What I did not Appreciate about Khamzat's Victory, and is it a problem?

[helltoupee]

Grammar and comprehension are two different things, bub. I'm going to have to take back that smart compliment now!

O really?

So you can understand grammar without comprehending it?

I should've never expected that you would. Back to streetbeefs you go.

 

[TheNewGame]

They will go downhill quickly if they follow this path of anti-fighting

Don't worry, not many fighters in the history of MMA have had or ever will have the skill and talent to do what Khamzat did against a top fighter like DDP.

 

[Only Here for Attachments]

O really?

So you can understand grammar without comprehending it?

I should've never expected that you would. Back to streetbeefs you go.

Grammar is the structure of language like parts of speech, clauses, syntax, punctuation, etc. Comprehension (specifically reading comprehension) is understanding what is being communicated and the implications therein. Two completely different things!

 

[Captain Herb]

I completely agree with you and I blame Joe Rogan.

That juicehead drug addicted primate is constantly harping on about letting fighters fight and forcing fighters to find their own ways out of control situations, even blatant wall and stall.

Yeah, Joe is the worst for that. The problem is that fighters can train anti-fighting and control as their go-to and fighters who want to fight will get tied up in situations where the fight has just stalled out and the rules seem to encourage that.

 

[Captain Herb]

Khamzat has 7 performance of the night in 9 fights. But ya, totally boring.

God you people are so butthurt over your guy losing.

I get it, your boy was absolutely and entirely embarrassed.

But sure, the entire world is crumbling because DDP had absolutely no answer to being manhandled for 25 minutes.

Suck it up goldfish brain -- some of us are actually here for the sport called MIXED martial arts. You want stand and bang? Go watch streetbeefs or some shit.

'just bleed bro' is literally the mma fan equivalent of teeny boppers going to justin bieber concerts

Sure, watch crap fights. Have fun

 

[Captain Herb]

Don't worry, not many fighters in the history of MMA have had or ever will have the skill and talent to do what Khamzat did against a top fighter like DDP.

Up and coming fighters saw what he did and now they will want to do it too. It's just a sign of things to come unless they tweak the rule set so it's not so biased toward control wrestlers.

 

[AL-Tappo McSnappo]

I watched this video from Luke Thomas, who I have previously avoided (because he is annoying), and he made what I thought was a very good point about the match: Khamzat's control was almost entirely for the sake of neutralizing DDP, and was not/could not have been with the intent to actually win the fight.

CAVEAT: I am differing to his expertise, because frankly this went way over my head when I was watching, and I simply do not have the experience to know whether what he said is accurate- as far as what is and is not possible for an athlete at that level.

The reason he says Khamzat's control was entirely for the sake of neutralizing DDP, and not for the sake of trying to win the fight is because the unified rules of MMA (judging criteria) emphasize that a fighter needs to "to advance to a position to finish the fight". Luke Thomas claims that mechanically Khamzat could not have been trying to "advance to a position to finish the fight" because it was mechanically impossible from the majority of his positions (chest to front, chest to back, knees on ground).

He also added some anecdotal evidence relating to corner directions, including Khamzat asking for permission to stand with DDP or attempt a submission- which is neither here nor there in my opinion.

[Those are the cliffs, Luke talks for nearly 20 mins, but that's all he actually says- other than "I'm right"]

Point being, I am one of those people who felt that his domination, and the style of his domination, was sufficient. Looking at the ruleset, and with more insight as to Luke's view on Khamzat's approach (remember my CAVEAT), I am now reconsidering my position.

It was cool to see the control, but in light of the unified rules, the casual fans, and the Just Bleed God hardcore fans, I wonder whether Khamzat's strategy is a bigger problem than I initially took it to be.

A fight is a necessarily risky undertaking. At a certain point, an excessively risk averse approach is not really fighting. Beyond simply standing fighters up, should there be more significant penalties for stalling a fight, and if so, perhaps Khamzat should not be the champion (in that manner). That is my question, notwithstanding my feeling that Khamzat is a MUCH better fighter than DDP, and that he should be champion.

Luke is such libtard, so annoying.

