The MMA thread
Discussion
vetrof said:
Conor McGregor supposedly gets in the octagon around 175lbs. Interesting that the UFC has banned IVs for rehydration between the weigh-in and the fight. Some believe that's a dangerous 'half way house' as it's been suggested that under rehydrated fighters are more susceptible to traumatic brain injury.
Technically it's the Nevada State Athletic Commission that has banned IV's... But I take your point. As for Connor, it was reported that he had a really bad weight cut this time, and his coach doesn't want him fighting at that weight again. Personally I think people should fight at their normal weight. Hell, even New Zealand put their school children into weight class for rugby, not age group. They don't seem to have done too badly recently! A poor comparison, I know, but it's done for the health of the kids, so why not protect the fighters?
vetrof said:
Conor McGregor supposedly gets in the octagon around 175lbs. Interesting that the UFC has banned IVs for rehydration between the weigh-in and the fight. Some believe that's a dangerous 'half way house' as it's been suggested that under rehydrated fighters are more susceptible to traumatic brain injury.
There's no doubt dehydrated brains suffer more in boxing, it's been tried and tested and many deaths over the years back up the medical opinion, boxing moved away from same day weigh ins in the 70s due to a spate of deaths, but its not perfect. I don't know what's proposed here by this promotion but lads will still cut for a same day weigh in and people will die (to put it bluntly) fighting dehydrated, the further out you weigh in the bigger they'll cone into the ring, it's an unfixable I'm afraid without constant monitoring of fighters weight which would really thin out the competition at the lower weights and also takes away what's traditionally been one of the main training motivations for fighters in camp. Someone like Ricky Hatton absolutely thrived on the weight cut and wouldn't have stood any chance at heavyweight - which he walked around at for 40 weeks a year 
I'm not sure about the Condit fight. He may have landed a lot more strikes but they were very light volume strikes without any real intention.
Lawler won round 1, maybe 3rd and definitely 5th. Herb dean would have stopped that fight before it got to round 3. I'm not disappointed with either winning it, I could see arguments for both sides and it comes down to a judge's opinion.
Lawler won round 1, maybe 3rd and definitely 5th. Herb dean would have stopped that fight before it got to round 3. I'm not disappointed with either winning it, I could see arguments for both sides and it comes down to a judge's opinion.
RL did put in a champions performance for round five, but for my money - any money - the guy who landed more than the other guy threw should be given the benefit of the doubt. R5 - 10-8 round..... Yes and no. At the end both were still swinging, but RL definitely had the better of the round.
For the power thing - the rules are 'effective striking, effective grappling, control of the ring/fighting area, effective aggressiveness and defense.' It doesn't say anything about power. It does also say 'Effective striking is judged by determining the total number of legal strikes landed by a contestant.' But once again I take your point - RL's punches were a lot more eye-catching. http://www.ufc.com/discover/sport/rules-and-regula...
I just hope we don't lose Condit - he's talking about retirement.
For the power thing - the rules are 'effective striking, effective grappling, control of the ring/fighting area, effective aggressiveness and defense.' It doesn't say anything about power. It does also say 'Effective striking is judged by determining the total number of legal strikes landed by a contestant.' But once again I take your point - RL's punches were a lot more eye-catching. http://www.ufc.com/discover/sport/rules-and-regula...
I just hope we don't lose Condit - he's talking about retirement.
Is throwing a leg or arm out with little power considered striking? A lot of Condit's strikes were very weak and half-hearted. Not especially effective in terms of doing any damage or anything other than notching up the strike count.
Condit's still young in fighter terms, I don't think he'll retire. Considering priorto Lawler he only won 2 out of his last 5 bouts it's a bit surprising he was having a title shot and there is 3 other fighters above him in the rankings. I'm sure Dana will push for a rematch.
Condit's still young in fighter terms, I don't think he'll retire. Considering priorto Lawler he only won 2 out of his last 5 bouts it's a bit surprising he was having a title shot and there is 3 other fighters above him in the rankings. I'm sure Dana will push for a rematch.
g4ry13 said:
Is throwing a leg or arm out with little power considered striking? A lot of Condit's strikes were very weak and half-hearted. Not especially effective in terms of doing any damage or anything other than notching up the strike count.
The rules don't say anything about power. Is aggression power? Potentially.I know when I was fighting/training, my striking sensei would talk about different rhythms and flows, in both speed and power.
I also watched Condit in Vegas, as he beat Diaz off the back foot to win the interim title. That was the correct result then - why not now?
I really hope that this fight (and the last few main events) are an indication of what is coming for 2016 in the UFC. Next up is Cain Vs Werdum. We'll see if the blown knee was the real reason for that shellacking he got last time.
Gassing Station | Sports | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff