Jump to content

VERY Interesting Article on the UFC


seveniron

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 125
  • Created
  • Last Reply
yeah im pretty sure this is the same tool that did an article about GSP which had so many holes in it i thought it was swiss cheese.

 

i read that GSP article awhile ago as well. i think the author was spot on. you can see that the general mma crowd is starting to agree based on the number of "GSP is boring" threads that have been popping up lately.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And yet no mention of Machida vs Shogun....

 

personally, i thought the Machida/Shogun fight was VERY close to a draw. in other words, i don't believe Shogun won convincingly enough to take the title. i also don't think Griffin or Edgar should have been handed the belt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i read that GSP article awhile ago as well. i think the author was spot on. you can see that the general mma crowd is starting to agree based on the number of "GSP is boring" threads that have been popping up lately.

 

I think what everyone meant to say is you have no logic of this sport.

 

1. This thread an EPIC fail

2. You have no legit argument

3. This is a UFC form and you're posting anti-UFC material (WOW, I'm not suprised)

 

Last but not least... GTFO of here with your hater garbage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

personally' date=' i thought the Machida/Shogun fight was VERY close to a draw. in other words, i don't believe Shogun won convincingly enough to take the title. i also don't think Griffin or Edgar should have been handed the belt.[/quote']

 

Machida won.

Griffin won.

Edgar won.

 

There are worse decisions.. such as Hamill vs Bisping, or Franklin vs Henderson.

Deal with it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i read that GSP article awhile ago as well. i think the author was spot on. you can see that the general mma crowd is starting to agree based on the number of "GSP is boring" threads that have been popping up lately.

 

i dont really have time to go into it but i did an entire thread on it and i pulled it apart easily,there was no basis in fact or any substance a bit like the pile of poo you are expecting everyone to read now!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

there are some interesting thoughts in this article: UFC: The Ultimate Fraud Championship

 

just wanted to share and see what you guys think..

 

whats interesting is the guy that wrote that AWFUL article, said UFC people are ALSO the people that will tell you that Dan Henderson is a has been. Sorry but i think Dana White got that right that Dan Henderson was not worth what he was asking for. (there is many decisions like Anderson Silva vs Damian Maia match up, i think Dana got very very wrong). But Seriously dont look at sites like this mate. At least present a MUCH better link that actually has a decent argument, so i can comment on it in an unbiased manner.

 

But a link that states that Forrest Griffin took a dive to make Anderson Silva look good???

Then how the HELL do you explain UFC 112 against Maia!?!?!? Did Anderson Silva take a dive in the 4th round when he slowed down? or was he just being a dancing monkey or does this guy in that link, think Dana TOLD Anderson Silva to dance like a monkey????

 

I personally think he was being a dancing Monkey on his own accord, but if YOU want to think Anderson Silva was told to act that way, then i guess that awful site mmacritic****es.com can have thier stupid opinions.

 

Seriously for your own mental intelligence, dont look at sites like that, because you MAY get fooled by them and then post a thread for us to have to read.......

 

oh sht, thats already happened, you HAVE posted a thread for us to have to read. Should of told us in advance or just simply posted a thread with a poll questioning the UFC as a fraud organisation without that mmacritic.com link.

 

Dont get me wrong i feel there are MANY bad scoring decisions made by judges in the UFC, that they have to remedy. And YES Dana White adn his cronies DO have to make business decisions on the fight cards and who fights who, but once they are in that octogon im pretty damn sure the fighters just try and bash each other until someone wins.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

personally' date=' i thought the Machida/Shogun fight was VERY close to a draw. in other words, i don't believe Shogun won convincingly enough to take the title. i also don't think Griffin or Edgar should have been handed the belt.[/quote']

News Alert!! when you win the fight in a championship fight you get the belt and it doesn't have to be in any special fashion.

 

you don't have any business writing mma articles

Link to comment
Share on other sites

and bisping evans

 

Been a while since I've seen that. Which event was that at?

Wouldn't mind watching it again. I've seen a lot of people say that Bisping should have won that fight.

 

Personally, the Ortiz/Evans decision bothered me.

People say that Evans should have lost that fight because of Ortiz' point deduction. But, IMO, if Tito wasn't grabbing the cage for dear life, he would have ended up on his back and likely lost the round.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Been a while since I've seen that. Which event was that at?

Wouldn't mind watching it again. I've seen a lot of people say that Bisping should have won that fight.

 

Personally' date=' the Ortiz/Evans decision bothered me.

People say that Evans should have lost that fight because of Ortiz' point deduction. But, IMO, if Tito wasn't grabbing the cage for dear life, he would have ended up on his back and likely lost the round.[/quote']

 

dont get me wrong BISPING lost against hammil hands down, but i really dont think evans won that fight he got a take down at the end of each round and just laid there.