 

[Hassan Mouzine]

I watched this video from Luke Thomas, who I have previously avoided (because he is annoying), and he made what I thought was a very good point about the match: Khamzat's control was almost entirely for the sake of neutralizing DDP, and was not/could not have been with the intent to actually win the fight.

CAVEAT: I am differing to his expertise, because frankly this went way over my head when I was watching, and I simply do not have the experience to know whether what he said is accurate- as far as what is and is not possible for an athlete at that level.

The reason he says Khamzat's control was entirely for the sake of neutralizing DDP, and not for the sake of trying to win the fight is because the unified rules of MMA (judging criteria) emphasize that a fighter needs to "to advance to a position to finish the fight". Luke Thomas claims that mechanically Khamzat could not have been trying to "advance to a position to finish the fight" because it was mechanically impossible from the majority of his positions (chest to front, chest to back, knees on ground).

He also added some anecdotal evidence relating to corner directions, including Khamzat asking for permission to stand with DDP or attempt a submission- which is neither here nor there in my opinion.

[Those are the cliffs, Luke talks for nearly 20 mins, but that's all he actually says- other than "I'm right"]

Point being, I am one of those people who felt that his domination, and the style of his domination, was sufficient. Looking at the ruleset, and with more insight as to Luke's view on Khamzat's approach (remember my CAVEAT), I am now reconsidering my position.

It was cool to see the control, but in light of the unified rules, the casual fans, and the Just Bleed God hardcore fans, I wonder whether Khamzat's strategy is a bigger problem than I initially took it to be.

A fight is a necessarily risky undertaking. At a certain point, an excessively risk averse approach is not really fighting. Beyond simply standing fighters up, should there be more significant penalties for stalling a fight, and if so, perhaps Khamzat should not be the champion (in that manner). That is my question, notwithstanding my feeling that Khamzat is a MUCH better fighter than DDP, and that he should be champion.

i have not seen the video but to me it seems Luke is talking out of his ass.
chimaev had him multiple times in a CRUCIFIX. there are not many positions better to finish a fight. DDP held on for dear life. there were several submission attempts also, from different positions, including the crucific, also on ddp's back etc.
this my dear friend is just plain bullshit....it is looking for a weakness or something to critique. this was the same during khabibs wins.....he would get hit 1 time and analysts would act that he is vulnerable and has bad defense bla bla bla

khamzat was definately not sttalling/'just neutralizing ddp'...he advanced his positions every round either from side control to crucifix....or sometimes extra steps...from guard/to half guard/to side control/to crucifix. or DDP turned and gave him his back and khamzat would try to choke him from there. It is not khamzats fault that DDP was not willing to try to get up or go for damage/submissions himself. Doesnt mean Khamzat wasnt advancing his position or trying wo win....he was doing more than 'neutralizing ddp', but he is also not stupid to take unnecessary risks and give DDP a chance to get back in the fight.

Khamzat fought relentless but smart. Luke is a moron, always has been imo.

 

[Epsteins Guard]

You could argue they [DDP] had a stupid strategy, I'll give you that. But clearly by round 3 he knew the strategy wasn't working, and was trying to defend takedowns. He just didn't have the wrestling skill to do anything.

But again, Khamzat could have taken risks. He could have tried to finish the fight. And yes, that would have risked him gassing out and given him a higher chance to lose. That's how taking risks works. He made a choice to secure the belt. Fair enough. But you're bending over backwards to ALSO not make it his fault the fight was boring, and you're simply wrong.

Why is the onus on Khazmat to be "exciting" though? He's the challenger, he's easily beating the champion. The person who needs to be taking risks in that situation is the one who is getting absolutely dominated. If DDP is too afraid to scramble because he knows he'll get choked, that's on him. If he's too afraid to pull the trigger standing up because of the TD, that's on him. Be better. It's NOT the challenger's job to carry the champion because the champion isn't anywhere near his league. That's ridiculous.

It's funny that people keep saying Khazmat "didn't do enough." Well, DDP literally didn't do anything. At all. He literally just laid there and got molested hoping Khazmat would tire out from molesting him. That strategy only works on Conor.

 

[mattemate]

Dude, you OK?

