UFC Fox 23 - Pena vs Shevchenko - Denver

Status
Not open for further replies.
I wouldn't say he came out super aggressive against Jake. He was floating in kicking range the vast majority of the fight, and only got aggressive when he caught a kick or clipped him with something. I'm trying to find reasons to bet Mas myself, but I really think Cerrone is going to get the job done. He is vastly improved when it comes to protecting the distance he likes with boxing, and Masvidal loves the jabbing range that Cerrone is optimal against.

i do need to rewatch it for some reason i remember him being really aggressive!
 
Friendly reminder that Frankenstein fought someone that is 5ft6.

 
Does anyone know Jordan Johnson's wrestling credentials? I garnered his an ex Hawkeye so being an Iowa wrestler i assume hes pretty darn good?

Edit: Div 1 wrestler from Iowa
 
Last edited:
Did watch tape on Shevchenko and Pena. Not sure why this line is even, I dropped ~5u on Shevchenko at once and might even go bigger if I have time to do some additional research regarding training and such.

Shev is far, far ahead standing, has a very good clinch game and survived a round on the bottom against Nunes who except for that fight have four straight r1 finishes against Tate, Rousey and McMann. If Nunes can't finish you with a round on top while fresh Pena sure as shit will have issues with it too. She also looked fairly fresh in round 3 against Nunes, had no cardio issues going five against Holm at a half decent pace and always looks fairly relaxed in the cage not using a ton of energy.

In short, Shev has done much better then anyone else the last few years against Nunes and owned a former Strikeforce (on short notice) and a former UFC champion in her last 3.

Pena on the other hand has a good win over Zingano, which is very impressive although I think Zingano gased fairly badly in that fight and did some dumb shit, but other then that she has wins over Jessica "1-5 since 2014" Eye in a fight where she gave up a round to Eye's "dominant" grappling, Milana Dudieva and Jessica "1-5" Rakoczy (who in her defense is much better then her record suggest, but on the other hand also capable of making 115).

Before that run she did well on TUF, beating monsters like over the hill Baszler, Sarah Moras and some chick I never even heard of and I'm borderline autistic with names. I don't want to go back even further since that would be more then 3 years, but let's just say it doesn't get better.

Lastly, I'm not even sure Pena is a better grappler. She probably is, but I wouldn't bet her at -500 in a pure grappling match and if it goes to the ground Shev might very well have top position for the most part due to her clinch game.
 
The biggest red flag for me on Pena is that she said she doesn't care about elevation and isn't going to change anything because of it....WTF how does someone say this in 2017 MMA (maybe just hyperbole?!).

Nah, I get the feeling that Pena is actually just really really unintelligent.
 
Did watch tape on Shevchenko and Pena. Not sure why this line is even, I dropped ~5u on Shevchenko at once and might even go bigger if I have time to do some additional research regarding training and such.

Shev is far, far ahead standing, has a very good clinch game and survived a round on the bottom against Nunes who except for that fight have four straight r1 finishes against Tate, Rousey and McMann. If Nunes can't finish you with a round on top while fresh Pena sure as shit will have issues with it too. She also looked fairly fresh in round 3 against Nunes, had no cardio issues going five against Holm at a half decent pace and always looks fairly relaxed in the cage not using a ton of energy.

In short, Shev has done much better then anyone else the last few years against Nunes and owned a former Strikeforce (on short notice) and a former UFC champion in her last 3.

Pena on the other hand has a good win over Zingano, which is very impressive although I think Zingano gased fairly badly in that fight and did some dumb shit, but other then that she has wins over Jessica "1-5 since 2014" Eye in a fight where she gave up a round to Eye's "dominant" grappling, Milana Dudieva and Jessica "1-5" Rakoczy (who in her defense is much better then her record suggest, but on the other hand also capable of making 115).

Before that run she did well on TUF, beating monsters like over the hill Baszler, Sarah Moras and some chick I never even heard of and I'm borderline autistic with names. I don't want to go back even further since that would be more then 3 years, but let's just say it doesn't get better.

Lastly, I'm not even sure Pena is a better grappler. She probably is, but I wouldn't bet her at -500 in a pure grappling match and if it goes to the ground Shev might very well have top position for the most part due to her clinch game.

