Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
brewster

Nik Lentz vs. Andre Winner

Recommended Posts

Yes' date=' a new most hated.....[/quote']

Only if he makes it to top ten status. For everyone that loves a winner, there seems to be two that hate them. In mma anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lentz, you suck.

 

Winner was ill, that is obvious.

 

Worst fight of the year contender, thanks to a guy that had no interest in actually fighting. Damn good at hugging though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

lentz really annnoyed me winning via dominant postion I really want judging criteria to change wrestlers abuse the system to grind out a win, do something with you dominant postion see chael sonnen for details instead of wrasssssssssling, I know its a aspect of mma, dont hate saying watch k1 or boxing I just think you should do something with ur postion ground and pound go for submissions just don't like the decison grinders maynards another one I hope edgar smashes him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If a fighter gets points for scoring takedowns then the other fighter should get the same points for each takedown they stuff.

For some reason a desperate fighter that pushes someone against the cage for 15 minutes because they can't do anything else wins the fight even though the other fighter landed the best shots by far.

It's largely a problem with fight matching too.....something the UFC need to consider more since this is supposed to be entertainment, not some academic study on the merits of various martial arts.

 

Winner wasn't robbed, but every fan that watched that garbage was robbed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lentz is a P U S S Y, and that is the only way he could "win" the fight. And too the guy who said for every fan of a winner there are two haters. Are you tyring to tell me you enjoyed that fight last night?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wasn't impressed with Lentz win. I thought Winner did more damage in the fight. But he was stuck on the cage stuffing wrestling take downs most of the fight. And Lentz completed a few of them winning the fight. Soft ground and pound by Lentz. The whole fight was a basically just a showcase of Winner's decent take down defense. Yet the judges count up the take downs and virtually nothing else. Lentz wins easily in a very unremarkable fight.

 

I guess it's just the nature of the beast in MMA. Stopping take downs is one of the most important things a striker will require in MMA. Oh sure there is a lot more but if you really want to be a striker in MMA, take down defense is crucial.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not Lentz fault Winner is a one dimensional joke of a fighter, nor is it his fault 80% of you morons picked the striker over the wrestler.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey Vendur, your stupid. Lentz is the boring, one dimensional fighter. Whenever they got into any type of striking battle, winner turned his chin. All Lentz could do was "the guida" if there wasn't a stupid loop hole in the judging, that would have been a win for Winner.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hey Vendur' date=' your stupid. Lentz is the boring, one dimensional fighter. Whenever they got into any type of striking battle, winner turned his chin. All Lentz could do was "the guida" if there wasn't a stupid loop hole in the judging, that would have been a win for Winner.[/quote']

 

i take offence to that

 

because clay guida actually knows how to fight & actually tries to inflict damage while controlling

 

i literally fast forwarded through the fight whenever lentz got his hands on winner because i knew NOTHING was going to happen.

 

lentz is ****ing boring. correct.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, ok. I'm not really a fan of Guida (that could change), but I will agree. Lentz is sooo boring compared to Guida. All I was sayin' is Guida is known to go out, grab you and wear you down, no very prettily, if thats even a word.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hey Vendur' date=' your stupid. Lentz is the boring, one dimensional fighter. Whenever they got into any type of striking battle, winner turned his chin. All Lentz could do was "the guida" if there wasn't a stupid loop hole in the judging, that would have been a win for Winner.[/quote']

 

Hey dumb ****, you might want to learn how to spell simple words like "you're" before you start calling people stupid. Letnz has 7 KOs and 7 Submissions, and he has finished 75% of his fights. He clearly can KO people and submit them, and he showed he's a better wrestler, too. There is no loophole. Winner did nothing. he landed one single punch in the first round that didn't even bother nik, and was raped like a little ***** holding on to the chage for dear life for the rest of the fight. Nik didn't have to use anythng but his wrestling to win that fight cause Winner sucks so much ****.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hey dumb ****' date=' you might want to learn how to spell simple words like "you're" before you start calling people stupid. Letnz has 7 KOs and 7 Submissions, and he has finished 75% of his fights. He clearly can KO people and submit them, and he showed he's a better wrestler, too. There is no loophole. Winner did nothing. he landed one single punch in the first round that didn't even bother nik, and was raped like a little ***** holding on to the chage for dear life for the rest of the fight. Nik didn't have to use anythng but his wrestling to win that fight cause Winner sucks so much ****.[/quote']