 

[mattemate]

Excuse me Sir I will address your logical fallacy and you will hide. There is no fighter on the roster that would be allowed to do what Khamzat did in laying and holding an opponent down and pitter patter fight after fight. You would not receive heavy favor nor position even if winning. It would piss the fans off and you god damn know it. In denial? If there was an entire card of this UFC viewership would plummet. Basically Khamzat is being allowed due to being a cash cow to fight in a dirty style of neutralizing fights from occurring while landing weak shit. You say it’s awesome when Khamzat himself didn’t want to fight this way and was being directed by his corner to.

Meh
GSP beat Koscheck basically just with jabs.
Same shit. Can't deal with it, train harder.

 

[mattemate]

Whassup my Georgian wrestling loving brutha? Big fan of Chimaev's style and the way he got this done. Intriguing match up and Khamzat performed to expectations.

But on balance, it can't be ignored that UFC's 185 is short on former high level or even mid level (MMA) wrestlers. Chimaev is the Merab/Evloev/Islam/Arman/Belal/Ankalaev/Blaydes of his division. Of course it's MMA not wrestling so stance and set ups are different and Khamzat did all that to perfection to set up his shots.

DC and Chael talked about this on their podcast. Given their backgrounds and that both remain active in the wrestling community, I respect their takes on this. Both of them low key shit on Dricus' TD defense and I agree Dricus did a pretty crap job of (not) sprawling on Khamzat's double legs - though of course Khamzat set those up great. They also cite Khamzat's performance vs. Usman (struggled to take him down and became wary of gassing out from wasted shots) and Burns (hesitant to take him down due to respecting Gilbert's sub game).


marked at 3:30



So overall impressive as hell but I do think this was a favorable style match up for Chimaev and I'm not sure who at 185 challenges him in the near term. If he stays healthy I think he beats the brakes off Barralho and de Ridder.

A prime Chris Weidman or Jacare would be an interesting matchup for Khamzat. 85 is low on good wrestlers right now.

The most cringe thing you losers that are on these forums do is assign positions to people they never stated or addressed to make an argument. If you swear you know what is in other men’s head you don’t know you are engaging in gay behavior. If you think a fighter holding people down running out the clock is in any way quality entertainment does your gay acting self understand that he could hold him in yhat position with pitter patter until this moment. Your gay acting ass would still be watching huh? Admiring the work of holding a man down in position endlessly. A fucking gay ass clown calling people Just Bleed for finding that trash. Knowing damn well if any low level fighter did that wack shit he would be cut. You’re a piece of shit

Good grief dude, get a hold of yourself. I was wondering what someone like you is doing in my F12, then I saw the thread got moved. I avoid this part of Sherdog because of your type. Enjoy your incoming ban.

Lol but is fighting quality entertainment? What does make it entertaining for the audience? I'm sure many fighters don't find entertaining and I'm sure DDP wouldn't find it entertaining if Chimaev dropped hard elbows while he had him on a crucifix. Chimaev could have totally done that and hurt DDP badly there. He is more kind hearted than ppl realizes, I guess. I don't think Chimaev going for the hunt and hurting DDP badly when he could just win by showing he's better, matters. DDP said "I'm ready to kill my opponent, if the referee doesn't stop me, I'm not stopping". Chimaev was just laughing off — Dricus likely doesn't even know what is to kill someone. So instead of dropping 12-6 elbows while on crucifix, he beat DDP in a way that will sting even more — he showed there "I can just smash your face if I want but I'll just dominate you, because I don't need to make you lose years of your brain, we have families after all" ... Class dominance, showing dominance without wanting to hurt DDP even tho directly saying he could shut his lights out there...

Exactly. Chimaev I think is actually not a born fighter. He's a traumatized guy from a war zone.

Anyway, what you say here reminds me of something Rickson said a long time ago, that you don't have to be cruel, sadistic, or even angry in a fight.

Then I heard an interview with Rocky Marciano where he says he would actually hate the guy he's fighting a bit. Makes sense, he was trying to take the guy's head off with every shot. Khamzat could have opened up on DDP but chose not to. It's actually more impressive.