UFC 78

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Apart from the rubbish mmacritic.com bs i personally think ,we the audience do need to see a judging panels way of scoring or at least some of the judges scoring options before a fight, because i dont understand it either because some of the wierd and bizarre decisions that have been made in the UFC.

 

Like Machida vs Rua, the judges argument was that Rua did NOT do enough the beat the champion. That to BEAT a champion quote"you must BEAT the champion" and the judges feel that RAua didnt do enough.

 

So how the hell did Edgar do enough to beat BJPenn then??????

He ran around for 5 rounds getting countered all night by BJPenn so why did Edgar do enough and Rua didnt do enough??? how does that even work. All Edgar did was do 2 takedowns that did zero damage to BJPenn.

 

I agree theres alot of wierd judging but to call the whole UFC complete frauds i think is a bit too much, unless there is solid evidence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Apart from the rubbish mmacritic.com bs i personally think ' date='we the audience do need to see a judging panels way of scoring or at least some of the judges scoring options before a fight, because i dont understand it either because some of the wierd and bizarre decisions that have been made in the UFC.

 

Like Machida vs Rua, the judges argument was that Rua did NOT do enough the beat the champion. That to BEAT a champion quote"you must BEAT the champion" and the judges feel that RAua didnt do enough.

 

So how the hell did Edgar do enough to beat BJPenn then??????

He ran around for 5 rounds getting countered all night by BJPenn so why did Edgar do enough and Rua didnt do enough??? how does that even work. [b']All Edgar did was do 2 takedowns that did zero damage to BJPenn.[/b]

 

I agree theres alot of wierd judging but to call the whole UFC complete frauds i think is a bit too much, unless there is solid evidence.

 

Are you on glue?

Edgar was beating on BJ for that entire fight!! I had Penn winning the first two rounds, but he started to fade in the third. To me, that was the closest round. Edgar easily won rounds 4 and 5.

 

Regarding Machida vs Shogun..

Another very close fight. While Shogun did an amazing job, I felt that Machida did enough to win the first three rounds.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry guys but I have to come to this guys defense it's hard to find credible evidence that the ufc is fixed when the fact is it's not. It would be like someone trying to convince you an apple is an orange. The guy can't possibly prove to you but can only throw garbage from his mouth stating so since an apple is an apple and not an orange. So my advice to this guy is when you are trying to look something up don't just click on any ole thing on the internet because there are so many non-credible sources. As about 73% of all articles you read on line are biased fallacies. See I made up a percentage but it's ok I did that because it sounds good or believable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm a bit confused....

 

The author describes how he scored the Griffin fight, yet goes on to tell us it was his first experiance watching an MMA fight? How does one score a fight when they have no experiance understanding the sport?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm a bit confused....

 

The author describes how he scored the Griffin fight' date=' yet goes on to tell us it was his first experiance watching an MMA fight? How does one score a fight when they have no experiance understanding the sport?[/quote']

 

i think he meant that it was his first experience watching a 'corrupt' fight in the ufc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i'm sure you guys are aware that there was/is corruption in boxing (as well as some other sports). which is why i don't get why you guys can't/won't accept that this is also happening in the ufc.

 

There is corruption in the game of monopoly too but do all people play monopoly dirty too? no. so why is it so hard for you to accept that some businesses and businessman keep it clean? The only corruption in the ufc would be steroids which sherk lost his belt because of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is corruption in the game of monopoly too but do all people play monopoly dirty too? no. so why is it so hard for you to accept that some businesses and businessman keep it clean? The only corruption in the ufc would be steroids which sherk lost his belt because of it.

 

do you, or do you not believe that there is (or has been) corruption in boxing?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

do you' date=' or do you not believe that there is (or has been) corruption in boxing?[/quote']

 

Yes but again that apples and oranges just because boxing is corrupt doesn't make track and field corrupt, football, basketball, soccer, nascar, curling, olympic wrestling, and mma corrupt. Just because elite xc did pay fighters to throw matches doesn't mean that the ufc is corrupt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

listen guys. just because you would like to believe that there isn't corruption in your beloved ufc organization, it doesn't mean it's true. i know a lot of you are very passionate about the ufc and mma in general and don't want to accept that something that you've spent so much time following and viewing could be corrupt.

 

and it's not like he's saying all the fights are setup...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes but again that apples and oranges just because boxing is corrupt doesn't make track and field corrupt' date=' football, basketball, soccer, nascar, curling, olympic wrestling, and mma corrupt. Just because elite xc did pay fighters to throw matches doesn't mean that the ufc is corrupt.[/quote']

 

yes, i understand that. but why is it so hard for you to believe that there could be corruption in the ufc? what makes them so special that they're impervious to it?

