When GSP beat Hendricks :

Dbreiden83080 said:
2 division champ.. You can cry about it all you want, he came back and won that belt.. Sorry kid. Salt, it tastes like shit I am sure..



His legacy is that of a GOAT. This very website says he is the "Goat" Just check the poll at the top of the page.. Again sorry kid about that salt.. Tastes like shit..

https://forums.sherdog.com/threads/all-time-goat-poll.3916359/page-175



GSP openly talked about wanting stricter drug testing to which his boss Dana White both in public and in private told GSP to "Shut up".. Dana knew this was a larger scale undetected issue, that he did NOT want to deal with. And his biggest star brining it to light was going to cause Dana Head aches..



Yeah good ol 70% hamburger Hendricks with 300 excuses why he can't take a drug test outside of the NSAC ones.. Funny how he could not even make weight under USADA testing. Not even at 185.. GSP 185 made weight won the belt.. All under USADA.. Salt.. Yep.. Tastes like shit.
Click to expand...

His legacy is as the cherry picker. The guy who quit once his own division got tough.
The guy who tried to game drug testing in his favor.

He will be forgotten and ignored in 20 years or so. Nobody will care.

Look at Aldo, still going at it. If he gets another belt, he will be a MUCH greater all timer
than GSP. Not a picker, not a chooser. And truly tested by USADA.

There are maybe 10 guys ahead of GSP on the all time claims.

GSP was ok in his prime. His opponents were weak. That's all.


Go back to playing barbie doll with your GSP action figures.
Does your toy GSP come with a rigged PED test?
 
GSP Fighter Data
26-2 record, two belt UFC champion, longest championship WW reign with the most successful title defenses and he appears on most Top 5 GOAT lists. Not saying GSP is the GOAT, as there have been many great MMA fighters over the years, but those who claim GSP's legacy is lacking are simply salty and out of touch with tangible facts.
 
Blanqa Blanqua said:
their skin complexion is the same lol

but one got fucked up
Click to expand...

No, it isn't. "Complexion" isn't just color/pigmentation, dumbass.

And someone already posted photos of GSPs face when he utterly dominated the opposition, and it didn't look all that different.

You know why? Because one really doesn't tell us much about the other in any kind of a consistent fashion.

Which is why it's not considered as part of the judging criteria.
 
Everbest said:
His legacy is as the cherry picker. The guy who quit once his own division got tough.
The guy who tried to game drug testing in his favor.

He will be forgotten and ignored in 20 years or so. Nobody will care.

Look at Aldo, still going at it. If he gets another belt, he will be a MUCH greater all timer
than GSP. Not a picker, not a chooser. And truly tested by USADA.

There are maybe 10 guys ahead of GSP on the all time claims.

GSP was ok in his prime. His opponents were weak. That's all.


Go back to playing barbie doll with your GSP action figures.
Does your toy GSP come with a rigged PED test?
Click to expand...


Nobody else in the history of the UFC has ever fought as much Number 1 contenders as GSP, so my question is: wtf are you talking about with you cherry-picking stuff?

It's not as if he called McGregor from two weight class below like Anderson Silva...

Also, GSP's GOAT Claim is the best in the business
 
Last edited:
GSP 1,3,5

Would have loved round 1 being a 10-10. Draw would have been acceptable in my books.
 
GSP gonna come back and finish Conor and/or Khabib sometime in the next few years at 165.
 
gono btw said:
Not sure here... Are you kindah sayin´that Damage is "not considered as part of the judging criteria" ... ?
Click to expand...
No, I'm saying that superficial appearance isn't an accurate indication of damage, so superficial appearance isn't part of judging criterial.

Someone getting smacked flush with a hard shot does damage. It doesn't always leave huge marks. Sometimes relatively light shots will mark someone up. An abrasion, which would indicate a shot not landing cleanly, would leave a lot of markings vs. that flush shot, for example.