My buddy Frankie was a great amateur boxer, close to 200 fights. Used to live with Andre Ward, he's legit. He told me that there was one fight where the guy just clowned him the entire time, he never got off shit. Just couldn't get going. He said THAT was worse than getting knocked out. He had one fight where he was KOd in the first minute, but you can deal with that psychologically-- think of it as a lucky punch, or going out on your shield. But getting dissected for an entire fight was just so demoralizing. And THAT is what Khamzat just did.

Khamzat has 7 performance of the night in 9 fights. But ya, totally boring.

God you people are so butthurt over your guy losing.

I get it, your boy was absolutely and entirely embarrassed.

But sure, the entire world is crumbling because DDP had absolutely no answer to being manhandled for 25 minutes.

Suck it up goldfish brain -- some of us are actually here for the sport called MIXED martial arts. You want stand and bang? Go watch streetbeefs or some shit.

'just bleed bro' is literally the mma fan equivalent of teeny boppers going to justin bieber concerts

Dude is a total mouth breather. Great comment. It's mixed martial ARTS, not brutality, not gore, not snuff. We have to put up with these idiots. Ugh.

 

[Alpha_T83]

Why is the onus on Khazmat to be "exciting" though? He's the challenger, he's easily beating the champion. The person who needs to be taking risks in that situation is the one who is getting absolutely dominated. If DDP is too afraid to scramble because he knows he'll get choked, that's on him. If he's too afraid to pull the trigger standing up because of the TD, that's on him. Be better. It's NOT the challenger's job to carry the champion because the champion isn't anywhere near his league. That's ridiculous.

It's funny that people keep saying Khazmat "didn't do enough." Well, DDP literally didn't do anything. At all. He literally just laid there and got molested hoping Khazmat would tire out from molesting him. That strategy only works on Conor.

LOL no. Sorry but DDP shouldn't be forced to give up the fight and let Khamzat submit him just because he's losing.

This is the same thing with Anderson Silva vs Thales Leites and Demian Maia. Silva was dominating and playing around with them, refusing to try and finish them. There was nothing either of those opponents could do, and it was Silva's fault the fight was weird.

Khamzat dominated DDP and there was nothing DDP could do except give up, and that's not reasonable to expect him to give up. So Khamzat can take the free boring win, yes, but he also gets the blame for the boring fight. Once again, you are obviously a Khamzat fan and you're bending over backwards to make it not his fault. You have cognitive dissonance badly.

 

[Epsteins Guard]

LOL no. Sorry but DDP shouldn't be forced to give up the fight and let Khamzat submit him just because he's losing.

This is the same thing with Anderson Silva vs Thales Leites and Demian Maia. Silva was dominating and playing around with them, refusing to try and finish them. There was nothing either of those opponents could do, and it was Silva's fault the fight was weird.

Khamzat dominated DDP and there was nothing DDP could do except give up, and that's not reasonable to expect him to give up. So Khamzat can take the free boring win, yes, but he also gets the blame for the boring fight. Once again, you are obviously a Khamzat fan and you're bending over backwards to make it not his fault. You have cognitive dissonance badly.

This is one of the most straight up autistic takes I've seen on Sherdog in quite a while and it's hilarious that you're trying to pass off your flagrant retardation as me being a fanboy while you're begging for a participation trophy for your boy like some liberal cuckboy.

You've been spending too much time at the Special Olympics if you think there's any sport in the entire world where the winner has to ease up to give the loser a chance to win. If a team is up 2-1 in hockey, is it their obligation to pull their goalie so the score can be tied and make it more exciting? Should a winning football team just punt the ball everytime they get it until the other team catches up so it will be exciting? Should a MLB pitcher be forced to throw fastballs down the middle until the score is tied? This is literally the dumbest cuckboy logic in history. Absolute welfare mentality.

LOL no. Sorry but DDP shouldn't be forced to give up the fight and let Khamzat submit him just because he's losing.

This is the same thing with Anderson Silva vs Thales Leites and Demian Maia. Silva was dominating and playing around with them, refusing to try and finish them. There was nothing either of those opponents could do, and it was Silva's fault the fight was weird.

Not reasonable to expect him to give up? Nobody was asking him to give up, they were asking him to do something. Anything. Anything but lie there getting molested by a clearly superior fighter. But you and your welfare mentality think its reasonable to ask the person who is dominating the fight... to NOT try and win as easily so that your boy has a chance. Pathetic.