I agree with you about Shev being the much better striker but she is clueless from the bottom. If Pena takes her down she isn't getting back up IMO.

I'm on Pena for 2u btw, so might be my bias talking haha.
 
Does anyone know Jordan Johnson's wrestling credentials? I garnered his an ex Hawkeye so being an Iowa wrestler i assume hes pretty darn good?

not 100% but i think this is his him:
http://gculopes.com/roster.aspx?rp_id=946

KM: What were you doing before MMA and how did you get started in MMA?

JJ: I grew up wrestling and wrestled all the way through college. I was always pretty sure I’d end up fighting, that seemed to be the next progression of college wrestling. I finished school and started going into the MMA Lab in Glendale, AZ helping those guys out grappling. I was working in the mine and testing the water. John Crouch said it was something I could do and do a good job at it so I ended up quitting my job and went all in into the fight game. I started in 2012 then in 2013 they got me an amateur fight in King of the Cage. I had my amateur career and one pro fight at the Lab. That is when I came out to San Diego.
 
http://www.bloodyelbow.com/2017/1/2...g-criteria-explained-hinds-bell-mma-interview

Interesting read especially this section in regard to the Lauzon fight:

"BE: Effectiveness and Dominance through grappling still seem to be widely misunderstood concepts. What are judges looking for when assigning credit to grappling?

Hinds: Agreed. The main reason for the misunderstanding is that people continue to evaluate actions instead of results. In a grappling scenario, positioning means the least when making an evaluation. This is a very hard concept for most to understand; especially when it comes to grappling artists that are used to “gaining points” for positional advantages.

All must keep in mind: It’s what is being accomplished to progress/finish the fight in that position as opposed to the position itself.

Example: A fighter with their opponent’s back (dominant position) that is doing nothing but holding a seat belt grip is going to weigh less than a fighter that is on bottom in full closed guard (neutral position) hurting his/her opponent with elbows and solid, (near) fight ending threatening submission attempts.

Judges should be always looking at the result of an action, not the action itself.

Judges should be looking for the same things in grappling that they look for in striking. Damage. The opportunity to finish the fight.

They should be evaluating (near) fight ending sequences such as: tight effective submissions, positions and transitions that have clearly diminished their opponent’s ability to compete, slams that have affected their opponents output and positional dominance that has rendered their opponent solely defensive with little to no offensive output.

Just hold a position has some weight, but not as much as people think when assessing an effective grappling round."

I think chaps we need to be going with the guy who has threatened from the bottom moving forward if the other person has just laid on them. Examples are Magny and Lauzon fights. I scored the fight for Magny but the other fight for Held. Let's hope it takes the books a few months to cotton on and let's get rich on live bet. I'm gonna imprint damage, dominance and duration into my mind.

In the same article the guy says r2 of tate holm should be 10-8 tate. can anyone remember that round?
 
Last edited:
not 100% but i think this is his him:
http://gculopes.com/roster.aspx?rp_id=946

KM: What were you doing before MMA and how did you get started in MMA?

JJ: I grew up wrestling and wrestled all the way through college. I was always pretty sure I’d end up fighting, that seemed to be the next progression of college wrestling. I finished school and started going into the MMA Lab in Glendale, AZ helping those guys out grappling. I was working in the mine and testing the water. John Crouch said it was something I could do and do a good job at it so I ended up quitting my job and went all in into the fight game. I started in 2012 then in 2013 they got me an amateur fight in King of the Cage. I had my amateur career and one pro fight at the Lab. That is when I came out to San Diego.

Cheers bud. So he is a div 1 all American?
 
http://www.bloodyelbow.com/2017/1/2...g-criteria-explained-hinds-bell-mma-interview

Interesting read especially this section in regard to the Lauzon fight:

"BE: Effectiveness and Dominance through grappling still seem to be widely misunderstood concepts. What are judges looking for when assigning credit to grappling?

Hinds: Agreed. The main reason for the misunderstanding is that people continue to evaluate actions instead of results. In a grappling scenario, positioning means the least when making an evaluation. This is a very hard concept for most to understand; especially when it comes to grappling artists that are used to “gaining points” for positional advantages.

All must keep in mind: It’s what is being accomplished to progress/finish the fight in that position as opposed to the position itself.