Let's flip that on it's head - Are you saying that a hard shot that breaks ribs, but doesn't show anything visually, should be counted less than a glancing shot at the corner of the eye that makes a small welt? If GSP's face marks up easily, is that really an accurate indication of damage?

Another example - Ali - Frazier III. Ali was a notorious head-hunter. Frazier was famously someone who brutally attacked the body. Who's face looked worse? But Ali was not only pissing blood, but they were finding tiny bits of his actual kidney tissue in his bloody urine. Would how the faces looked at the end be an accurate indication of damage taken?
 
Last edited:
fzoid4454 said:
No, I'm saying that superficial appearance isn't an accurate indication of damage, so superficial appearance isn't part of judging criterial.

Someone getting smacked flush with a hard shot does damage. It doesn't always leave huge marks. Sometimes relatively light shots will mark someone up. An abrasion, which would indicate a shot not landing cleanly, would leave a lot of markings vs. that flush shot, for example.

Let's flip that on it's head - Are you saying that a hard shot that breaks ribs, but doesn't show anything visually, should be counted less than a glancing shot at the corner of the eye that makes a small welt? If GSP's face marks up easily, is that really an accurate indication of damage?
Click to expand...
hmmm...yeahh... obviously you dont know much about Scorin´Systems, mate...

Visible Damage is & was a part of most Scorin´Systems (be it Pride ´s or UFC´s)...
 
gono btw said:
hmmm...yeahh... obviously you dont know much about Scorin´Systems, mate...

Visible Damage is & was a part of most Scorin´Systems (be it Pride ´s or UFC´s)...
Click to expand...

No. It can be used as a secondary way for judges to try and assess whether the blows had impact, but nowhere is the appearance considered as part of scoring criteria.
 
Everbest said:
His legacy is as the cherry picker. The guy who quit once his own division got tough.
The guy who tried to game drug testing in his favor.

He will be forgotten and ignored in 20 years or so. Nobody will care.

Look at Aldo, still going at it. If he gets another belt, he will be a MUCH greater all timer
than GSP. Not a picker, not a chooser. And truly tested by USADA.

There are maybe 10 guys ahead of GSP on the all time claims.

GSP was ok in his prime. His opponents were weak. That's all.


Go back to playing barbie doll with your GSP action figures.
Does your toy GSP come with a rigged PED test?
Click to expand...

You have just become my favorite poster. Very well put yet the gsp brigade will tear you apart because they have a zero tolerance policy for any dissention regarding Georges overrated mythical farce of a legacy. The guy beat the absolute worst competition out of any long standing champ this side of mm but at least mm finished some good fighters. Georges went life and death in a stand up war against Jake sheilds who is an amazing fighter and an all time great but he has never won a single round on the feet against any fighter except gsp. Georges tucked his tail between his legs after the pig rigg gift and high tailed it out of town before tyron, Robbie and others got to him. He didn't like guys that could wrestle and hit hard. Then he waited 4 years in hiding until a one eyed 40 year old cyclops won the mW title and won another belt to cement his shaky and terribly pedestrian legacy.
 
fzoid4454 said:
No. It can be used as a secondary way for judges to try and assess whether the blows had impact, but nowhere is the appearance considered as part of scoring criteria.
Click to expand...
Understand... You jus´dont know what you´re talkin´about...
Scorin´Systems are a complex topic, & you should really be loaded b4 givin´your opinion...

1. Effort to finish the fight by KO or submission
2. Damage
3. Standing combinations and ground control
4. Takedowns and defense
5. Aggressiveness
6. Weight differences (15 Kilos or more at heavyweight) (10K at middleweight)

2. Damage:
Any strike that does damage or accumulations of strikes that result in damage are awarded here.
Damage may be visible such as a cut or bruised leg, or it may be shown by an opponent’s reaction to a strike such as favoring a leg that has been kicked or turning away from a body shot. A near submission may also result in damage points.