Also, I'm not sure why you're bringing up the Anderson Silva fights other than you're just trying to completely prove how fucking stupid you are.

Guess who NOBODY cares about? Thales Leites and Demian Maia.

Guess who's a legend? Anderson Silva.

That's because history cares about winners, not losers. I'm sure that's a new concept for you and your welfare mentality. Now go die your hair blue and run off for your welfare checks.

 

[Mohawk Banditó]

If you're right, then they definitely wrote the rules poorly. And if they did indeed meant that offensive control wrestling also scores no points (unless damage is assessed equal), then they should have specified that. Either way, I look at this as confusing, and a step back for the rules. It's basically back to judges scoring the fight how they feel like scoring it, each interpreting the rules differently.

The thing I liked about the old rules is that it made it clear: If your opponent lands 10 impactful punches on you, breaks your nose, and then you take him down and control him for 4+ minutes with minimal offense, zero damage, zero submission attempts, then you lose the round. Period. That's how it should be.

In that sense, control is just unrealized potential without damage, and only gets scored if everything else is equal. IMO that's the best way to score MMA, because it punishes boring control wrestling. It's also important to emphasize that this would not have changed Khamzat vs DDP, as Khamzat was so dominant that he shut DDP out from doing any damage.

The thing is, the language was hardly ever changed wholesale, it's always been modified with a different level of importance. So basically, look at it like a conversation trying to tell judges how to score fights that has been going on for years.

From the beginning, it was understood that effective striking/grappling, aggression, and octagon control are what judges scored points on.

Then judges were just scoring them altogether in a bucket, like Garcia beating Phan because his aggression was so high.

So it's rewritten with pretty much all the same language except noted specifically the levels of importance those things have, putting them in tiered order.

But then they went on to change a few key words to note that in the "effective striking/grappling" section, the 'impact' is only offensive impact, not that people should get points for defense because judges were doing that. So they change the word to "damage," and now we fast forward to dumbass Dominick Cruz going "That cut that happened in round 1 is still bleeding in round 2, so that means he lost this round 2, because that's still visual damage."

Their wording has always been shit. Check out their multiple changes to the grounded fighter rule in order to terribly describe what being "grounded" means in official terminology, despite the fact that pretty much every person who ever grapples knows what it should mean, but because there was such a struggle defining it in words, they made this mean grounded.

 

[Epsteins Guard]

You're a complete idiot. Hey I've got an idea!

Great rebuttal!

You want a participation award now?

I know you libtard little bitches need a little pat on that back every few mins so you dont get the anxiety and get all sad

 

[Captain Herb]

Great rebuttal!

You want a participation award now?

I know you libtard little bitches need a little pat on that back every few mins so you dont get the anxiety and get all sad

I can tell you have a lot of dates lined up so I'm going to let you go so you can keep smashing all that pussy.

 

[Epsteins Guard]

I can tell you have a lot of dates lined up so I'm going to let you go so you can keep smashing all that pussy.

"You all need to change the rules so we can win! MOM THEY WONT LET ME WIN, BAN THE BAD MAN."

lmaoo how Americans sound after losing all their belts to third worlders after we just spent years of watching NCAA wrestlers push people against a cage and bury their heads in their opponents nuts for 10 years.

 

[Epsteins Guard]

Wouldn't a leftist be happy that an oppressed Muslim beat an evil White colonizer?

To be honest, no idea, I'm not American and anyone who breaks down all of the issues of the world and splits them into "left" or "right" is a barely sentient braindead twat anyway. I will admit though, my people generally do pretty well at using that to divide you all while we reap the benefits though. Really Americans are basically just all farm animals for us anyway, so it doesn't really much matter.

 

[Captain Herb]

"You all need to change the rules so we can win! MOM THEY WONT LET ME WIN, BAN THE BAD MAN."

lmaoo how Americans sound after losing all their belts to third worlders after we just spent years of watching NCAA wrestlers push people against a cage and bury their heads in their opponents nuts for 10 years.


View attachment 1110043

Try getting laid. It's a game changer