GSP vs Shields Time To Choose!

Training
161

Good analysis. As much as I despise Diaz’ attitude, the guy always shows up to fight. He pushes a relentless pace and doesn’t tire. A couple of months back I scoffed at someone saying Diaz would beat GSP. Now I believe that GSP would win still, but he wouldn’t BEAT Diaz. Just like he didn’t “beat” BJ in their first fight. He would never exchange with Diaz because he would get swarmed and TKO’ed

[quote]roguevampire wrote:
the thing is, GSP’s stand up has become so 1 dimensional. all he does is throw that jab and that front leg round house kick. people say that Gsp would keep his distance and pick diaz apart. are you kidding me. Diaz doesn’t give guys a chance to get their distance. hes on them fast and hard. ever notice, how fast guys tire when they fight him. in ever fight lately i see him in, he digs that hook to the body and the guy crumbles and weakens. do you really think gsp could trade with paul daley. gsp would get knocked out in the 1st round.

ok, i think we can all agree or most, that for gsp to win, he has to take diaz down. which, probably won’t be a big problem for gsp. but remember, unlike Bj penn, diaz is really good in his guard and will never get tired. while penn is great in top position, hes sucks on the bottom. i can see this being a very very tough fight. and if gsp decides to stand with diaz just a tad to long, he will get killed. anyone thinks that diaz can’t beat gsp in the stand up is in total denial.

so i think the match comes down to, can diaz get back to his feet. will the ref stand them up enough. how hard can diaz make gsp work in his guard. this will be a grueling match. it will definately not be a beat down like in the bj penn fight. diaz is bigger and stronger and is much better on his back the penn is. so i see this match being tough and diaz has a very good chance of winning given his endurance.[/quote]

162

[quote]roguevampire wrote:

[quote]audiogarden1 wrote:

[quote]roguevampire wrote:
the thing is, GSP’s stand up has become so 1 dimensional. all he does is throw that jab and that front leg round house kick. people say that Gsp would keep his distance and pick diaz apart. are you kidding me. Diaz doesn’t give guys a chance to get their distance. hes on them fast and hard. ever notice, how fast guys tire when they fight him. in ever fight lately i see him in, he digs that hook to the body and the guy crumbles and weakens. do you really think gsp could trade with paul daley. gsp would get knocked out in the 1st round.

ok, i think we can all agree or most, that for gsp to win, he has to take diaz down. which, probably won’t be a big problem for gsp. but remember, unlike Bj penn, diaz is really good in his guard and will never get tired. while penn is great in top position, hes sucks on the bottom. i can see this being a very very tough fight. and if gsp decides to stand with diaz just a tad to long, he will get killed. anyone thinks that diaz can’t beat gsp in the stand up is in total denial.

so i think the match comes down to, can diaz get back to his feet. will the ref stand them up enough. how hard can diaz make gsp work in his guard. this will be a grueling match. it will definately not be a beat down like in the bj penn fight. diaz is bigger and stronger and is much better on his back the penn is. so i see this match being tough and diaz has a very good chance of winning given his endurance.[/quote]

For the most part i agree. However, saying BJ sucks from his guard is ridiculous.

GSP would probably stay on the feet just long enough to set up takedowns, and control from there for 5 rounds. Would be another horribly uneventful decision win, with Diaz maybe having an exciting moment or two of sweeping and/or possibly a sub attempt. [/quote]

many people have talked about this. Even Joe rogan mentioned that bj penn has never submitted someone off his back. its not that hes bad there, hes just much more dominant when hes on top. just watch his last fight against fitch. he was pinned on his back against that cage for a full round getting clocked. I just don’t think it will be all that easy. im quite sure diaz will train alot in the getting up after getting taken down. it will be a tough fight. [/quote]

That was the third round against one of the biggest and best wrestlers in the division though. In the first two rounds Penn was able to get back to his feet on several occasions and avoid much damage. One of his criticisms has always been his lack of conditioning, which just happens to be one of Fitch’s strengths. He was totally exhausted in that round and it was his fatigue that kept him on his back, not his lack of skills from that position.

And to be honest, I think Fitch would pretty much take Diaz down and keep him there for the whole fight if they ever met as well. Diaz doesn’t have nearly the takedown defense that Penn does, and I really don’t see him being any more successful submitting Fitch from that position either (since Fitch has never been submitted, ever, in his MMA career and has been in some really bad spots).

I still say that GSP is able to control Diaz on the ground and grind out a decision win. But I don’t think anyone is saying that if GSP is stupid enough to stand toe to toe with Diaz he’ll be at an advantage.

