Jump to content
Check out the Spin Axis Podcast! ×
IGNORED

The UFC/MMA/Etc. Thread


Note: This thread is 3814 days old. We appreciate that you found this thread instead of starting a new one, but if you plan to post here please make sure it's still relevant. If not, please start a new topic. Thank you!

Recommended Posts

Posted

Silva is actually considering a move down to the welterweight division since he doesn't see any "big" fights for him at middle weight and he doesn't want to fight JBJ are light heavyweight.

Originally Posted by clubchamp

I like Hendo a lot and I really hope he wins but he will have to land the H Bomb in the first 3 rounds or he's getting submitted. I think if what Saores said is true it sounds like Silva wants only big pay fights so I'd assume that would be a sign that Silva has plans to retire in the next few years.

Joe Paradiso

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • Moderator
Posted
Originally Posted by newtogolf

Silva is actually considering a move down to the welterweight division since he doesn't see any "big" fights for him at middle weight and he doesn't want to fight JBJ are light heavyweight.

I could see that being an option.  He makes the cut to 185 very easily and GSP cuts from almost the same weight Anderson does.

I guess that's one way to force the fight with GSP since GSP is obviously scared to fight Anderson. Now that Anderson has fought Sonnen twice, he has no reservations on fighting the wrestling style of GSP.  Like I said before, Anderson would destroy GSP UNLESS....UNLESS, this fight takes too much longer to put together.

Here is the thing.  If Anderson goes to WW to fight GSP, it's a win win for him.  And not so big of a deal for GSP.  Anderson cutting the weight would prove that he wants to challenge GSP.  If he were to lose, then the weight cut would be a huge factor.  If he were to win, he becomes no doubt the best P4P (already is in my eyes). Add his age to that and the fact that he is reaching the end of his career and that just makes it that much better.

If GSP wins...not so much a big deal any more because Anderson is older and already peaked out while GSP is just reaching his peak.  And the fact that Anderson had to cut weight to come to him.  If he loses, then that hurts his move to MW, loses him the title, and kills the best P4P talk.

Anderson is for sure the benefactor if he moves regardless of the outcome. Just my opinion obviously.  And I am a HUGE GSP fan as well.  The guy has a great attitude and work ethic.  This would be the biggest fight in the UFC in a LONG time

Bryan A
"Your desire to change must be greater than your desire to stay the same"

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted

I agree, GSP vs Silva would be a superfight - probably a bigger PPV draw than the Brock Lesner fights.  GSP is a good striker, he just likes to get out of fights without too much damage.  Silva has a huge reach advantage which would put GSP in harms way of knees and elbows any time he went for a take down.  I hope it happens.

Originally Posted by TN94z

I could see that being an option.  He makes the cut to 185 very easily and GSP cuts from almost the same weight Anderson does.

I guess that's one way to force the fight with GSP since GSP is obviously scared to fight Anderson. Now that Anderson has fought Sonnen twice, he has no reservations on fighting the wrestling style of GSP.  Like I said before, Anderson would destroy GSP UNLESS....UNLESS, this fight takes too much longer to put together.

Here is the thing.  If Anderson goes to WW to fight GSP, it's a win win for him.  And not so big of a deal for GSP.  Anderson cutting the weight would prove that he wants to challenge GSP.  If he were to lose, then the weight cut would be a huge factor.  If he were to win, he becomes no doubt the best P4P (already is in my eyes). Add his age to that and the fact that he is reaching the end of his career and that just makes it that much better.

If GSP wins...not so much a big deal any more because Anderson is older and already peaked out while GSP is just reaching his peak.  And the fact that Anderson had to cut weight to come to him.  If he loses, then that hurts his move to MW, loses him the title, and kills the best P4P talk.

Anderson is for sure the benefactor if he moves regardless of the outcome. Just my opinion obviously.  And I am a HUGE GSP fan as well.  The guy has a great attitude and work ethic.  This would be the biggest fight in the UFC in a LONG time

Joe Paradiso

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • Moderator
Posted
Originally Posted by newtogolf

I agree, GSP vs Silva would be a superfight - probably a bigger PPV draw than the Brock Lesner fights.  GSP is a good striker, he just likes to get out of fights without too much damage.  Silva has a huge reach advantage which would put GSP in harms way of knees and elbows any time he went for a take down.  I hope it happens.


