Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

***The UFC/MMA THREAD***


Charlie.Sheen

Recommended Posts

Well in hockey there is a clear cut winner. It's not based on judges decisions so you can't compare.

There was also a clear cut winner in the fight. That's the problem here. The look of impropriety is glaring.

Edited by Harbinger
Link to comment
Share on other sites

thats why the rounds are to short, the ufc sucks.

there should be no judges in a title match

if the rounds were like 10 mins. and they were fighting to the death basically everybody would know by now who the winner was, but NO. they have to have a re-match so ufc can make more money. its ungulate feces

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So because the Penguins only won by one goal in Game 7 means that the Wings get to hold onto the Cup for another year?

Not buying it.

It is the reality, but it is unfair.

By a goal in game SEVEN, you said it yourself. When it comes to rules, championships, fairness, and so on UFC is a joke compared to leagues like NHL.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So because the Penguins only won by one goal in Game 7 means that the Wings get to hold onto the Cup for another year?

Not buying it.

It is the reality, but it is unfair.

That's not what he meant, and you know it.

It's more if an F1 champ raced another doing 50mph, and did JUST enough to stay a couple of inches ahead or behind. Does the other guy deserve a TITLE without actually putting all he has into it? Machida won his title by fighting, not hanging back. This fight he didn't force the pace, but Shogun did not do what's required to win a title. Shogun does not deserve the title based on this fight, but Machida didn't win it either.

The entire fight was a bloody joke, and I hope they have a rematch soon, so we can enjoy both fighters going all out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's not what he meant, and you know it.

It's more if an F1 champ raced another doing 50mph, and did JUST enough to stay a couple of inches ahead or behind. Does the other guy deserve a TITLE without actually putting all he has into it? Machida won his title by fighting, not hanging back. This fight he didn't force the pace, but Shogun did not do what's required to win a title. Shogun does not deserve the title based on this fight, but Machida didn't win it either.

The entire fight was a bloody joke, and I hope they have a rematch soon, so we can enjoy both fighters going all out.

Actually he did what was required to win the title. You can not take other matches into consideration when judging a fight. You judge what is put in front of you. The title means nothing when you are judging a contest. The fight is all you are judging. Nothing more and nothing less. That's why this is such an injustice. This was Shogun winning in every conceivable way within the fight. Adding in it was for a belt, and that is why he didn't win is a joke. There is no benefit of the doubt positioning. This wasn't a draw and the champ gets to keep the belt. This was a win for Shogun and he was denied the belt.

This is like a guy sliding into first and getting there first. Then the first base ump says well since the first baser is a golden glover you're out.

Edited by Harbinger
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually he did what was required to win the title. You can not take other matches into consideration when judging a fight. You judge what is put in front of you. The title means nothing when you are judging a contest. The fight is all you are judging. Nothing more and nothing less. That's why this is such an injustice. This was Shogun winning in every conceivable way within the fight. Adding in it was for a belt and that is why he didn't win is a joke. There is no benefit of the doubt positioning. This wasn't a draw and the champ gets to keep the belt. This was a win for Shogun and he was denied the belt.

Logically, yes you're right. Still, the more I think about it, the happier I am with the decision. If the two fighters stood for 5 rounds, and Rua threw the only punch, would he deserve the title?

I don't know, I think this decision is going to benefit us, fans, in the end. Rematch will be much better, because neither fighter is happy with the way it went down (at least I don't think Machida is happy, unless he lacks all self respect).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Logically, yes you're right. Still, the more I think about it, the happier I am with the decision. If the two fighters stood for 5 rounds, and Rua threw the only punch, would he deserve the title?

I don't know, I think this decision is going to benefit us, fans, in the end. Rematch will be much better, because neither fighter is happy with the way it went down (at least I don't think Machida is happy, unless he lacks all self respect).

I think the decision is a farce and it leads to a lack of credibility. I am an outspoken hater of the UFC. I do not hide that at all. I'm a huge fan of MMA and I'm not afraid to say that the UFC at this moment is the best we have as product goes. But I don't think that crapty decisions are at all good for the sport.

It doesn't make me want to see a rematch. I really feel ripped off as a fan. There is no such thing as a moral victory. Either you win or you lose. At this moment in time. I feel like I lost. I feel like I lost a little more faith in the sport I love so much.

I'll ask you simply. If the canucks scored only one goal in a game 7 against the reigning penguins for the stanley cup finals would you say they don't deserve the title?

Edited by Harbinger
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the decision is a farce and it leads to a lack of credibility. I am an outspoken hater of the UFC. I do not hide that at all. I'm a huge fan of MMA and I'm not afraid to say that the UFC at this moment is the best we have as product goes. But I don't think that crapty decisions are at all good for the sport.

It doesn't make me want to see a rematch. I really feel ripped off as a fan. There is no such thing as a moral victory. Either you win or you lose. At this moment in time. I feel like I lost. I feel like I lost a little more faith in the sport I love so much.