163

[quote]Dre Cappa wrote:
Good analysis. As much as I despise Diaz’ attitude, the guy always shows up to fight. He pushes a relentless pace and doesn’t tire. A couple of months back I scoffed at someone saying Diaz would beat GSP. Now I believe that GSP would win still, but he wouldn’t BEAT Diaz. Just like he didn’t “beat” BJ in their first fight. He would never exchange with Diaz because he would get swarmed and TKO’ed
[/quote]

He is definitely a very “game” fighter. He hasn’t really been facing elite level competition though, so I think it’s tough to say how well he would do against the guy who has all but cleaned out the division (in mostly dominating fashion). Shields hadn’t lost in 7 years prior to their fight, and had even moved up and beaten some big names at MW, yet even fighting GSP minus one good eye he was unable to beat him. That just speaks to the talent disparity between the UFC and other organizations IMO (at least at WW/MW) and just how good GSP is.

I do agree that he probably wouldn’t “beat” (finish) Diaz though or exchange (stand toe to toe) with him though. He has only been finished twice in his career (one due to doctor stoppage) and is admittedly an extremely tough character. I just don’t think that GSP is the type who is going to be the third guy to do it.

164

Heavyweights are the only area where there is competition against the UFC. Even that is debatable right now with guys like Velasquez, Dos Santos, Carwin, and Lesner in the UFC. Outside of Overreem and Werdum their is a lack of top level heavyweights. Fedor in his last two fights looked human. Even against Rogers he was getting rocked. I dont know if its he lost that scary Russian persona or if he is just getting old but he doesnt carry the fear of facing him he once did.

Its looking like another GSP startegy fight. Which is starting to piss off fans. The diehard fans will say that he is great and you dont understand MMA but when I see a guy with that much physical ability like GSP I would like to see guys get smashed.

165

[quote]Dre Cappa wrote:
After seeing the past few fights of GSP, especially the last one, I am beginning to believe GSP wants no part of Anderson. As much as I respect GSP for being a true martial artist, someone who has devoted the majority of his life to perfecting his art, he has become a conservative point fighter who seeks to win at all costs. On another forum someone called GSP a martial scientist. That is what he has become. He is a the equivalent of paint by numbers while Anderson and Fedor are like the Picassos and Monets of fighting. I believe if these types of performances continue, GSP will slowly be moved outside the Holy Trinity of best fighters of his generation, which is GSP, Anderson and Fedor. The latter two have a killer instinct that GSP no longer possesses. GSP fights well under the watered-down Unified rules. He goes for takedowns with 12-15 seconds in a round to score points, but minimize the time he has to be on the ground with a dangerous grappler. That is not fighting, that is crafting a strategy to win under a very specific set of rules. Guys like Anderson and Fedor could fight under Pride type rules and even Vale Tudo and be successful. GSP would not be.

GSP fights tough guys like Fitch and Shields because they are top contenders and in his division. But moving up to face a champion like Anderson would require GSP to step out of his comfort zone, something he doesn’t seem willing to do.

Also, IIRC, two of the judges scored the fight 48-47. While I don’t know which rounds were credited to Shields, the problem with always leaving fights in the judges’ hands is that one day I see GSP on the losing end of a controversial decision. Winning 3 rounds to 2 is hardly dominating your opponent. One of those rounds goes the other way and Shields is the new champ. The longer you let your opponent hang around, the greater the risk you have of losing in the end.

If you’ve the time and patience, look up a thread on Sherdog called is GSP an athlete or a fighter? It illuminates the differences in mentality between the win-at-all-costs types and those seeking to actually FIGHT and beat their opponents.[/quote]

This was a great post. I agree with everything youve said here 100%. And for the record, it had to be the 4th and 5th rounds that were given to Shields. Its pretty ridiculous to think that Shields potentially could have pulled that one off if he had opened up more in the third like he did in the 4th and 5th.

166

[quote]punchedbear wrote:

Heavyweights are the only area where there is competition against the UFC. Even that is debatable right now with guys like Velasquez, Dos Santos, Carwin, and Lesner in the UFC. Outside of Overreem and Werdum their is a lack of top level heavyweights. Fedor in his last two fights looked human. Even against Rogers he was getting rocked. I dont know if its he lost that scary Russian persona or if he is just getting old but he doesnt carry the fear of facing him he once did.
[/quote]

Agreed.