 

you're probably the type to believe anything until it's proven in the news or something that it isn't what you expected. sometimes you should use your own eyes and judge things for how you see them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

yes' date=' i understand that. but why is it so hard for you to believe that there could be corruption in the ufc? what makes them so special that they're impervious to it?

 

you're probably the type to believe anything until it's proven in the news or something that it isn't what you expected. sometimes you should use your own eyes and judge things for how you see them.[/quote']

 

I used my own eyes, and judged that Edgar defeated Penn.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

do you' date=' or do you not believe that there is (or has been) corruption in boxing?[/quote']

 

Just because something happens in one sport is not any sort of proof it happens in another.

 

That's a pretty week argument to try and use to prove this opinion piece is nothing but unsubstantiated garbage that boarders on libel. The fact you linked it here could very well open up a can of worms on the author, if it's you or some other guy.

 

Maybe you didn't stop to think about that, but by writing and publishing it on the internet with absolutely no proof and basically calling the UFC corrupt and fixing fights, well I hope the author has a good lawyer. Those are very serious charges when you factor in the sports book betting that goes on with MMA fights.

 

Times are a changing and "its just an internet blog" is no longer a defense against a libel charge.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

does your sig signify that you work for the Bell Centre?

 

HA!

Nice try, bud.

You start a thread with a link to a crappy article, probably to get people to visit your crappy site.

No self-respecting MMA fan would EVER link to that crap site. Especially with the garbage that he (you) writes.

 

You're grasping at straws by trying to compare sigs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

listen guys. just because you would like to believe that there isn't corruption in your beloved ufc organization' date=' it doesn't mean it's true. i know a lot of you are very passionate about the ufc and mma in general and don't want to accept that something that you've spent so much time following and viewing could be corrupt.

 

and it's not like he's saying all the fights are setup...[/quote']

 

I dont understand why you agree with the article? lol

It says clearly states in that article "The UFC fans are also the people that will tell you that Dan Henderson is Past it"

But the problem is , is Dana White was right about getting rid of Dan Henderson. So that there is a bs way of thinking in the article. Secondly how do you explain Anderson Silva running around at UFC 112? Do you actually think Dana White WANTS to discredit his own organistation by telling Anderson Silva to act that way and then throw it all in in the 4th round by pretending to be tired at UFC112? Sorry your article at mmacritic.com isnt even biased , its complete rubbish. its so false , its crazy. Ive never read another piece of garbage quite like it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

yes' date=' i understand that. but why is it so hard for you to believe that there could be corruption in the ufc? what makes them so special that they're impervious to it?

 

you're probably the type to believe anything until it's proven in the news or something that it isn't what you expected. sometimes you should use your own eyes and judge things for how you see them.[/quote']

 

There could be corruption in what your saying right now. How do I know someone isn't paying you to type what you are? The answer is I don't nor do I have proof of this. So I don't believe someone is, but if I had a fighter taking money on a fight for him to lose, or if a fighter in the ufc came out and publicly said I lost that fight because so and so paid me to throw the fight then. You would have to weigh everything about the fight his condition before going into the fight versus his opponent and then can make an assumption, but to completely make accusations with 0 proof is asanine. I have no proof strikeforce is fixed and am not posting that is fixed that any of them are fixed other than the one that went out of business because they were fixed which was elite xc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I used my own eyes' date=' and judged that Edgar defeated Penn.[/quote']

 

I wasnt taking anything away from Edgar winning that fight. What i was saying is that if the Judges judged Rua vs Machida the way they did and thier argument on the night that i remember on eof the commentators saying is that was something along the lines of "to be the champion , you must BEAT the champion" . So they gave the decision to Machida. So i thought well if thats the way judges judge the fights, then wouldnt it of been the same with Edgar vs BJPenn? When Rua really did look like he was pepperin gMAchida all night with leg kicks and Edgar was peppering BJPenn with Jabs. So why did the judges judge teh MAchida fight the way they did and judge the Edgar fight the way they did?

 

Because of 2 takedowns that did nothing to BJPenn? Or was it just the constant running around for 5 rounds jab peppering BJ? What was the thing that they judged on that gave Edgar the title but DIDNT give Rua the title?

 

lol if that makes any sense at all...................... :):)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There could be corruption in what your saying right now. How do I know someone isn't paying you to type what you are? The answer is I don't nor do I have proof of this. So I don't believe someone is' date=' but if I had a fighter taking money on a fight for him to lose, or if a fighter in the ufc came out and publicly said I lost that fight because so and so paid me to throw the fight then. You would have to weigh everything about the fight his condition before going into the fight versus his opponent and then can make an assumption, but to completely make accusations with 0 proof is asanine. I have no proof strikeforce is fixed and am not posting that is fixed that any of them are fixed other than the one that went out of business because they were fixed which was elite xc.[/quote']

 

Strikeforce probably paid Brett Rogers to take a dive!!

 

See what I did there? :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...