads.

He's just one of those polarizing fighters that has a reality distortion field around him because he's a unique and fun talent. He's had 3 ranked fights, two of them were controversial/close decisions. That isn't my opinion.

 

[Bradillac]

I think we're in a place where Chimaev is extremely overrated and DDP is still being underrated. Chimaev's resume is extremely weak (especially at 185 where he's somehow fighting for the title) and has asterisk's all over it, while DDP has fought and beat the best of the best at 185. I'm seriously not sure what he has shown in the past that make people think he has the ability to steamroll DDP.. beating a short notice Kevin Holland?

Does anyone seriously think DDP would have any problems at all beating Usman?

 

[chinarice]

He's fought 3 ranked opponents, and the two fights that got out of the first round, he looked (and demonstrably was) less dangerous. This is a fairly uncontroversial and broadly accepted opinion. So we're run into the thing here where one guy has an oddball opinion and is mad at everyone else.




Sorry I conflated his majority decision with Usman. I only meant to type, controversial decision re: Burns. What a rocking update/correction.



You are confusing me with someone else, no idea wtf you are talking about.

I am not. It's literally bolded in your post I quoted.... You just out here straight up trolling at this point lol

 

[188912345]

Does anyone seriously think DDP would have any problems at all beating Usman?

Does anyone seriously think Khamzat would have any problems beating Till, old Brunson, Strickland or Izzy? Except you?

Stylistically, those are clearly easier matchups than Burns/Usman/Whittaker.

 

[chinarice]

He's fought 3 ranked opponents, and the two fights that got out of the first round, he looked (and demonstrably was) less dangerous. This is a fairly uncontroversial and broadly accepted opinion. So we're run into the thing here where one guy has an oddball opinion and is mad at everyone else.




Sorry I conflated his majority decision with Usman. I only meant to type, controversial decision re: Burns. What a rocking update/correction.



You are confusing me with someone else, no idea wtf you are talking about.

I'm talking about Pettry, who is the sole mma media who scored it for Burns and they're a sherdog mod that pushed the 2FA bs here.

 

[fortheo]

Does anyone seriously think Khamzat would have any problems beating Till, old Brunson, Strickland or Izzy? Except you?

Stylistically, those are clearly easier matchups than Burns/Usman/Whittaker.

This is MW we're talking about now, not WW.

Strickland and Izzy are former MW champs who we've seen fend off grappling from big Middleweights many times, something we've never seen WW burns or Usman have to do. Hell, I've seen Burns out wrestled by a 5'6 lightweight and I've seen usman submitted. Izzy had never been subbed before DDP and never outwrestled by little 5'6 men or welterweight sized men. You're giving too much credence to what you believe as stylistically hard/favorable match ups and completely ignoring the weight class jump. 15lbs is a fucking big jump, especially in the kind of fighting that Khamzat likes to force on people. Strickland and izzy are longer and more rangy, too, thus more distance for khamzat to close. In my opinion, the 15lb difference and range difference and experience at the weight class matters a lot, more so than your logic of "but burns and short notice usman come from grappling backgrounds so they must have been harder match ups."

I think people write strickland off in a potential khamzat match just because of training stories where strickland was lightheartedly joking/ reprimanding khamzat telling khamzat to "go easy because everyone knows he's better than everyone." Strickland said that because khamzat just finished going unnecessarily hard on a training partner two weight classes smaller than him and khamzat is known to go too hard in the gym.

Historically, Strickland has had good TDD and has never been submitted. In a five rounder, which most strickland fights are these days, I would rate Strickland at MW as a tougher challenge than Burns at WW, and tougher than two week notice WW Usman who, unlike khamzat, had zero chance to bulk up 15 pounds.

 

[188912345]

This is MW we're talking about now, not WW.

Strickland and Izzy are former MW champs, they're obviously tougher fights at MW than old WW burns and short notice, old WW usman. You're giving too much credence to what you believe as stylistically hard/favorable match ups and completely ignoring the weight class jump. 15lbs is a fucking big jump, especially in the kind of fighting that Khamzat likes to force on people. We've seen Strickland and izzy fend off the grappling from big MW's numerous times whereas wwe've never seen Usman and burns have to do that. Hell, I've seen burns out wrestled by a 5'6 Lightweight and I've seen him gas. I've never seen Izzy or strickland out wrestled by such little men.. Strickland and izzy are longer and more rangy, too, thus more distance for khamzat to close. In my opinion, the 15lb difference and range difference and experience at the weight class matters a lot, more so than your logic of "but burns and short notice usman come from grappling backgrounds so they must have been harder match ups." E

I think people write strickland off in a potential khamzat match just because of training stories where strickland was light heartedly joking/ reprimanding khamzat telling khamzat to "go easy because everyone knows he's better than everyone." Strickland said that because khamzat just finished going unnecessarily hard on a training partner two weight classes lower than him and khamzat is known to go too hard in the gym.

Historically, Strickland has had good TDD and has never been submitted. In a five rounder, which most strickland fights are these days, I would rate Strickland at MW as a tougher challenge than Burns at WW, and tougher than two week notice WW Usman who, unlike khamzat, had zero chance to bulk up 15 pounds.

