The Muay Thai King Saenchai shared this about Conor

[Wayweary]

On his FB page:

Many people are attacking Conor McGregor after he lost once in UFC. Many "fans" are losing faith, making fun of, and laughing at McGregor.

But these aren't true fans. If there are no challenges and no adversity, then there are no growth. In Muay Thai, every single legend lost at one point. This is because we fight the best. We grow from our losses. We become great from our losses.

McGregor showed courage, fighting Nate Diaz with an "anyone anywhere" attitude. He is a lion.

20 years ago, Saenchai lost by knock out. Saenchai was 15 year old and fought an all-time great legend named Thongchai.

After that, Saenchai kept improving, and never got knocked down again. Now, Saenchai is the greatest of this era.

McGregor, you have potential of becoming greatest of this era too. Don't let the haters get to you. Lions don't lose sleep over the opinions of sheep.

Become the great lion you can be. Look forward to meeting you one day.

Chok Dee

Truly a King

Losing at 15 is a bit different from losing at your prime. Plus, Conor already had two prior losses and perhaps this would apply to one of those. This loss in reality is what his level is, not just an early bump in the road.

 

[The Pharoah]

You're the simple fanboy. Full of shit.

Meanwhile you're just another nuthugger answering the call.

What's this!? People on the internet talking shit about CONOR? NOT ON MY WATCH.

He's got holes in his game and they were exposed. Some people aren't going to like him. Get over it.

 

[Wayweary]

I missed the Holloway fight? Max Holloway was 22 years old at the time of that fight and he took McGregor to the score cards. Since then Max has gone 8-0, finishing 6 of the 8 fighters. Max is vastly improved and is now 24 years old. McGregor better stay away from 5'10" Max Holloway who has the length and the western boxing to beat him. I'll take Max in that rematch all day long son.

He was actually still 21, I think, which was younger than Conor was when he lost to Duffy. If TS's point applies to one of these two, it would more likely be Holloway. I like Max's chances in a rematch but he doesn't have a reach advantage despite the height. He has a small, tall frame and his reach is listed as five less than Conor's.

 

[Toco]

Uh, he made connie look even worse actually

 

[ditchbankbandit]

"fanboys"? Conor has made mma exciting. His behavior AND the behavior of his fans has increased fighter pay. Nate is now a millionaire after ONE fight. Conor and millions of his fans made this happen. The only behavior that is unbearable is that of the haters. Trolls like you who overlook the massive part of this game called entertainment. Whatever Conor is doing is WORKING. Even Nate supports his behavior. So for you to justify your bitchy attitude toward Conor because of what he says is a joke. You mma trolls/haters are a cancer in this sport. Period.

MMA was already exciting. Conor just made it annoying as fuck to hear him talk.

 

[Rome07]

Meanwhile you're just another nuthugger answering the call.

What's this!? People on the internet talking shit about CONOR? NOT ON MY WATCH.

He's got holes in his game and they were exposed. Some people aren't going to like him. Get over it.

why do you fanboys always refer to "nuts" etc. Lots of homo erotic language connected to you simple fanbots. I'm a Conor and Nate fan. Just tired of seeing hate threads posted by complete clowns claiming to be seasoned mma fans. I'm enjoying myself.

 

[Cooliox]

Saenchai is a man. Conor is a boy.

You think Conor is now going to head back to the gym and put GSP type of hours in to improve on his weaker areas?

He's going to do the same shit, talk the same shit, and cash in till there's nothing left in the well.

Wont be long.

 

[Toco]

How good is Jon Jones ground game?

I believe people overrated his ground game, but his wrestling is where it's at

And ofc, a billion times better than Connie's

 

[tdluxon]

On his FB page:

Many people are attacking Conor McGregor after he lost once in UFC. Many "fans" are losing faith, making fun of, and laughing at McGregor.

But these aren't true fans. If there are no challenges and no adversity, then there are no growth. In Muay Thai, every single legend lost at one point. This is because we fight the best. We grow from our losses. We become great from our losses.