You know, I'm glad you said that about GSP.  He has all the tools to be so much better IMO (I know, where do I get off saying that while not being a UFC fighter).  I really believe that Matt Serra hurt GSP.  Every since, he just fights not to lose.  If he would just be more aggressive, he would have a ton more fans.  He seems to be working on it as he talks about working on his KO power and what not.  I hope he starts heading back to the aggressive fight finishing ways of his past.  He is very patient, so he may just be content with waiting until everything comes together.  IMO, he seems to be building himself into a MW fighter which is great.  He has yet to reach his peak,  Anderson fights to now attain too much damage too, but he is still 10 times more aggressive than GSP.

But yeah...that would be a rare PPV buy for me!

Bryan A
"Your desire to change must be greater than your desire to stay the same"

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • 3 weeks later...
Posted

Looks like they canceled UFC 151. Henderson has a partial ligament tear in his knee, and the only person willing to fight John Jones on short notice is Chael Sonnen. Greg Jackson has advised Jones not to fight Sonnen, and Dana had to cancel the entire show... booo!

Sincerely, Jim


Posted

Bad move on Jones part imo.  While Sonnen doesn't deserve a title shot you don't tell Dana no, and force him to cancel an entire event.  At some point Jones will need a favor from Dana and he's going to be denied.  Sonnen / Jones would have generated plenty of PPV buys and allowed White to keep the event scheduled.  With Henderson out, not sure who Jones will face next since he's already stated he's not interested in Machida, Sonnen or Evans again and no one else is deserving.

Joe Paradiso

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted
Originally Posted by newtogolf

Bad move on Jones part imo.  While Sonnen doesn't deserve a title shot you don't tell Dana no, and force him to cancel an entire event.  At some point Jones will need a favor from Dana and he's going to be denied.  Sonnen / Jones would have generated plenty of PPV buys and allowed White to keep the event scheduled.  With Henderson out, not sure who Jones will face next since he's already stated he's not interested in Machida, Sonnen or Evans again and no one else is deserving.

I wouldn't fight Sonnen, he's to toughest guy you don't get credit for beating. Sonnen has a good chance to grind you down and get the victory, but if you beat him its like so what, you beat Chael. Your right though Dana is not to happy. He seems to hotter with Greg Jackson other then Bones Jones. I think they've already agreed on the next fight though, Jones vs Machida Sep, 22.

Sincerely, Jim


Posted
Originally Posted by Jimbo Slice

I wouldn't fight Sonnen, he's to toughest guy you don't get credit for beating. Sonnen has a good chance to grind you down and get the victory, but if you beat him its like so what, you beat Chael. Your right though Dana is not to happy. He seems to hotter with Greg Jackson other then Bones Jones. I think they've already agreed on the next fight though, Jones vs Machida Sep, 22.

I agree Sonnen is tough and could grind Jones down but I would still probably have said Jones would win that fight. Unfortunately I now think very little of Jones and I've always hated Greg Jackson mainly because his fighters are only good for a nap. Dana has said multiple times that he hates how Jackson's fighters fight for rounds not wins but telling Jones not to take the fight just put it over the top. Machida Vs Jones is on for the 22nd but Dana pretty much made it clear if Jones turned down that fight he was gone and he also said that is was not in Jones best interest to turn down the Sonnen fight. Dana also said in the press conference that Jones is not liked by a lot of the other fighters and now he just cost some guys a pay check. I'm guessing IF Jones loses to Machida it will be a LONG time till he gets another chance to get the belt back.

Driver: i15, 3 wood: G10, Hybrid: Nickent 4dx, Irons: Ping s57, Wedges: Mizuno MPT 52, 56, 60, Putter: XG #9 

Posted

One thing I really disappointed about is how Dana decided to openly blame Jones for the show's cancellation.

We all know that Dana likes to swear. Fine, no bigs. But this just shows the worst lack of professionalism on Dana's part.

