joshdfs Posted November 24, 2010 Report Share Posted November 24, 2010 So Rampage wins the Machida fight simply by taking the center of the ring and pressing the action, and members here go on and on about how Machida's elusive counter striking can't win fights. "Rampage took the center of the ring and was chasing Machida, which shows aggression and octagon control" Now let's take a look back a few months at BJ/Edgar I BJ spent most of the fight in the center of the ring. He struck with Edgar on a pretty even rate. Frankie was in and out, constantly circling and being evasive and picking his shots which were mostly counters... "Frankie had BJ chasing him and was counterstriking to his style, that shows octagon control.." Anyone else see the level of hypocrisy and the extent to which members will change their stances on issues to fit their own personal likes and dislkes? And for the record, I didn't personally agree with either decision, so go figure, I guess I have a bit of hypocrisy in me as well. AT least I admit it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig_M Posted November 24, 2010 Report Share Posted November 24, 2010 I hate the Octagon Control rule. Rampage didnt exactly control the octagon as Machida was choosing to move backwards and around the cage. Its not like Rampage was constantly backing him up Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jbrahams Posted November 24, 2010 Report Share Posted November 24, 2010 that's a good point Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dumbkidsthesedays Posted November 24, 2010 Report Share Posted November 24, 2010 Rampage had machida running backwards into the cage. BJ just couldn't hit frankie nor was he charging the way rampage was. Rampage was much more agressive the Bj was in his fight, while Machidas countering and footwork was much less effective then frankies was against BJ. Irrelevant comparison IMO I agreed with the rampage decision . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StephenColbert Posted November 24, 2010 Report Share Posted November 24, 2010 never thought about it.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crack_Addict Posted November 24, 2010 Report Share Posted November 24, 2010 How is making someone chase you octagon control? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
uaquin Posted November 24, 2010 Report Share Posted November 24, 2010 So Rampage wins the Machida fight simply by taking the center of the ring and pressing the action' date=' and members here go on and on about how Machida's elusive counter striking can't win fights. "Rampage took the center of the ring and was chasing Machida, which shows aggression and octagon control" Now let's take a look back a few months at BJ/Edgar I BJ spent most of the fight in the center of the ring. He struck with Edgar on a pretty even rate. Frankie was in and out, constantly circling and being evasive and picking his shots which were mostly counters... "Frankie had BJ chasing him and was counterstriking to his style, that shows octagon control.." Anyone else see the level of hypocrisy and the extent to which members will change their stances on issues to fit their own personal likes and dislkes? And for the record, I didn't personally agree with either decision, so go figure, I guess I have a bit of hypocrisy in me as well. AT least I admit it.[/quote'] The biggest difference I saw was Rampage was moving forward most of the fight, he was forcing Machida to circle. BJ just kinda stood there trying to counter punch while Frankie moved around him pressing the action. BJ, while in the middle of the ring was not the aggressor in that fight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doctor_Obviously Posted November 24, 2010 Report Share Posted November 24, 2010 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Melvinj0 Posted November 24, 2010 Report Share Posted November 24, 2010 I think it comes down to that fact that Machida had a 10-8 round, so even if Rampage won the first 2 rounds it at least shouldve been a draw. I hade Machida taking the first round though, so yes he was robbed Rampage still sucks though, and those saying "Hes Back" are idiots. The old rampage is not back, the old rampage would've ko'ed Machida in the first round. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fredshaulage Posted November 24, 2010 Report Share Posted November 24, 2010 I hate the Octagon Control rule. Rampage didnt exactly control the octagon as Machida was choosing to move backwards and around the cage. Its not like Rampage was constantly backing him up Lol. Choosing not to get KTFO if Page had connected with one of them haymakers! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skullbone Posted November 24, 2010 Report Share Posted November 24, 2010 Rampage had machida running backwards into the cage. BJ just couldn't hit frankie nor was he charging the way rampage was. Rampage was much more agressive the Bj was in his fight' date=' while Machidas countering and footwork was much less effective then frankies was against BJ. Irrelevant comparison IMO I agreed with the rampage decision .[/quote'] I agree with you. This falls into the boo-freakin-hoo category imo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zeusx18 Posted November 24, 2010 Report Share Posted November 24, 2010 Frankie was in and out landing jab after jab for 5 rounds. Machida was backpedaling and only landed around 5 strike in round 1 and 2. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riot_Act101 Posted November 24, 2010 Report Share Posted November 24, 2010 I hate the Octagon Control rule. Rampage didnt exactly control the octagon as Machida was choosing to move backwards and around the cage. Its not like Rampage was constantly backing him up THIS x 1000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frankyboyy Posted November 24, 2010 Report Share Posted November 24, 2010 on fight like those it is arguable and whoever the judge declare the winner will have 50% of the members of this forum behind him and 50% against. but in the end only 1 fighter has a w in his fights and gets closer to a shot Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.