 

Shut up you clown, he had absolutely nothing for Winner in the stand up. Winner landed some good punches, kicks and at least one really hard knee to the face. Lentz could hardly take him down, most of the fight was him tryin to hold onto him. If judges knew what was up, and damage was worth more then octagon control, Winner would have won. He hosuld have gotten points for every take down he stuffed. You must be racist, everyone else on here knows that fight was a snoozer. Come on Lentz learn another skill besides hugging.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Shut up you clown' date=' he had absolutely nothing for Winner in the stand up. Winner landed some good punches, kicks and at least one really hard knee to the face. Lentz could hardly take him down, most of the fight was him tryin to hold onto him. If judges knew what was up, and damage was worth more then octagon control, Winner would have won. He hosuld have gotten points for every take down he stuffed. You must be racist, everyone else on here knows that fight was a snoozer. Come on Lentz learn another skill besides hugging.[/quote']

 

ROFLMAO. It's like play trivial persuit with a retard. The way scoring works is if the fight was mostly grappling, then grappling is weighted as number 1 priority. This was just such a fight. You have no idea what Lentz had for standup with Winner, cause Lentz didn't need any standup to beat a one-dimensional limey who should be hopping the first boat back to "no wrestler" land to gain his manhood back. Ya, and I'm racist, and so were all three judges. Especially the 30-27 guy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ROFLMAO. It's like play trivial persuit with a retard. The way scoring works is if the fight was mostly grappling' date=' then grappling is weighted as number 1 priority. This was just such a fight. You have no idea what Lentz had for standup with Winner, cause Lentz didn't need any standup to beat a one-dimensional limey who should be hopping the first boat back to "no wrestler" land to gain his manhood back. Ya, and I'm racist, and so were all three judges. Especially the 30-27 guy.[/quote']

 

Hey Vendur, FORGET YOU! Obviusly Lentz won, I don't agree with it. You are the only person on here defending Lentz. Wow, it was one of the Spike TV fights, come out and put on a show to interest some new fans. If I had never seen UFC before and that was the first fight I saw. Well, it would be the last fight I see.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hey Vendur' date=' F U C K YOU! ! Obviusly Lentz won, I don't agree with it. You are the only person on here defending Lentz. Wow, it was one of the Spike TV fights, come out and put on a show to interest some new fans. If I had never seen UFC before and that was the first fight I saw. Well, it would be the last fight I see.[/quote']

 

Well, if that would be your response, I can only hope for more lentz/winner fights to cull the retarded population of the UFC fan base.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Besides seeing someone you don't like get beat' date=' what did you find exciting about how he won that fight?[/quote']

 

I don't have anything against winner, and nothing about that fight was exciting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You had said you were racist lol. Whatever arguement over, Winner lost. How I would score a fight, is: If you get a takedown and do damage you get points, if you are stalling and the guy gets up, no points, I would also give out cards for fighters stalling. I think giving out cards could make MMA way more exciting. I mean isn't the point of a fight to beat the other guy up, last night I saw Winner doing more "damage" to Lentz then Lentz could do to him. No point on argueing about this though, that is the way fights are scored, maybe one day it will change...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You had said you were racist lol. Whatever arguement over' date=' Winner lost. How I would score a fight, is: If you get a takedown and do damage you get points, if you are stalling and the guy gets up, no points, I would also give out cards for fighters stalling. I think giving out cards could make MMA way more exciting. I mean isn't the point of a fight to beat the other guy up, last night I saw Winner doing more "damage" to Lentz then Lentz could do to him. No point on argueing about this though, that is the way fights are scored, maybe one day it will change...[/quote']

 

Ever watch Pride?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
lolwut?