Its looking like another GSP startegy fight. Which is starting to piss off fans. The diehard fans will say that he is great and you dont understand MMA but when I see a guy with that much physical ability like GSP I would like to see guys get smashed.
[/quote]

Wanting to see finishes is fine, who doesn’t like to see fights get finished? But chastising someone for not finishing, when they are fighting the best competition out there I don’t understand. MMA is a combat sport, combat sports have rule sets, exploiting those rule sets is a legitimate way to win at combat sports. GSP’s camp just happens to develop strategies to allow him to win within those rule sets. That doesn’t mean that he won’t go for the finish if he thinks he can get it (i.e. the multiple near submissions against Hardy), but in the end he’s fighting to win by whatever means he feels will give him the best chance to do so.

167

Does anyone know where this whole fixation with stopping a fighter comes from? “Don’t leave the decision in the hands of the judges” is a Dana White slogan. And do you know why he says that? It’s because he wants every single fight to be a slug fest, or ground and pound extravaganza. And do you know why? It’s because the more action that they have the higher the PPV dollars. Dana White knows how to make money and he’s made a lot of it. With that said certainly fans want to see a fight with action in it, obviously.

But if you look at boxing you don’t really have that same mentality. Many fighters fight for several years and are very successful without necessarily knocking out a great amount of their opponents. But in mma there is a weird twist on things. If someone doesn’t actually stop the other guy people seem disappointed. I do attribute this in part at least to Dana White’s constant drum beat: “Don’t leave it in the hands of the judge’s”.

It’s first and foremost about winning. And that’s what GSP does, he wins. The general attitude of the mma fan should be to want to see a good fight. Forget about the obsession with stopping the other fighter. There have been plenty of fights that were full of action that ended in the hands of the judges. One that quickly comes to mind is Couture vs Nogueria. This is one of my favorite all time fights, yet it went the distance. And plenty of action packed fights do go the distance. should people complain? Of course not. Why don’t we stop singing Dana White’s favorite song and just tune in to and hope to see some really good fights. If they go the distance then so be it.

I’ve already written enough on GSP vs Shields but I just want to add one last point: People should not be upset with GSP. Every fight stands on its own merit. As I said he was blinded after the second round. I praise him for continuing. But, people should be upset with Jake Shields for not taking advantage of his great BJJ ability and taking GSP to the ground. At least GSP had a good reason to be tentative after the second round, what was Shields excuse for only shooting two or three times during the entire fight?

Can we end the obnoxious fixation with having to see every fight end before the final bell, and just watch and root for a good fight?

168

[quote]ZEB wrote:
Does anyone know where this whole fixation with stopping a fighter comes from? “Don’t leave the decision in the hands of the judges” is a Dana White slogan. And do you know why he says that? It’s because he wants every single fight to be a slug fest, or ground and pound extravaganza. And do you know why? It’s because the more action that they have the higher the PPV dollars. Dana White knows how to make money and he’s made a lot of it. With that said certainly fans want to see a fight with action in it, obviously.

But if you look at boxing you don’t really have that same mentality. Many fighters fight for several years and are very successful without necessarily knocking out a great amount of their opponents. But in mma there is a weird twist on things. If someone doesn’t actually stop the other guy people seem disappointed. I do attribute this in part at least to Dana White’s constant drum beat: “Don’t leave it in the hands of the judge’s”.

It’s first and foremost about winning. And that’s what GSP does, he wins. The general attitude of the mma fan should be to want to see a good fight. Forget about the obsession with stopping the other fighter. There have been plenty of fights that were full of action that ended in the hands of the judges. One that quickly comes to mind is Couture vs Nogueria. This is one of my favorite all time fights, yet it went the distance. And plenty of action packed fights do go the distance. should people complain? Of course not. Why don’t we stop singing Dana White’s favorite song and just tune in to and hope to see some really good fights. If they go the distance then so be it.

I’ve already written enough on GSP vs Shields but I just want to add one last point: People should not be upset with GSP. Every fight stands on its own merit. As I said he was blinded after the second round. I praise him for continuing. But, people should be upset with Jake Shields for not taking advantage of his great BJJ ability and taking GSP to the ground. At least GSP had a good reason to be tentative after the second round, what was Shields excuse for only shooting two or three times during the entire fight?

Can we end the obnoxious fixation with having to see every fight end before the final bell, and just watch and root for a good fight?[/quote]

For the Dana White comment. That one always comes out when we get a Shogun/Machida type decision. Where one guy gets dominated and wins somehow. Its frustrating for fighters,promoters, and fans. So his attitude is if you dont finish dont bitch when you get screwed by the judges.