Example: A fighter with their opponent’s back (dominant position) that is doing nothing but holding a seat belt grip is going to weigh less than a fighter that is on bottom in full closed guard (neutral position) hurting his/her opponent with elbows and solid, (near) fight ending threatening submission attempts.

Judges should be always looking at the result of an action, not the action itself.

Judges should be looking for the same things in grappling that they look for in striking. Damage. The opportunity to finish the fight.

They should be evaluating (near) fight ending sequences such as: tight effective submissions, positions and transitions that have clearly diminished their opponent’s ability to compete, slams that have affected their opponents output and positional dominance that has rendered their opponent solely defensive with little to no offensive output.

Just hold a position has some weight, but not as much as people think when assessing an effective grappling round."

I think chaps we need to be going with the guy who has threatened from the bottom moving forward if the other person has just laid on them. Examples are Magny and Lauzon fights. I scored the fight for Magny but the other fight for Held. Let's hope it takes the books a few months to cotton on and let's get rich on live bet. I'm gonna imprint damage, dominance and duration into my mind.

In the same article the guy says r2 of tate holm should be 10-8 tate. can anyone remember that round?

ya its going to be scary betting for the next few month.. i dont trust these retarded judges even know the basics of grappling let alone having to judge what a near fight ending submission looks like..
 
ya its going to be scary betting for the next few month.. i dont trust these retarded judges even know the basics of grappling let alone having to judge what a near fight ending submission looks like..

Going by the hendricks and lauzon fights i think if someone comes fairly close to a sub or even just locks one up, if the other person has done no damage on top we have to go with the person looking for the sub.
 
Going by the hendricks and lauzon fights i think if someone comes fairly close to a sub or even just locks one up, if the other person has done no damage we have to go with the person looking for the sub.

ya that seems likely but we still need a few more events to get a better read.. i worry we will see even more inconsistencies in the way fights are judged compared to the old rules
 
I agree with you about Shev being the much better striker but she is clueless from the bottom. If Pena takes her down she isn't getting back up IMO.

I'm on Pena for 2u btw, so might be my bias talking haha.

I agree on the not getting up part, although more like "will probably spend a significant time on bottom". It's just that all of Pena's TD's comes from the clinch, and I think Shev is a lot better in the clinch. Sure I wouldn't bet a Shev -4.5 line or anything like that, Pena might be able to get a round or two by doing that, but I don't think she'll have consistent success in getting the fight to the ground with top position.
 
I agree on the not getting up part, although more like "will probably spend a significant time on bottom". It's just that all of Pena's TD's comes from the clinch, and I think Shev is a lot better in the clinch. Sure I wouldn't bet a Shev -4.5 line or anything like that, Pena might be able to get a round or two by doing that, but I don't think she'll have consistent success in getting the fight to the ground with top position.

I think the clinch game is pretty equal and Pena's size and athleticism could carry her through. I think Pena will have a big advantage on the ground whilst Shevchenko will have a big advantage on the feet, the turning point for me is that Pena is a more dangerous finisher on the ground than Shevchenko on the feet.
 
Bobby Nash .. I like this boy mindset, what he is doing what he is writing. This boy is hungry. Opposite to chilled Pena dude killing cardio at mountains .
#suplexcity
Bet365 where are those fukin linessssss
 
Going by the hendricks and lauzon fights i think if someone comes fairly close to a sub or even just locks one up, if the other person has done no damage on top we have to go with the person looking for the sub.

There will be times when someone will be working on a sub and Rogan will say "he's not in danger", but to the layman who don't hear the commentary (judges), it will look like a dangerous sub attempt and reward it with big points. So the viewers will see it one way and the judges another. This will create live betting value.
 
The general fan thinks a lot of sub attempts are closer than they are. My guess is that judges do as well. If someone from guard is throwing up their legs at all, it will probably be considered a sub attempt. Conversely, someone having the back and controlling while the other defends with two on one the entire time probably won't be valued. It's completely idiotic.
 
I can't bet Nate i watched his last three fights and his volume is worse than Alvey. If it weren't for his low kicks he would barely throw anything. His chin is also gone CB staggered him, Santos folded him like a chair and even Barncat seemed to stun him. I'd take Alvey at evens but hes overpriced. As Nate is so tentative and Alvey counter strikes this could turn into a staring contest. I cant fault a play on Nate dec tho.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top