I'll ask you simply. If the canucks scored only one goal in a game 7 against the penguins for the stanley cup finals would you say they don't deserve the title?

That question is entirely irrelevant and it's frustrating to see it brought up by someone like you.

I'll ask you simply, if the fighters danced a Polka dance for 25 minutes, and Rua threw one shot, would you say he deserves the title?

The fight itself did more to hurt the sport than the decision. When two tigers go face to face and you get a c0ck fight, that's not good for the sport. I think you're misplacing your anger.

Edited by Vlad the Impaler
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That question is entirely irrelevant and it's frustrating to see it brought up by someone like you.

I'll ask you simply, if the fighters danced a Polka dance for 25 minutes, and Rua threw one shot, would you say he deserves the title?

The fight itself did more to hurt the sport than the decision. When two tigers go face to face and you get a c0ck fight, that's not good for the sport. I think you're misplacing your anger.

I would say yes he deserves the win. The fight is to be looked at as nothing more than the fight. That's it. Who ever does more takes it. If by your definition only one fight is thrown and the the rest of the fight they do nothing. Then the guy who threw the punch wins. I don't think there is any logical argument that can say he shouldn't win.

As for you think the fight did more damage than the decision. I can not disagree with you more. I am talking about credibility for the sport. Not credibility for the promotion. I don't care about the UFC's credibility. I think they have very little as it is. This judgement just makes the sport look very bush league. I would be complaining about this judgement if it was any two fighters. It just happens it was for the title and it was in the ufc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would say yes he deserves the win. The fight is to be looked at as nothing more than the fight. That's it. Who ever does more takes it. If by your definition only one fight is thrown and the the rest of the fight they do nothing. Then the guy who threw the punch wins. I don't think there is any logical argument that can say he shouldn't win.

As for you think the fight did more damage than the decision. I can not disagree with you more. I am talking about credibility for the sport. Not credibility for the promotion. I don't care about the UFC's credibility. I think they have very little as it is. This judgement just makes the sport look very bush league. I would be complaining about this judgement if it was any two fighters. It just happens it was for the title and it was in the ufc.

I didn't ask if he should win, I asked if he deserves the title. My opinion is no, the title shouldn't go to the fighter who gives just a hair more than bare minimum, even if the champ does less than that.

You don't think a much anticipated fight between a champ and a someone of Rua's caliber being what it was doesn't damage the sport's credibility? Using your hockey example, would you feel the same if Detroit vs. Penguins ended up being more of a New Jersey vs. Minnesota snoozefest final? (The reason I disregard your example of the one goal is because one goes may have been all that could be attained by the team doing everything they could, the fight wasn't remotely similar.)

Edited by Vlad the Impaler
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I didn't ask if he should win, I asked if he deserves the title. My opinion is no, the title shouldn't go to the fighter who gives just a hair more than bare minimum, even if the champ does less than that.

You don't think a much anticipated fight between a champ and a someone of Rua's caliber being what it was doesn't damage the sport's credibility? Using your hockey example, would you feel the same if Detroit vs. Penguins ended up being more of a New Jersey vs. Minnesota snoozefest final? (The reason I disregard your example of the one goal is because one goes may have been all that could be attained by the team doing everything they could, the fight wasn't remotely similar.)

You're adding emotion into the judging. Emotion invokes impartiality. This is not about deserving or anything else. This is about judging impartially within the rules. Who did the most, and succeeded the most should have been the only deciding factor when declaring a winner. It really is as simple as that.

I think you are adding a factor that has no bearing on the fight. The abilities of the fighter and how they used them are not factors when judging. You can only judge what actually happens in the ring. On saturday night. No matter how boring you may feel the fight was. Shogun did more of everything he needed to do to win and they judged against him. They disregarded what actually happened in the ring, and made a decision that would seem to be either colluded or emotional. Neither of which should happen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're adding emotion into the judging. Emotion invokes impartiality. This is not about deserving or anything else. This is about judging impartially within the rules. Who did the most, and succeeded the most should have been the only deciding factor when declaring a winner. It really is as simple as that.

I think you are adding a factor that has no bearing on the fight. The abilities of the fighter and how they used them are not factors when judging. You can only judge what actually happens in the ring. On saturday night. No matter how boring you may feel the fight was. Shogun did more of everything he needed to do to win and they judged against him. They disregarded what actually happened in the ring, and made a decision that would seem to be either colluded or emotional. Neither of which should happen.

You're right, entirely fair judging would have seen Rua win. I said as much right after the fight.

It's true that now I'm adding intangibles that perhaps don't belong here. Regardless, I think you should be excited for the rematch, it's bound to be a good one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're right, entirely fair judging would have seen Rua win. I said as much right after the fight.

It's true that now I'm adding intangibles that perhaps don't belong here. Regardless, I think you should be excited for the rematch, it's bound to be a good one.

I hope so. I just don't know if it will be or not. I actually enjoyed this fight as it was. I like both Machida and Shogun. But I thoroughly enjoyed watching Machida's face as he couldn't find any answers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...