He's the one responsible for making the show happen, not Jones. It was definitely a bitch move by Jones, but he is entitled to it.

Jones came out looking like a wimp, but Dana came out looking like a spoiled little brat. Plus, he most likely lost the trust of his fighters. Now they all know Dana does not have their back.


Posted
Originally Posted by Kapanda

One thing I really disappointed about is how Dana decided to openly blame Jones for the show's cancellation.

We all know that Dana likes to swear. Fine, no bigs. But this just shows the worst lack of professionalism on Dana's part.

He's the one responsible for making the show happen, not Jones. It was definitely a bitch move by Jones, but he is entitled to it.

Jones came out looking like a wimp, but Dana came out looking like a spoiled little brat. Plus, he most likely lost the trust of his fighters. Now they all know Dana does not have their back.

Dana was relying too much on the title fight and should have had a decent co main event for this card. I don't really have a problem with Dana pinning it on Jones since he did find a suitable replacement that would have drew a lot of ppv buys. Jones turning that down is weak and he stands to lose some money because he won't get near the ppv buys with Belfort so his percentage will be a lot lower. I will say I think Jackson told Jones to say no to stick it Dana for all the negative things Dana has said about Jackson.

Driver: i15, 3 wood: G10, Hybrid: Nickent 4dx, Irons: Ping s57, Wedges: Mizuno MPT 52, 56, 60, Putter: XG #9 

Posted
Originally Posted by clubchamp

Dana was relying too much on the title fight and should have had a decent co main event for this card. I don't really have a problem with Dana pinning it on Jones since he did find a suitable replacement that would have drew a lot of ppv buys. Jones turning that down is weak and he stands to lose some money because he won't get near the ppv buys with Belfort so his percentage will be a lot lower. I will say I think Jackson told Jones to say no to stick it Dana for all the negative things Dana has said about Jackson.

Even that being the case, Jones is not responsible for anything but his own performance in a fight. Making sure events happen is Dana's responsibility. If Dana wasn't able to get everyone on board, that's Dana's problem.

And I don't think men of business would be so petty as to reject a fight and cut off their own nose just to spite someone else.


Posted
Originally Posted by Kapanda

Even that being the case, Jones is not responsible for anything but his own performance in a fight. Making sure events happen is Dana's responsibility. If Dana wasn't able to get everyone on board, that's Dana's problem.

And I don't think men of business would be so petty as to reject a fight and cut off their own nose just to spite someone else.

Did Dana not put the event together? Did he not find a suitable replacement on short notice? Dana did his job just fine and Jones is a fighter that didn't want to fight so I'd say Jones would be responsible. Maybe Jackson isn't being petty but why would you tell Jones not to fight Chael oh wait that's right Chael is too dangerous to take on short notice. It's probably Chaels one punch KO power oh wait he hasn't knocked anyone out in a long time, maybe it's Chaels size and reach advantage no that certainly isn't it, I got it Chaels superior wrestling which could be a factor but Jones is perfect on TDD and is a pretty solid wrestler himself. I like Chael but there was no reason for Jones to turn down that fight other than he is just being difficult.

Driver: i15, 3 wood: G10, Hybrid: Nickent 4dx, Irons: Ping s57, Wedges: Mizuno MPT 52, 56, 60, Putter: XG #9 

Posted

Maybe there should be a change in the contracts. The possible replacement for a title fight should be determined when the contract is written. The possible replacement should also train as if he is going to fight. You would have to agree on the possible replacement before you even signed the contract.

Sincerely, Jim


Posted
Originally Posted by clubchamp

Did Dana not put the event together? Did he not find a suitable replacement on short notice? Dana did his job just fine and Jones is a fighter that didn't want to fight so I'd say Jones would be responsible. Maybe Jackson isn't being petty but why would you tell Jones not to fight Chael oh wait that's right Chael is too dangerous to take on short notice. It's probably Chaels one punch KO power oh wait he hasn't knocked anyone out in a long time, maybe it's Chaels size and reach advantage no that certainly isn't it, I got it Chaels superior wrestling which could be a factor but Jones is perfect on TDD and is a pretty solid wrestler himself. I like Chael but there was no reason for Jones to turn down that fight other than he is just being difficult.