Boxing has the same issue with decisions. Last fight I can recall off the top of my head was Malinaggi vs Diaz in Texas. That was highway robbery. It was textbook counter punching against a guy that wants to come forward in a smaller ring and he got punished because Diaz is a Texan. So judges in combat sports are not so great.

Sorry I wanna see a guy who obviously is the best fighter in his weight class finish fights. But do you seriously sit there before fights and think I hope this is a 5 round technical fight where guys use jabs and top control to win fights?

169

There are a few things wrong with this mentality. First of all, mma is not boxing. There are many more ways to finish a fight. Gloves are smaller, there are 8 points of striking in most positions as well as submissions etc. Finishing doesn’t mean it has to be a slugfest. If I wanted to watch boxing-like fights, I would watch boxing. I do not see mma as a substitute for it.

Secondly, call me outdated, but I began following the sport back when there were no rounds, no time limits and no judges. The only way you could win was by knockout or submission. Back then it was fighting though. Guys had that hunger and that killer instinct when they entered the cage or the ring. Now the sport has evolved (or devolved) to the point where a guy simply tries to outpoint the other person with a few jabs here and there and some takedowns. GSP may be a champion under the Unified rules, but under less rules do you feel confident he could be put in a cage with another guy under Vale Tudo rules and win? I wouldn’t bet on him. The “don’t leave it in the hands of judges” has nothing to do with Dana White for me.

I am not just one of those “just bleed” guys either. A technical grappling match that ends in a sub can be just as exciting as a slugfest KO. I am no Liddell fan either, but one of the reasons he is known as a legend was his killer instinct. He laid it all out there when he got in the cage. Wanderlei Silva as well. Their fight between them was action packed even though it went the distance.

People want to keep comparing mma to boxing. It is not the same thing. Just like mma is not wrestling. Just because one sport uses a certain criteria doesn’t mean mma has too as well. Why don’t we just put head gear and other protection on them and call it Olympic Tae Kwon Do while we are at it.

[quote]ZEB wrote:
Does anyone know where this whole fixation with stopping a fighter comes from? “Don’t leave the decision in the hands of the judges” is a Dana White slogan. And do you know why he says that? It’s because he wants every single fight to be a slug fest, or ground and pound extravaganza. And do you know why? It’s because the more action that they have the higher the PPV dollars. Dana White knows how to make money and he’s made a lot of it. With that said certainly fans want to see a fight with action in it, obviously.

But if you look at boxing you don’t really have that same mentality. Many fighters fight for several years and are very successful without necessarily knocking out a great amount of their opponents. But in mma there is a weird twist on things. If someone doesn’t actually stop the other guy people seem disappointed. I do attribute this in part at least to Dana White’s constant drum beat: “Don’t leave it in the hands of the judge’s”.

It’s first and foremost about winning. And that’s what GSP does, he wins. The general attitude of the mma fan should be to want to see a good fight. Forget about the obsession with stopping the other fighter. There have been plenty of fights that were full of action that ended in the hands of the judges. One that quickly comes to mind is Couture vs Nogueria. This is one of my favorite all time fights, yet it went the distance. And plenty of action packed fights do go the distance. should people complain? Of course not. Why don’t we stop singing Dana White’s favorite song and just tune in to and hope to see some really good fights. If they go the distance then so be it.

I’ve already written enough on GSP vs Shields but I just want to add one last point: People should not be upset with GSP. Every fight stands on its own merit. As I said he was blinded after the second round. I praise him for continuing. But, people should be upset with Jake Shields for not taking advantage of his great BJJ ability and taking GSP to the ground. At least GSP had a good reason to be tentative after the second round, what was Shields excuse for only shooting two or three times during the entire fight?

Can we end the obnoxious fixation with having to see every fight end before the final bell, and just watch and root for a good fight?[/quote]

170

[quote]fnf wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]rundymc wrote:

@Zeb: Honestly, if most of Georges’ last few fights looked more like the Penn/Alves fight, the whole “can’t finish fights” thing would be less of a criticism and more of a friendly jab, and you’d probably hardly hear it.

Most people, including myself, feel like GSP just isn’t as aggressive anymore. Personally I think that’s where the criticism comes from.

