absolutely, no doubt about it. It is a winning formula but unfortunately it just isn't as entertaining as the promoters would like it to be. I think we are going to see un uptick in the amount of people "vacating" their belts so that someone exciting can have it. I believe a lot of the fights in UFC are rigged for ratings. Nobody really wants to watch the Daegestani version of MMA, they didn't really even like Khabib's fights unless he was against someone that WAS exciting.
Something funny just happened too. My browser's spell-checker keeps trying to change Daegestani to "decongestant"
Right. Agreed 💯. It's reminiscent of the story of "Demetrious Johnson". Dude was incredible, but was not a thrash talker or anybody that shit. He just fought and won. Reality, is the Dagestani fellas might need to add a bit of spice to their style if they still want to make the bag, because entertainment is what sells and promoters don't really care who wins, it's who bring the most bag.
The last part 😂😂
Keyboard understood the assignment
There has long been suspicions of UFC rigging the promotions and setting up fights that the stats don't support. It began with Chael Sonnen, who totally didn't deserve the championship fight with Anderson Silva but because he was an exciting fighter and really good on the microphone, they gave it to him anyway... twice. I often wonder if Silva was told to let him get a few strikes in to make it entertaining because both of those fights are legendary but if you know much about Silva, he didn't seem himself in either of them. Play for the cameras they say.
I remember Mighty Mouse very well. He was always overlooked as being one of the greatest fighters of all time because he is the size of my Aunt's 8 year old daughter. But he was something else at the right moments. Those really tiny guys normally fail to impress me (and most people) because even though they are very talented, you simply cannot put enough behind a punch or kick when you arms and legs are so tiny. Most of those fights did and still do go the distance. People don't like decision victories, even if the fight is fast-paced and close.
Does sound like you've been a big UFC fan for a long time. It's the only way, you'd know about the promotions, rigging and even the endless unearned title fights.
Right. A knockout sells more, and for me it's usually the fights that go the distance that I enjoy, but you could argue that the judges decisions can be really poor sometimes.
I would argue that the judges decisions are affected by things that don't really matter such as takedowns that dont' result in any damage. All fighters shoot for these because they know they count a lot on the scorecards and it is just really frustrating to see a fighter try to win on points using this strategy.
I think a takedown is a tough one to judge because a lot of fighters do it just because they know it scores points for them and not because they actually intend to do anything once they are down there. Takedown defense is of paramount importance for sure, but prevention of damage is ... importanter...
Fans tend to turn on fighters who takedown with no intention, and I suppose that is at least as bad or even worse than judges frowning on it. Many times I feel like takedowns are intentional time wasters as well and I was happy to see that officials are a lot more likely to stand the fighters back up if nothing is going on, on the ground.
I did see Usman v Buckley, that was a great war... everything about it was fantastic.
absolutely, no doubt about it. It is a winning formula but unfortunately it just isn't as entertaining as the promoters would like it to be. I think we are going to see un uptick in the amount of people "vacating" their belts so that someone exciting can have it. I believe a lot of the fights in UFC are rigged for ratings. Nobody really wants to watch the Daegestani version of MMA, they didn't really even like Khabib's fights unless he was against someone that WAS exciting.
Something funny just happened too. My browser's spell-checker keeps trying to change Daegestani to "decongestant"
Right. Agreed 💯. It's reminiscent of the story of "Demetrious Johnson". Dude was incredible, but was not a thrash talker or anybody that shit. He just fought and won. Reality, is the Dagestani fellas might need to add a bit of spice to their style if they still want to make the bag, because entertainment is what sells and promoters don't really care who wins, it's who bring the most bag.
The last part 😂😂
Keyboard understood the assignment
There has long been suspicions of UFC rigging the promotions and setting up fights that the stats don't support. It began with Chael Sonnen, who totally didn't deserve the championship fight with Anderson Silva but because he was an exciting fighter and really good on the microphone, they gave it to him anyway... twice. I often wonder if Silva was told to let him get a few strikes in to make it entertaining because both of those fights are legendary but if you know much about Silva, he didn't seem himself in either of them. Play for the cameras they say.
I remember Mighty Mouse very well. He was always overlooked as being one of the greatest fighters of all time because he is the size of my Aunt's 8 year old daughter. But he was something else at the right moments. Those really tiny guys normally fail to impress me (and most people) because even though they are very talented, you simply cannot put enough behind a punch or kick when you arms and legs are so tiny. Most of those fights did and still do go the distance. People don't like decision victories, even if the fight is fast-paced and close.
Does sound like you've been a big UFC fan for a long time. It's the only way, you'd know about the promotions, rigging and even the endless unearned title fights.
Right. A knockout sells more, and for me it's usually the fights that go the distance that I enjoy, but you could argue that the judges decisions can be really poor sometimes.
I would argue that the judges decisions are affected by things that don't really matter such as takedowns that dont' result in any damage. All fighters shoot for these because they know they count a lot on the scorecards and it is just really frustrating to see a fighter try to win on points using this strategy.
Fighting , agree, but I think takedowns should infact actually count for much. It takes a lot to take someone down don't you think?
Did you see the Usman vs Buckley match?
I think a takedown is a tough one to judge because a lot of fighters do it just because they know it scores points for them and not because they actually intend to do anything once they are down there. Takedown defense is of paramount importance for sure, but prevention of damage is ... importanter...
Fans tend to turn on fighters who takedown with no intention, and I suppose that is at least as bad or even worse than judges frowning on it. Many times I feel like takedowns are intentional time wasters as well and I was happy to see that officials are a lot more likely to stand the fighters back up if nothing is going on, on the ground.
I did see Usman v Buckley, that was a great war... everything about it was fantastic.