Was Royce Gracie past it When he fought Matt Hughes?

[Philly253]

Thick as a country breakfast

 

[THECYNDlCATE]

Co

I made that claim and I provided the proof. Are you simple?

You didn't provide any proof at all.

I asked you outright to show me, where I asked you a question, you gave me a correct answer that I refused to accept, by asking the question again with harder variables.

Come on now, get to it.

 

[Darwinambrosius]

Co


You didn't provide any proof at all.

I asked you outright to show me, where I asked you a question, you gave me a correct answer that I refused to accept, by asking the question again with harder variables.

Come on now, get to it.

You had to extrapolate that a version of Hughes we never saw would lose to a version of Royce we did see, which any logical person would understand is pretty dumb. When I asked how it related to the question, you said it was in response to people saying that Royce would never beat Hughes despite the fact that nobody had said that when you posted that. I pointed that out and you then said you were jusy discussing the skills of Royce, this changing the parameters of your original statement. This isn't difficult to grasp.

Have you read the responses of the other people? I know you have, you read mine.

You know, responses like Royce could have never beat him.

That's how it fucking relates.

Look at me, I'm on Sherdog, starting arguments trying to look cool.

He asked about where you rate Royce and his abilities.

I discussed his abilities and how Hughes had to usurp them to beat him later on.

Now fuck off.

Now please show me where I said I wasn't in a debate. Please remember that a basic tenet of debating is that, as I said earlier, the burden on proof is on the claimant.

 

[THECYNDlCATE]

You had to extrapolate that a version of Hughes we never saw would lose to a version of Royce we did see, which any logical person would understand is pretty dumb. When I asked how it related to the question, you said it was in response to people saying that Royce would never beat Hughes despite the fact that nobody had said that when you posted that. I pointed that out and you then said you were jusy discussing the skills of Royce, this changing the parameters of your original statement. This isn't difficult to grasp.




Now please show me where I said I wasn't in a debate. Please remember that a basic tenet of debating is that, as I said earlier, the burden on proof is on the claimant.

You are lying.

The original thing you typed about, had nothing to do with you. It was a general response to the question.

The only version of Hughes that Royce could beat, was the version that was around during UFC 1 and Royce's real prime.

Hughes didn't know any GJJ, but he was wrestling and fighting. But he would have lost to Royce.

After he learned Royce's craft, Royce never had much of a chance. No version of Royce would.

This statement had nothing to do with you and it's not moving any goal post.

So that's two lies you are caught in.
Keep going.

 

[Darwinambrosius]

You are lying.

The original thing you typed about, had nothing to do with you. It was a general response to the question.

The only version of Hughes that Royce could beat, was the version that was around during UFC 1 and Royce's real prime.

Hughes didn't know any GJJ, but he was wrestling and fighting. But he would have lost to Royce.

After he learned Royce's craft, Royce never had much of a chance. No version of Royce would.

This statement had nothing to do with you and it's not moving any goal post.

So that's two lies you are caught in.
Keep going.

Jesus H. Christ, you are the dumbest person on this forum.

Let me lay this out, step by step:
1. You make your post.
2. I ask how it is relevant to the OP.
3. You say that it "fucking relates" because other responses said Royce would never beat Hughes, which your inability to quote such posts when asked to demonstrates that nobody had said such a thing at such point.
4. You then say that you were responding with a general statement about Royce's ability, which moves the original "goal post" of you defending Royce against those imaginary detraction posts to just talking about him in general.

This is incredibly simple to understand, kid. The silver lining is that your raging butthurt triggered responses have provided teh lulz.

 

[THECYNDlCATE]

Jesus H. Christ, you are the dumbest person on this forum.

Let me lay this out, step by step:
1. You make your post.
2. I ask how it is relevant to the OP.
3. You say that it "fucking relates" because other responses said Royce would never beat Hughes, which your inability to quote such posts when asked to demonstrates that nobody had said such a thing at such point.
4. You then say that you were responding with a general statement about Royce's ability, which moves the original "goal post" of you defending Royce against those imaginary detraction posts to just talking about him in general.

This is incredibly simple to understand, kid. The silver lining is that your raging butthurt triggered responses have provided teh lulz.

That's moving the goal post to you?

Not to mention the false connections you are making up to try and save face.

You are just throwing shit in all directions because I have you nailed down.

Now again, show me where I moved the goal post. Show me where I asked you a question, you answered correctly, I refused to accept it and I reasked the question with harder variables.

Show me that.
I am still waiting.

As a matter of fact, let's tear this down.

This is my first post on the topic, with the post above it, so you can see the context of my post.



So clearly you can see the context and what it has to do with the topic. It's been accepted, even before the fight happened, that Royce was far past his prime. However, with people talking hypothetical situations, I added a correction that people were overlooking.


Now, to show your level of dishonesty, this is your first post on the topic, it was post #2. You started this entire train of thought.



So here you are, talking about UFC 1 Royce. What does this have to do with Royce being past it or not? But then you are going to attack me over this same train of thought?

You are an idiot.

Now, prove I moved the goal post.
Don't make anymore false claims. SHOW me.

Show me the question I asked you, then I refused to accept your correct answer, and then I supposedly reask this question with more difficult variables.

You're a liar

 

[TheNinja]

Matt Hughes could've toyed with Royce and subbed him. He should've done it for bragging rights.

The interesting thing is that he basically did submit Royce and we all saw it. Matt had him in that armbar and could have snapped Royce's arm b/c Royce wasn't going to tap no matter what. I think Matt later said he didn't want to break his arm so he just flattened him out and pounded him for the TKO instead.

 

[Myrddin Wild]

I felt like Royce was way past his prime in the Hughes fight. A guy who grew up in JJ giving his back like that is nothing more than just being old & not wanting to get hit in the face any more.