I’m not a finish whore, and sometimes prefer a good fight to go the distance (as cruel as that may sound, lol). I thoroughly enjoyed the 2nd BJ fight, and his domination of Fitch/Alves. There’s just something different about his past few in terms of aggression. Granted they were still masterful performances.[/quote]

But you can’t judge GSP by his last fight, that is my only point. How can a man be judged by two rounds? And if there were judgement passed down from this peanut gallery it should be praise of a man who went the distance while blinded in one eye. Most of the people condemning GSP for not ending the fight would pee their pants and run from the octagon if they were suddenly blinded in one eye.

Really, where is the empathy? Where is the fairness?[/quote]

I got thumbed in the right eye while boxing once, couldn’t see, and got hit with a lot of lefts. I didn’t pee in my pants and run from the ring, but I held on a lot for the next round :slight_smile:
Maybe with all of GSP’s superiority over every welterweight, people expect more. I don’t blame him with sticking to a gameplan that is working. That’s what you’re supposed to do.[/quote]

^My thoughts exactly.

Like I said, I’m personally letting that fight slide (didn’t know how bad the poke was). It doesn’t change the fact that he’s looked different in his last three. I loved the Alves fight. It wasn’t the kind of fight you’d want to watch repeatedly, but it was mastery at it’s best. The fights after that lacked a certain aggression. Take BJ’s last fight for instance. Even Frankie’s. Or Hominick’s.
When you’re so dominant, people expect a lot from you. They expect more than domination. It’s unfair I know. Personally I can’t shake the feeling that Georges can do better than the Hardy/Kos/Shields fight. Silva knows this. One of the reason he has his ups and downs in popularity is that there are fights where he ‘lollygags’ (as Brock eloquently puts it). Of course I’m not saying Georges is ‘lollygagging’ per se, he can’t afford to with his competition. I just think he isn’t as aggressive as he needs to be to get that finish.

171

[quote]ZEB wrote:
Does anyone know where this whole fixation with stopping a fighter comes from? “Don’t leave the decision in the hands of the judges” is a Dana White slogan. And do you know why he says that? It’s because he wants every single fight to be a slug fest, or ground and pound extravaganza. And do you know why? It’s because the more action that they have the higher the PPV dollars. Dana White knows how to make money and he’s made a lot of it. With that said certainly fans want to see a fight with action in it, obviously.

But if you look at boxing you don’t really have that same mentality. Many fighters fight for several years and are very successful without necessarily knocking out a great amount of their opponents. But in mma there is a weird twist on things. If someone doesn’t actually stop the other guy people seem disappointed. I do attribute this in part at least to Dana White’s constant drum beat: “Don’t leave it in the hands of the judge’s”.

It’s first and foremost about winning. And that’s what GSP does, he wins. The general attitude of the mma fan should be to want to see a good fight. Forget about the obsession with stopping the other fighter. There have been plenty of fights that were full of action that ended in the hands of the judges. One that quickly comes to mind is Couture vs Nogueria. This is one of my favorite all time fights, yet it went the distance. And plenty of action packed fights do go the distance. should people complain? Of course not. Why don’t we stop singing Dana White’s favorite song and just tune in to and hope to see some really good fights. If they go the distance then so be it.

I’ve already written enough on GSP vs Shields but I just want to add one last point: People should not be upset with GSP. Every fight stands on its own merit. As I said he was blinded after the second round. I praise him for continuing. But, people should be upset with Jake Shields for not taking advantage of his great BJJ ability and taking GSP to the ground. At least GSP had a good reason to be tentative after the second round, what was Shields excuse for only shooting two or three times during the entire fight?

Can we end the obnoxious fixation with having to see every fight end before the final bell, and just watch and root for a good fight?[/quote]

Like I said a few posts ago, I’m not a finish-the-fight-whore, and honestly, I think most guys, that are a couple of steps or more above the casual fan, aren’t either.

Just as in boxing however, I like it when two guys with killer instinct get into a cage/ring and fight. It doesn’t have to be a brawl, in fact, I think it’s way better when it’s a technical chess match, but I only enjoy it when I see fighters going for a finish. And no, they don’t have to get it, they just have to try.

Dre’s post on this is very apt. There are athletes, and then there are fighters. One tries to win, the other tries to hurt. I tend to gravitate to the latter in terms of my fighter preferences.

172

Amen to that. Go watch some of the Pride fights and watch the bad intention the top level guys brought with them into the ring. Wanderlei was nicknamed the Axe Murderer for Christ’s sake. You don’t get that name by going out and playing patty-cake with the other guy. Fedor against Goodridge looked like a guy getting revenge on the person that killed his family.

Aldo and Hominick went 5 rounds but that was a GREAT fight. Both guys were coming at each other hard, and both showed a high level of technical proficiency along with a ton of heart.