McGregor showed courage, fighting Nate Diaz with an "anyone anywhere" attitude. He is a lion.

20 years ago, Saenchai lost by knock out. Saenchai was 15 year old and fought an all-time great legend named Thongchai.

After that, Saenchai kept improving, and never got knocked down again. Now, Saenchai is the greatest of this era.

McGregor, you have potential of becoming greatest of this era too. Don't let the haters get to you. Lions don't lose sleep over the opinions of sheep.

Become the great lion you can be. Look forward to meeting you one day.

Chok Dee

Truly a King

He's got a good point. I think all of the hate wasn't the result of the loss however, but rather all of his shit talking before the fight and about his past opponents. If he was more respectful of his past opponents such as Jose Aldo and hadn't talked so much about Nate before the fight, I think the reaction would have been very different.

His behavior outside of the ring has got him tons of fans but also tons of people who hate him and when you talk shit about others when you when, they'll talk shit about you when you lose. Some would describe it as "you reap what you sow" or "what's good for they goose is good for the gander."

 

[Rome07]

He was actually still 21, I think, which was younger than Conor was when he lost to Duffy. If TS's point applies to one of these two, it would more likely be Holloway. I like Max's chances in a rematch but he doesn't have a reach advantage despite the height. He has a small, tall frame and his reach is listed as five less than Conor's.

and Conor tore his ACL during the fight and still won. Yet, that is not added to the equation? Pathetic.

 

[RhinoRush]

Who is we? The legion of 12 year olds making 1000 threads a day about Conor?

Yeaaaaaah. It's the anti-conor crowd that make thousands of unnecessary thread about him. Riiiiiiight.

 

[The Pharoah]

why do you fanboys always refer to "nuts" etc. Lots of homo erotic language connected to you simple fanbots. I'm a Conor and Nate fan. Just tired of seeing hate threads posted by complete clowns claiming to be seasoned mma fans. I'm enjoying myself.

Who am I fanboying?

You're the fanboy here you fool. It is not even subtle either.

"I'm a fan of both fighters, but" is classic fanboy rhetoric. You're not really a nate fan and if conor retired today you would be gone tomorrow and everyone here knows that. We've heard it all before pal.

 

[Wayweary]

and Conor tore his ACL during the fight and still won. Yet, that is not added to the equation? Pathetic.

What's that got to do with what I was saying? This is the topic of losing when you are young before you are in your prime. I never took the win away from Conor but they were in different points in their career and life. Get some perspective.

 

[Rome07]

Who am I fanboying?

You're the fanboy here you fool. It is not even subtle either.

"I'm a fan of both fighters, but" is classic fanboy rhetoric. You're not really a nate fan and if conor retired today you would be gone tomorrow and everyone here knows that. We've heard it all before pal.

No, real fans can like multiple fighters and they can restrain themselves from labelling everyone that likes McGregor, a fanboy. Look, you're a little bitch and you've probably been shaming every McGregor fan on this forum for awhile. It just feels good to express what a tool I think you are for doing that and I will continue to be a Nate, Nick, Conor, etc fan.

 

[Rome07]

What's that got to do with what I was saying? This is the topic of losing when you are young before you are in your prime. I never took the win away from Conor but they were in different points in their career and life. Get some perspective.

oh, how old was Conor and how many fights did he have in the UFC?

 

[Rome07]

What's that got to do with what I was saying? This is the topic of losing when you are young before you are in your prime. I never took the win away from Conor but they were in different points in their career and life. Get some perspective.

I'm just trying to figure out your point. Conor was around 25 for the Holloway fight. It was his 2nd UFC fight. Max had already fought 5 UFC fights and looked good. Are you suggesting Conor was the more seasoned UFC fighter? That he has reached his prime after 8 UFC fights with one loss?

 

[Wayweary]

oh, how old was Conor and how many fights did he have in the UFC?

Conor had twice as many wins and was like three years older. The relevant thing to his recent loss is that Conor is 27 today (while Holloway was 21 back then) which is old enough to be mature so that age and inexperience isn't much of an excuse at this point where as Holloway had yet to even really find his stride (he was 7-3 at the time, coming off of a loss).