 

Obviously you never watched pride. Pushing your **** up into a corner of the cage is no different than holding on to the ropes/corner, or leaning outside of the ropes when someone is trying to take you down. I always think its funny how many fake pride tards there are out there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Obviously you never watched pride. Pushing your **** up into a corner of the cage is no different than holding on to the ropes/corner' date=' or leaning outside of the ropes when someone is trying to take you down. I always think its funny how many fake pride tards there are out there.[/quote']

 

lol no stickin your **** into a cage is a hell of a lot different then grabbing the ropes with your hands, though I see what you're getting at, both make the take down much harder to complete and could be seen as stalling, though you're view on stalling would have to be pretty skewed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
lol no stickin your **** into a cage is a hell of a lot different then grabbing the ropes with your hands' date=' though I see what you're getting at, both make the take down much harder to complete and could be seen as stalling, though you're view on stalling would have to be pretty skewed.[/quote']

 

That's how it worked in pride, dude. Winner would have got penalized for stalling.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That's how it worked in pride' date=' dude. Winner would have got penalized for stalling.[/quote']

 

I know, but it's hard to say that he would be carded, I mean I guess if we assume that Pride rules were adapted without any changes to a cage, Winner could have very well been carded.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
lol no stickin your **** into a cage is a hell of a lot different then grabbing the ropes with your hands' date=' though I see what you're getting at, both make the take down much harder to complete and could be seen as stalling, though you're view on stalling would have to be pretty skewed.[/quote']

 

Man, just no! You do not see what he is saying, take that back immediately! Winner in no means was stalling, anyone who thinks that, I think is out of their mind! Winner was trying to knock him out, Lentz wanted to lie down on top of him. You don't seem like a sensable person to me Vendor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Vendur, either you are a troll or you have a tragic hard on for wrestling. If the latter then fine, go watch wrestling and good luck to you.

 

This is supposed to be MMA, and to exist it must be entertaining otherwise no sold out shows and very few PPV. Lentz had nothing that could hurt Winner so he just held on for dear life.

Lentz's finishes in MMA have come against fighters nobody has heard of, so don't get too excited about that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Vendur' date=' either you are a troll or you have a tragic hard on for wrestling. If the latter then fine, go watch wrestling and good luck to you.

 

This is supposed to be MMA, and to exist it must be entertaining otherwise no sold out shows and very few PPV. Lentz had nothing that could hurt Winner so he just held on for dear life.

Lentz's finishes in MMA have come against fighters nobody has heard of, so don't get too excited about that.[/quote']

 

Lentz had a hooks-in rear naked choke in the final moments of the fight, so I don't know wtf you are talking about 10-15 more seconds and that fight would have ended in a tapout or a TKO. So clearly you don't know wtf you are talking about. Lentz tired Winner out and finally got the fulll controlled takedown-- then he fullmounted him TWICE and sunk in the rearnaked. He completely dominated him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lentz had a hooks-in rear naked choke in the final moments of the fight' date=' so I don't know wtf you are talking about 10-15 more seconds and that fight would have ended in a tapout or a TKO. So clearly you don't know wtf you are talking about. Lentz tired Winner out and finally got the fulll controlled takedown-- then he fullmounted him TWICE and sunk in the rearnaked. He completely dominated him.[/quote']

 

Getting the hooks in doesn't mean that a fight is about to end. A rear naked is never locked in until the aggressor manages to get his arm under his opponents chin and onto the bicep. That's the tricky part. Getting the hooks in will immobilise your opponent for a while, but it doesn't mean the end of the fight. Think about the Dunham vs Griffin fight at UFC 115. Dunham had Griffin's back for most of the fight, and had both hooks in on numerous occasions, but was unable to get his arm across the neck due to Griffin's strength, chin control and wrist control. And with Dunham, we're talking about a top level jujitsu artist.

 

I also disagree with your idea that Lentz dominated the fight. The way I see it, he spent two rounds struggling for a takedown, and then one round in which he was able to dominate. I'm not disagreeing with the decision, because his relentless attempts to take Winner down meant that Winner was unable to really mount his own offence, but to say that a fighter who was unable to adequately execute his game plan until the 3rd round "dominated" the fight is untrue in my opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
. I'm not disagreeing with the decision' date=' because his relentless attempts to take Winner down meant that Winner was unable to really mount his own offence, but to say that a fighter who was unable to adequately execute his game plan until the 3rd round "dominated" the fight is untrue in my opinion.[/quote']

 

Ya, but you don't know if his plan all along was just to tire out Winner and then finish him the third. We only have one round were anything significant happened, and it was total domination by Lentz , with Winner flopping around like a fish out of water fighting for survival.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ya' date=' but you don't know if his plan all along was just to tire out Winner and then finish him the third. We only have one round were anything significant happened, and it was total domination by Lentz , with Winner flopping around like a fish out of water fighting for survival.[/quote']

 

I think it's fairly unlikely that Lentz's gameplan was to grab onto Winner's and pretend to be trying to take him down for the first two rounds while he wasted energy defending it. I think it's far more likely that his plan was just to take Winner down and hold him down for three rounds, but he was unable to do so until the third. Of course we've seen guys utilise Greco Roman wrestling against the fence (Randy Couture being a prime example), but that doesn't involve holding on to your opponents legs and trying to put them off balance. Lentz himself expelled far more energy in the first two rounds than he would have if he'd got Winner to the ground or even if he'd gone Greco Roman and deliberately stalled Winner against the fence.