Like Run said, there is fighting to win, and fighting to hurt.

[quote]rundymc wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:
Does anyone know where this whole fixation with stopping a fighter comes from? “Don’t leave the decision in the hands of the judges” is a Dana White slogan. And do you know why he says that? It’s because he wants every single fight to be a slug fest, or ground and pound extravaganza. And do you know why? It’s because the more action that they have the higher the PPV dollars. Dana White knows how to make money and he’s made a lot of it. With that said certainly fans want to see a fight with action in it, obviously.

But if you look at boxing you don’t really have that same mentality. Many fighters fight for several years and are very successful without necessarily knocking out a great amount of their opponents. But in mma there is a weird twist on things. If someone doesn’t actually stop the other guy people seem disappointed. I do attribute this in part at least to Dana White’s constant drum beat: “Don’t leave it in the hands of the judge’s”.

It’s first and foremost about winning. And that’s what GSP does, he wins. The general attitude of the mma fan should be to want to see a good fight. Forget about the obsession with stopping the other fighter. There have been plenty of fights that were full of action that ended in the hands of the judges. One that quickly comes to mind is Couture vs Nogueria. This is one of my favorite all time fights, yet it went the distance. And plenty of action packed fights do go the distance. should people complain? Of course not. Why don’t we stop singing Dana White’s favorite song and just tune in to and hope to see some really good fights. If they go the distance then so be it.

I’ve already written enough on GSP vs Shields but I just want to add one last point: People should not be upset with GSP. Every fight stands on its own merit. As I said he was blinded after the second round. I praise him for continuing. But, people should be upset with Jake Shields for not taking advantage of his great BJJ ability and taking GSP to the ground. At least GSP had a good reason to be tentative after the second round, what was Shields excuse for only shooting two or three times during the entire fight?

Can we end the obnoxious fixation with having to see every fight end before the final bell, and just watch and root for a good fight?[/quote]

Like I said a few posts ago, I’m not a finish-the-fight-whore, and honestly, I think most guys, that are a couple of steps or more above the casual fan, aren’t either.

Just as in boxing however, I like it when two guys with killer instinct get into a cage/ring and fight. It doesn’t have to be a brawl, in fact, I think it’s way better when it’s a technical chess match, but I only enjoy it when I see fighters going for a finish. And no, they don’t have to get it, they just have to try.

Dre’s post on this is very apt. There are athletes, and then there are fighters. One tries to win, the other tries to hurt. I tend to gravitate to the latter in terms of my fighter preferences.
[/quote]

173

We all gotta pray that GSP gets Serra’d on next fight so that we can enjoy WW again.

174

[quote]punchedbear wrote:
But do you seriously sit there before fights and think I hope this is a 5 round technical fight where guys use jabs and top control to win fights?[/quote]

No, but I don’t degrade a fighter because he did not finish his opponent (not saying you do that).

175

[quote]Dre Cappa wrote:
There are a few things wrong with this mentality. First of all, mma is not boxing. There are many more ways to finish a fight. Gloves are smaller, there are 8 points of striking in most positions as well as submissions etc. Finishing doesn’t mean it has to be a slugfest. If I wanted to watch boxing-like fights, I would watch boxing. I do not see mma as a substitute for it.[/quote]

I agree, but that means there are also more ways to out point your opponent as well. From striking and kicking to takedowns and top control.

First of all I appreciate the fact that you were a fan from the beginning, as was I. But it’s just not reasonable to compare a no holds barred fight with what we have today in mma. If memory serves the only things that were illegal back in the early days were fish hooking and eye gauging. They even allowed groin strikes for a while. GSP has specifically trained for these rules. He knows how to win under these conditions. I don’t think it’s fair to say that he couldn’t win under any other conditions. I have no doubt that many fighters today, if given the opportunity to train properly would do well under the old nhb rules. Finally, I understand why you would want to see a fight not left in the hands of the judges. As a fan you want your money’s worth and it’s understandable. But Dana White is pushing it for entirely different reasons. He knows that if he has two guys in the octagon trying to take each others heads off the ppv’s rise. It’s really that simple. He has a money making machine called the UFC, and he knows how that machine works.

I totally agree with you. I love watching a good grappling match. I wonder how people would feel if when two fighters were standing and the pace was slow they started them on the ground. Ha, interesting way to look at it - Flip it around. Not very fair huh?

I agree with you. I love boxing and college wrestling, but they are not mma. Each has its own particular things that keep me coming back for more.