Dana obviously did NOT put the event together... he cancelled it! I know what you're trying to say, but it doesn't hold. Putting the event together inherently means getting fighters willing to fight on board. He did not do that. Jones played his part, but ultimately Dana is responsible for it.

Don't take this as me saying that Jones decision was the best one. He shouldn't be blamed for what he is not responsible for, however. One tangible consequence of Dana's action is that his fighters (even if just Jones) will trust him less. On the other hand, I can't see what was particularly positive about his decision.


Posted
Originally Posted by Jimbo Slice

Maybe there should be a change in the contracts. The possible replacement for a title fight should be determined when the contract is written. The possible replacement should also train as if he is going to fight. You would have to agree on the possible replacement before you even signed the contract.

They tend to always be training anyway, but in different cycles. It kind of messes things up unnecessarily if you're going to break your cycle just on the off chance that you are called to fight.


Posted
Originally Posted by Kapanda

They tend to always be training anyway, but in different cycles. It kind of messes things up unnecessarily if you're going to break your cycle just on the off chance that you are called to fight.

I agree It would be strange for one fighter to hold a 6-8 week training camp in preparations for a fight, that he most likely will not be in. If the event doesn't happen, that could be the case for many other fighters that where on that card. Some of the fights will still happen and some wont, and if and when they do happen the timing is thrown off already. Having one predetermined guy train as a sub for the main event sounds like a good idea to me lol. It doesn't have to be the next in line for a shot but somebody a little lower down on the list that would still make an interesting fight. I would sure train for the small chance I might get a shot at the title. Give the alternate some incentive for taking the chance, like a desired opponent in his next fight if this one doesn't happen. You cant just cancel events, especially a pay per view. There needs to be an agreement on who the possible replacement/s might be weather he trains a full camp or not. Pay per view main events only.

Or make the complete card more sustainable, and worthy of pay per view, even if the main event doesn't happen. Is that possible, that might not be possible?

When Dana asked Chael if he would fight Jones on that date. He said he would fly down and fight him tomorrow lol.

Sincerely, Jim


Posted
Originally Posted by Kapanda

Just on a simple matter of principle, blaming Jones for UFC 151 being cancelled was obviously wrong. But this article really drives the message home, within the context of fight promotion

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1311586-ufc-151-fallout-fighters-dont-cancel-entire-fight-cards-promoters-do

I'm still not sure how you are seeing it as wrong? The promoter found a suitable replacement on short notice and the champion said no to the fight. The poor card falls on Dana but Jones not fighting falls on Jones which is what killed 151. The guy that wrote that article fails to realize that there is only so many big ppv draws so it's impossible for Dana to not have 2 or 3 cards a year that rely heavily on the main event. If anyone can give me one legitimate reason why Jones bailed on the fight with Sonnen I might see the point but until then it is Jones who cancelled 151. The other point that Jones defenders never seem to bring up is he is the first champion to ever turn down a fight with a replacement. So if you are Dana you found a replacement and based on history he had no reason to think Jones would say no to the fight. Basically every other time this happened the promoter fixed without a problem the one time the promoter couldn't fix it was because Jon Jones refused to fight.

Driver: i15, 3 wood: G10, Hybrid: Nickent 4dx, Irons: Ping s57, Wedges: Mizuno MPT 52, 56, 60, Putter: XG #9 

Note: This thread is 3814 days old. We appreciate that you found this thread instead of starting a new one, but if you plan to post here please make sure it's still relevant. If not, please start a new topic. Thank you!

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


  • Want to join this community?

    We'd love to have you!

    Sign Up
  • TST Partners

    PlayBetter
    Golfer's Journal
    ShotScope
    The Stack System
    FitForGolf
    FlightScope Mevo
    Direct: Mevo, Mevo+, and Pro Package.

