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

Cheap shots won't win the fight for Anderson, Sonnen is too smart to risk losing his pay day during a weigh in.  It does show the slime Silva is to cheap shot someone while his posse is there to protect him from retaliation.

Originally Posted by Infamous 273

WOW!!!  Silva with the shoulder chin check!

Joe Paradiso

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted
Originally Posted by newtogolf

Cheap shots won't win the fight for Anderson, Sonnen is too smart to risk losing his pay day during a weigh in.  It does show the slime Silva is to cheap shot someone while his posse is there to protect him from retaliation.

i agree.  i was just shocked.  total lack of composure on silva's behalf.


Posted

Not to defend Silva, that was cheap, wrong, stupid, but you think he did it because he had backup??

Makes me glad to learn that I'm not the only one with a bias here.

Feel like putting some money down. I have never heard of any instance where antagonising the baddest kid on the block turned out to be a good idea!


Posted

I knew I should've worn a condom tonight! I thought about it, I decided not to pull the trigger, and that was a mistake!


Posted

I take my hat off to Chael though. I'm definitely a fan now. I absolutely love hard workers. He wasn't as good, but he went all in. I love that. That's a winner in my eyes.


  • Moderator
Posted

It was a good fight.  Chael made a huge mistake with the spinning back fist.  It was also a very terribly executed strike.  Man that was really telegraphed and you can't telegraph those shots with Anderson.  He has seen those his whole life.  But with that being said, I think Sonnen wouldn't have been able to rely on the takedowns as much anymore.  Silva was stuffing them very well in the 2nd. It was just a matter of time after that.

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

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted

I taped the PPV, was away this weekend so didn't get a chance to see it.  I did read that Chael controlled the first round, and in the 2nd round went for a spinning punch or elbow that Silva easily ducked and countered.  The death blow was a knee to the chest followed by numerous punches and kicks until the ref stepped in to stop it.  I'll watch it tonight.  I'm disappointed in the results, but not shocked given I've only seen Stoney Carter knock out Matt Serra with a spinning punch, the rest of the ones I've seen thrown miss and leave the guy who threw it in a vulnerable position.  I was happy to ready Sonnen showed proper respect to Silva after the loss which is what MMA is all about.

Joe Paradiso

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted
Originally Posted by TN94z

It was a good fight.  Chael made a huge mistake with the spinning back fist.  It was also a very terribly executed strike.  Man that was really telegraphed and you can't telegraph those shots with Anderson.  He has seen those his whole life.  But with that being said, I think Sonnen wouldn't have been able to rely on the takedowns as much anymore.  Silva was stuffing them very well in the 2nd. It was just a matter of time after that.

This... and it wasn't even so much throwing the spinning back fist but falling down is pretty much the end. If you fall on your own into that position with Silva you either catch a knee to the chest, get some mean G&P; or both. I thought Chael had things going his way and made a very stupid mistake but props to Silva for seizing the opportunity.

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

Posted

If you watch very carefully, Silva tripped Sonned while he slipped the backfist.  His subtle counterattacks are really amazing to watch.  If you ever get a chance watch the switch he hit on Nate Marquart.


Posted
Originally Posted by pholmes

If you watch very carefully, Silva tripped Sonned while he slipped the backfist.  His subtle counterattacks are really amazing to watch.  If you ever get a chance watch the switch he hit on Nate Marquart.

That would've been cool, but he didn't

From bird's eye you can see that there is no tripping going on.


Posted
This is a gif that made me say that.........im not sure http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m6tsprOwUN1qf09yvo1_400.gif

Posted

The whole card was strange to me.  Sonnen throwing a spinning backfist was really confusing.  Forrest running out of the cage and then coming back to take Joe's interview. Maia breaking Kim's rib with a take down.

I also feel that Silva holding the shorts should have had a point deducted from him.  Yves is a terrible ref.


Posted

If he did trip him that would have been cool but it was Chael taking a wild swing and losing his balance. I will give Silva credit for throwing the knee because if he is just slightly off the mark he loses a point or the match. Actually maybe Chael should have dropped his head into Silva's knee sure he would have been KO'd but Silva would have gotten DQ'd leaving Chael another quick turn around to fight him again. I'd love to see Stann get a shot soon granted I know he has almost no chance against Silva but he has a great story. I'm guessing Lombard, Munoz or Bisping are probably next in line with Munoz or Lombard being the front runners.

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

Posted
Originally Posted by BEAN

The whole card was strange to me.  Sonnen throwing a spinning backfist was really confusing.  Forrest running out of the cage and then coming back to take Joe's interview. Maia breaking Kim's rib with a take down.

I also feel that Silva holding the shorts should have had a point deducted from him.  Yves is a terrible ref.

I believe Dana went after Forrest so I imagine that conversation ended with "do you want to get paid". Yves is a terrible ref but that's normally because he stops fights to early.

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.