Maybe I'm putting too much importance in the stylistic matchup, but the "old Usman" "LW Burns" arguments are also what led 66% of sherdog to pick Whittaker to beat Khamzat. Many by late finish, disregarding Whittaker's non-ability to finish in the later rounds in a decade or so.

We have now seen Khamzat steamroll everyone except Burns and Usman.
He has been scheduled for about 46 rounds in his career, went 3 rounds twice, and had a total of 3 close rounds, once while injured.
Also 1 round he clearly lost (Burns round 2).

We could also then, if we went back in time, say that Strickland, Whittaker, or DDP would have a hard time at MW, given that all of them have losses where they've been finished at WW.

It's almost like a fighter that moves up a weightclass also becomes bigger and stronger than when he fought 15 lbs lighter and sometimes performs better.

Surely losses are worse than close decisions?

Speaking of close decisions, Strickland has made a career out of winning/losing split decisions.

Or maybe the aforementioned fighters are allowed to improve, but Khamzat can't?

Why are his capabilites always judged from 2022-23, one of them being in a lower weight class, and one of them involving a serious hand ligament injury?

How is that more relevant than Dricus performance vs a 39 year old Brunson, a year after Khamzat vs Burns?

But injuries are only allowed to be mentioned when it happened to Whittaker, not to Khamzat.

Speaking of Strickland, by all accounts WW-Khamzat dominated MW Strickland when they trained together.

That's backed up from the Strickland/Schmo interview, if you disregard what Khamzat said about it.
It also further showed in how triggered Strickland became when Dana said the winner of Khamzat vs Usman would get the title shot, and Khamzat won.

 

[KO Shotz]

Something crazy could happen like DDP subbing Khamzat in round 1 knowing it will likely go to the ground early.

Someone getting subbed early or it'll be fight of the year

 

[fortheo]

Maybe I'm putting too much importance in the stylistic matchup, but the "old Usman" "LW Burns" arguments are also what led 66% of sherdog to pick Whittaker to beat Khamzat. Many by late finish, disregarding Whittaker's non-ability to finish in the later rounds in a decade or so.

We have now seen Khamzat steamroll everyone except Burns and Usman.
He has been scheduled for about 46 rounds in his career, went 3 rounds twice, and had a total of 3 close rounds, once while injured.
Also 1 round he clearly lost (Burns round 2).

We could also then, if we went back in time, say that Strickland, Whittaker, or DDP would have a hard time at MW, given that all of them have losses where they've been finished at WW.

It's almost like a fighter that moves up a weightclass also becomes bigger and stronger than when he fought 15 lbs lighter and sometimes performs better.

Surely losses are worse than close decisions?

Speaking of close decisions, Strickland has made a career out of winning/losing split decisions.

Or maybe the aforementioned fighters are allowed to improve, but Khamzat can't?

Why are his capabilites always judged from 2022-23, one of them being in a lower weight class, and one of them involving a serious hand ligament injury?

How is that more relevant than Dricus performance vs a 39 year old Brunson, a year after Khamzat vs Burns?

But injuries are only allowed to be mentioned when it happened to Whittaker, not to Khamzat.

Speaking of Strickland, by all accounts WW-Khamzat dominated MW Strickland when they trained together.

That's backed up from the Strickland/Schmo interview, if you disregard what Khamzat said about it.
It also further showed in how triggered Strickland became when Dana said the winner of Khamzat vs Usman would get the title shot, and Khamzat won.

Bud, a ton of that doesn't have anything to do with what I said and is getting into mental gymnastic territory.

Khamzat looked good against Whittaker, no doubt about it, but anyone I speak to who actually does BJJ tells me that choke shouldn't have finished whittaker.

You're trying to say that Burns and Usman would have success at MW simply because DDP and strickland (former Welterweights), went on to have success at MW. Come on dude, that's mental gymnastics and you know it. Not every fighter has the frame to move up a weight class successfully. We know DDP and Strickland are great middleweights. You're imagining that Burns and Usman would be.

I'm not judging Khamzat strictly based off his 2022-2023 run. I take his fights against usman and whittaker in to consideration, but surely you understand that the majority of khamzats career was not at MW in the UFC, and the two recent ones aren't the best fights to draw deductions from since, as you said, khamzat was injured, Usman wasn't a MW and had no training, and Whittaker had a pre existing injury and tapped to a choke that the vast majority of guys with experience admit shouldn't have finished him. The majority of opinions about khamzat will be about where we saw him spend the majority of his time fighting.

Again, you're putting too much stock into training stories. The training strories from khamzat and strickland were about the wrestling -- not fighting. Khamzat "by all accounts" dominates everyone in training because he has the reputation for going TOO hard against training partners and because his style is one that you CAN go hard in during training. Strickland did flippantly say that Khamzat is better than anyone and that khamzat gives him the best rounds. It means very little in an actual fight. You know who out grappled Merab in training regularly? Patchy mix. It means nothing in a fight. You know who gave TJ good rounds in the gym regularly? Cody garbrandt, it meant nothing in a fight. etc etc etc

As for mentioning injuries. I've seen you mention khamzat's hand injuries numerous times, so what do you mean you're not allowed to mention them? lol. Have you mentioned DDP going into the Whittaker fight with a foot injury? I doubt it.

I don't know where you're going with all these other arguments because they're countering points I didn't make here.