    Coupon Codes (save 10-20%): "IACAS" for Mevo/Stack/FitForGolf, "IACASPLUS" for Mevo+/Pro Package, and "THESANDTRAP" for ShotScope. 15% off TourStriker (no code).
  • Popular Now

  • Posts

    • Nah, man. People have been testing clubs like this for decades at this point. Even 35 years. @M2R, are you AskGolfNut? If you're not, you seem to have fully bought into the cult or something. So many links to so many videos… Here's an issue, too: - A drop of 0.06 is a drop with a 90 MPH 7I having a ball speed of 117 and dropping it to 111.6, which is going to be nearly 15 yards, which is far more than what a "3% distance loss" indicates (and is even more than a 4.6% distance loss). - You're okay using a percentage with small numbers and saying "they're close" and "1.3 to 1.24 is only 4.6%," but then you excuse the massive 53% difference that going from 3% to 4.6% represents. That's a hell of an error! - That guy in the Elite video is swinging his 7I at 70 MPH. C'mon. My 5' tall daughter swings hers faster than that.
    • Yea but that is sort of my quandary, I sometimes see posts where people causally say this club is more forgiving, a little more forgiving, less forgiving, ad nauseum. But what the heck are they really quantifying? The proclamation of something as fact is not authoritative, even less so as I don't know what the basis for that statement is. For my entire golfing experience, I thought of forgiveness as how much distance front to back is lost hitting the face in non-optimal locations. Anything right or left is on me and delivery issues. But I also have to clarify that my experience is only with irons, I never got to the point of having any confidence or consistency with anything longer. I feel that is rather the point, as much as possible, to quantify the losses by trying to eliminate all the variables except the one you want to investigate. Or, I feel like we agree. Compared to the variables introduced by a golfer's delivery and the variables introduced by lie conditions, the losses from missing the optimal strike location might be so small as to almost be noise over a larger area than a pea.  In which case it seems that your objection is that the 0-3% area is being depicted as too large. Which I will address below. For statements that is absurd and true 100% sweet spot is tiny for all clubs. You will need to provide some objective data to back that up and also define what true 100% sweet spot is. If you mean the area where there are 0 losses, then yes. While true, I do not feel like a not practical or useful definition for what I would like to know. For strikes on irons away from the optimal location "in measurable and quantifiable results how many yards, or feet, does that translate into?"   In my opinion it ok to be dubious but I feel like we need people attempting this sort of data driven investigation. Even if they are wrong in some things at least they are moving the discussion forward. And he has been changing the maps and the way data is interpreted along the way. So, he admits to some of the ideas he started with as being wrong. It is not like we all have not been in that situation 😄 And in any case to proceed forward I feel will require supporting or refuting data. To which as I stated above, I do not have any experience in drivers so I cannot comment on that. But I would like to comment on irons as far as these heat maps. In a video by Elite Performance Golf Studios - The TRUTH About Forgiveness! Game Improvement vs Blade vs Players Distance SLOW SWING SPEED! and going back to ~12:50 will show the reference data for the Pro 241. I can use that to check AskGolfNut's heat map for the Pro 241: a 16mm heel, 5mm low produced a loss of efficiency from 1.3 down to 1.24 or ~4.6%. Looking at AskGolfNut's heatmap it predicts a loss of 3%. Is that good or bad? I do not know but given the possible variations I am going to say it is ok. That location is very close to where the head map goes to 4%, these are very small numbers, and rounding could be playing some part. But for sure I am going to say it is not absurd. Looking at one data point is absurd, but I am not going to spend time on more because IME people who are interested will do their own research and those not interested cannot be persuaded by any amount of data. However, the overall conclusion that I got from that video was that between the three clubs there is a difference in distance forgiveness, but it is not very much. Without some robot testing or something similar the human element in the testing makes it difficult to say is it 1 yard, or 2, or 3?  
    • Wordle 1,668 3/6 🟨🟨🟩⬜⬜ ⬜🟨⬜⬜🟨 🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩
    • Wordle 1,668 3/6 🟨🟩🟨🟨⬜ 🟩🟩🟩🟩⬜ 🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩 Should have got it in two, but I have music on my brain.
    • Wordle 1,668 2/6* 🟨🟨🟩⬛⬛ 🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Welcome to TST! Signing up is free, and you'll see fewer ads and can talk with fellow golf enthusiasts! By using TST, you agree to our Terms of Use, our Privacy Policy, and our Guidelines.