 

And I still disagree that Lentz ever really mounted a serious attempt to finish the fight. You pointed out he had mount and back control with the hooks in, but both of those positions were mostly likely obtained because Lentz knew he had to stay busy to stop being stood up, and was looking to get a position where Winner would be completely unable to get to his feet. Lentz's gameplan looked to me to be all about controlling Winner for 3 rounds and getting a decision. I saw nothing to make me believe that a finish was in the game plan.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't care wtf your ignorant **** thinks. Full mount and hooks in rear naked chokes all usually mean a finished fight about half the times they are applied. It's a lot easier to hold a guy in side mount than it is full mount, too, and much safer, but you can't really finish very essily in that psotition. Lentz could have went to side mount instead of full, but he didn't. He also could have went in side mount when he went for the rear naked, too, and again he didn't. Cause he was trying to finish the fight, not lock up a decision. you just don't know jack **** about MMA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't care wtf your ignorant **** thinks. Full mount and hooks in rear naked chokes all usually mean a finished fight about half the times they are applied. It's a lot easier to hold a guy in half mount than it is full mount' date=' too, and much safer, but you can't really finish very eassily in that psotition. Lentz could have went to side mount instead of full, but he didn't. He also could have went in side mount when he went for the rear naked, too, [b']and again he didn't[/b]. Cause he was trying to finish the fight, not lock up a decision. you just don't know jack **** about MMA.

 

You keep telling me I don't know anything about MMA. I don't know if it's giving you some sense of comfort or something but you're the one comparing Gray Maynard to Rampage Jackson, so whatever.

 

First off, it is not easier to hold a guy down in half guard then it is in full mount. Some guys prefer to remain in half guard because being able to grip onto the leg means that it's safer to posture up, but in general it's a far riskier position to stay in, because a hip transition from half guard to full guard isn't awfully hard to pull off and from there the guy on the bottom has control of your posture and a far better chance of getting back to feet.

 

The mount has been known as the holy grail position of MMA because of the control that the aggressor has over his opponent. From there, there is a low risk of the opponent escaping due to the immobilisation of the legs, as well as multiple submission opportunities such as the arm triangle, the americana or the armbar. Also it's impossible for the fighter on the bottom to defend strikes from all angles, so a TKO is easily possible, especially if the opponent is worn out. But like I said, the mount is COMPLETELY about control. How many fights do you see where the ref stops the contest because one of the fighters is in mount? Royce Gracie in UFC 1? That's about it. The aggressor has a number of opportunities available to him to finish the fight. So, if Lentz was trying so hard to finish the fight, then why did he stay in the down position with his arm wrapped around Winner's head to prevent any escape while landing pattycake punches to the body in order to avoid being stood up? That doesn't sound like a guy trying to finish a fight? That sounds like a guy trying to control his way to a decision.

 

Also, you need to drop this belief that just because Lentz had back control with hooks, that somehow meant he was seconds away from finishing the fight. In a control sense, a back mount with hooks is even more favourable than mount because the defending fighter is unable to roll, and runs the risk of being flattened out if he attempts any drastic transition. Lentz didn't make a serious attempt at getting the rear naked. He just kept the hooks in and waited for the horn the sound. Again, this transition was all about control, as was Lentz's entire game plan. He did nothing in that fight to convince anyone (aside from yourself) that he had any intention of finishing Winner off.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We're all wrong, Vendur is a genius and MMA savant, and should be the new colour commentator for the UFC.

 

Lentz is the most entertaining fighter out there, he's finished all the best LW in the world on his way to a title shot very soon. I think a Lentz v Gray Maynard fight should happen before Maynard gets to take on Edgar. As it stands the jury is out on who most deserves the shot at the LW belt.

 

Anyone knwo when the best of Nick Lentz DVD is out?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...