ufc sco.jpg

Unified Rules of MMA – Judging Criteria
Amended July 2012
Part 1
1. Definitions
“Effective striking” is judged by determining the impact of legal strikes landed
by a contestant and the number of such legal strikes. Heavier strikes that have a
visible impact on the opponent will be given more weight than the number of
strikes landed. These assessments include causing an opponent to appear
stunned from a legal blow, causing the opponent to stagger, appearance of a cut
or bruise from a legal strike and causing the opponent to show pain. Cumulative
impact on a fighter will also be weighed. If neither fighter shows an advantage in
impact of strikes, the number of strikes will determine the most effective striker.
 
gono btw said:
Understand... You jus´dont know what you´re talkin´about...
Scorin´Systems are a complex topic, & you should really be loaded b4 givin´your opinion...

1. Effort to finish the fight by KO or submission
2. Damage
3. Standing combinations and ground control
4. Takedowns and defense
5. Aggressiveness
6. Weight differences (15 Kilos or more at heavyweight) (10K at middleweight)

2. Damage:
Any strike that does damage or accumulations of strikes that result in damage are awarded here.
Damage may be visible such as a cut or bruised leg, or it may be shown by an opponent’s reaction to a strike such as favoring a leg that has been kicked or turning away from a body shot. A near submission may also result in damage points.

View attachment 821695

Unified Rules of MMA – Judging Criteria
Amended July 2012
Part 1
1. Definitions
“Effective striking” is judged by determining the impact of legal strikes landed
by a contestant and the number of such legal strikes. Heavier strikes that have a
visible impact on the opponent will be given more weight than the number of
strikes landed. These assessments include causing an opponent to appear
stunned from a legal blow, causing the opponent to stagger, appearance of a cut
or bruise from a legal strike and causing the opponent to show pain. Cumulative
impact on a fighter will also be weighed. If neither fighter shows an advantage in
impact of strikes, the number of strikes will determine the most effective striker.
Click to expand...
Nothing in what you just posted refuted what I said in the post you are responding to.

Reading comprehension. Look into it.
 
fzoid4454 said:
Nothing in what you just posted refuted what I said in the post you are responding to.

Reading comprehension. Look into it.
Click to expand...
hmm.. nah...

This is your original narrative:

fzoid4454 said:
Which is why it's not considered as part of the judging criteria.
Click to expand...

I suggest you limit yourself to less complex topics, mate... Scorin´Systems are definitely not for you.
 
Mma23 said:
Tbh the mere fact that we debate who won that fight just highlights the greatness of GSP. GSP sustained that form throughout his career and was fighting a peak Hendricks on all the peds in the world at his very best which was short lived. That Hendricks would’ve kod any of the welterweights today. That peak was a small part of his career and GSP still had an extremely hard to call fight with him (imo he won). It was the hardest fight of his career. He was green in his early losses. Not everyone does that well in their hardest fights.

For reference khabib who’s regarded as one of the GOATs now I suppose had his equivalent of that fight against gleison tibeau. And he couldn’t secure a single takedown on him despite a lifetime of wrestling. GSP was simply on another level as an athlete and a person.

I agree that if Hendricks was natty it would be fair to consider it a win for both of them
Click to expand...
I believe the Hendricks of that night gives Khabib a really really tough time. His power negates Khabib's relentless pressure in order to get the takedown. His takedowns that have worked so easily on everyone else are nowhere near as easy on roided Hendricks.
 
fzoid4454 said:
No, it isn't. "Complexion" isn't just color/pigmentation, dumbass.

And someone already posted photos of GSPs face when he utterly dominated the opposition, and it didn't look all that different.

You know why? Because one really doesn't tell us much about the other in any kind of a consistent fashion.

Which is why it's not considered as part of the judging criteria.
Click to expand...



{<jordan}


lol, read below - my point stands truer than ever


4400F9A6-8AB4-4B1B-BDF7-9E99023E6AB2.jpeg

same complexion you flop

one just got FUCKED UP
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,281,018
Messages
58,335,884
Members
176,003
Latest member
HeneryH

Share this page

Back
Top