 

[Wayweary]

I'm just trying to figure out your point. Conor was around 25 for the Holloway fight. It was his 2nd UFC fight. Max had already fought 5 UFC fights and looked good. Are you suggesting Conor was the more seasoned UFC fighter? That he has reached his prime after 8 UFC fights with one loss?

I'm saying that Holloway was young back then. He got into the UFC when he was super young and was still finding his feet, basically, with a 3-2 UFC record and 4-0 prior to entering the UFC (I believe he was a late replacement or something or he wouldn't have been called up so soon). Making mistakes at that age is quite different than when someone loses and they are six years older. Since then, Holloway has been able to progress and mature as a fighter much more than Conor has done in the same period so. Like with the TS and this Thai boxer guy being 15 when he lost and moving forward to never be knocked down again - Conor is a matured fighter who was already into his prime when he lost for the THIRD time, not some 21 or 15 year old kid. I don't know why this is a hard point for you to grasp.

 

[Rome07]

Conor had twice as many wins and was like three years older. The relevant thing to his recent loss is that Conor is 27 today (while Holloway was 21 back then) which is old enough to be mature so that age and inexperience isn't much of an excuse at this point where as Holloway had yet to even really find his stride (he was 7-3 at the time, coming off of a loss).

no, I think it's pretty relevant to note that Holloway had 5 UFC fights against high caliber fighters while Conor came in from the European region and hadn't fought at that level as much. This was his second UFC fight, opponent was changed to Max and Conor tore his ACL during the fight which obviously impacted his style and performance. Conor now has two more fights than Max did when they fought. TWO. Conor's career and his evolution as a fighter in the UFC has really just begun. He has only been fighting in the UFC for around two years. That is a damn good "excuse". He is not near his prime and the constant changing of opponents near the fight date is also a factor.

 

[Wayweary]

no, I think it's pretty relevant to note that Holloway had 5 UFC fights against high caliber fighters while Conor came in from the European region and hadn't fought at that level as much. This was his second UFC fight, opponent was changed to Max and Conor tore his ACL during the fight which obviously impacted his style and performance. Conor now has two more fights than Max did when they fought. TWO. Conor's career and his evolution as a fighter in the UFC has really just begun. He has only been fighting in the UFC for around two years. That is a damn good "excuse". He is not near his prime and the constant changing of opponents near the fight date is also a factor.

First off, this isn't about the Holloway fight for Conor. You need to try to catch up because you're lost in the sauce. It's about the significance of Conor's loss DAYS ago. Again, I never said Conor didn't perform well against Holloway and it isn't relevant to any of my points. Second, Holloway got into the UFC at a much earlier stage in his career. Entering the UFC is not like graduating middle school and going to high school where you get promoted at a certain age as long as you don't fail. People can enter the big show at different points of their career. Sometimes you are already being pushed for a title shot if you are established in another org and starting contracts vary. Conor was a 13-2 two-division champ in his mid twenties when he entered the UFC while Holloway was a 19-year-old 4-0 kid coming in as a last-minute replacement, I believe. And THIS MONTH, against Nate, Conor was a 19-2 UFC champion with 7-0 UFC record (in part because he was more comfortable as a fighter when he entered the UFC than someone like Holloway) as compared to Holloway's 7-2 when they fought with a rocky road in the UFC because he was still young and learning. So, at the time of those losses, Conor had twice as many fights and was six years older (Holloway had only been in MMA for a short time - less than three years - but Conor had been in pro MMA something like 8 years when he lost to Nate). If you can't understand that there is a difference as to their respective career arcs at the time of the losses, something is seriously wrong with you. Conor lost when he was similarly young and probably wouldn't lose in the same exact way today because he's matured as a fighter. I think it's perfectly valid to say the same about Holloway regarding his earlier losses but Conor lost the other day toward his physical and fighting prime. The same excuses don't apply. Get it?