It is clear that the judges do not like Diaz because they find him to be disrespectful, which is why Diaz is not taking the rematch. He can't get fair judging in Vegas. Simple as that folks.

Diaz record stuff

Well your boy ran around like a pussy after he promised a dog fight.

He had one good goddamn flurry the entire fight, the punch-punch-headkick combo and THAT didn't even stop Diaz's pace.

Diaz landed the cleaner, harder shots and controlled the cage the entire fight. Fight won.

Condit was NOT happy and look at the faces on his coaches. They were not happy either. You can not be proud of a pussy performance like that. Condit and team were shocked as FUCK when they announced him as the winner. It is clear that the judges do not like Diaz because they find him to be disrespectful, which is why Diaz is not taking the rematch. He can't get fair judging in Vegas. Simple as that folks.

In boxing, you'd call that being "a runner". There are successful runners in boxing - I think of Cory Spinks right away. But people hated Cory Spinks and the networks stopped showing his fights, even after his legs went away and he actually had somewhat entertaining fights. Condit didn't do anything that I'd consider proper counter punching or stick and move action. Strike and run, strike and run, stayed away from anything that would be connoted as a exchange, did nothing to seriously hurt Diaz and end the fight.

-11-1-1 outside the UFC

-A combined 7-5 inside the UFC, where the competition is the consensus best. This does not include IFCO Steinbeiss fight in 2006 (because it's not UFC)

Good thing this isn't boxing, then. So far as "proper counter punching" or "stick and move action".....compared to boxing, almost NO ONE in mma does that. Why?Because it's not practical.

It's "impractical" because its difficult to master. The same reason was once applied to things like side kicks, non-squared stances, and the jab in MMA.

I'm not saying that running isn't an effective tactic, but it isn't classic "stick and move" defensive counter punching. The closest you'll see to it is Anderson Silva using head movement to confound a one dimensional Forrest Griffin en route to a KO. Rashad is pretty good at it too, TBH. It works if you know how to use it, but like a lot of techniques, most fighters are bad at utilizing these weapons correctly, and so the argument is that it "doesn't work". Remember when karate stances and things like sidekicks were sure fire absolutely positively not gonna work in MMA ever?

All I know is this:

-11-1-1 outside the UFC

-A combined 7-5 inside the UFC, where the competition is the consensus best. This does not include IFCO Steinbeiss fight in 2006 (because it's not UFC)

That's a huge disparity. 85% win record (11 out of 13) out, 58% (7 out of 12) win record in. The numbers don't lie.

It's one thing to poke holes in a fighter's record (you can do this with anyone) but when people are collectively criticizing an entire organization it's just silly. I mean, do these people actually forget that Pride actually had an overall better roster than UFC during the whole rivalry?

I admit that it wasn't the fight I had hoped for, but it's a sport first, entertainment second. And besides, you forgot about the part where, despite "running away", he was still able to win the fight.

Fights are scored on effective striking & grappling, aggression, and octagon control.

I hate the notion that Diaz was won simply because he was pushing forward. This alone does not equate to "aggression" as you have to actually be throwing punches and landing too. Diaz was moving forward yet he was outstruck by Condit by a fair margin. It should be obvious that Condit was the clean, effective striker in a match that was primarily a striking battle. Though not a ton of damage was done in the fight, clearly the most effective blows were given by Condit with the couple of kicks and knees to the head, as well as the many kicks to the leg. It's ironic too that Diaz would be so critical of Condit's kicks as Diaz is well known for throwing tons of jabs, and "baby" or "pitter-patter" punches during fights.

Even if Diaz made better use of grappling, it hardly factored into the fight, and you have to give Condit some credit too. Diaz got a nice takedown in round five, but remember it wasn't the only time he attempted to take the fight to the ground as Condit did stuff a couple of previous attempts. Even with the takedown, Condit as able to stay out of trouble and nullify Diaz' submission attempts while being in a disadvantageous position.

Octagon control. This is something that Diaz is usually very good at, but not so much in this fight. Diaz typically outstrikes his opponents and aims to keep his opponent up against the fence while he unloads a barage of punches. Diaz is great at luring his opponent into his gameplan but in this fight, Condit was able to avoid the majority of Diaz' strikes by not allowing this to happen by moving, and picking his shots in the process. In essence, it was Condit that demonstrated more "octagon control" over the course of the fight as he was able to better implement his gameplan, dictate the pace of the fight, and take advantage of available opportunities.

Upon rewatch, I scored it differently but with the same end result. I have Condit winning rounds 1,3,4. Diaz, I gave him round 2 and even if Diaz wins round 5, it's still a win for Condit.

Even though I would rather see Diaz fight St-Pierre, the right man won.

How's Tim Sylvia, Andrei Arlovski, Pedro Rizzo, Ricco Rodriquez, and Frank Mir doing these days?

shutupanddie, you are just wrong friend. Keep defending your stance that the only way to beat Diaz is to not fight Diaz. They gave the game to condit, however the fight goes to Diaz. Condit got treated like a bitch because he fought like one. =) Diaz 1-2 and 5 for sure.

Damn, it's like Sherdog up in this place right now. Except not as bad.

It's one thing to poke holes in a fighter's record (you can do this with anyone) but when people are collectively criticizing an entire organization it's just silly. I mean, do these people actually forget that Pride actually had an overall better roster than UFC during the whole rivalry?

How's Tim Sylvia, Andrei Arlovski, Pedro Rizzo, Ricco Rodriquez, and Frank Mir doing these days?

How did stalwarts like Ken Shamrock, Tito Ortiz, Kevin Randleman, BJ Penn, Chuck Liddell, Randy Couture, and Matt Hughes fare in their last UFC title runs?

Seriously...it's amounts to the same thing.

Also, I posted this on a different forum but I'll re-post it here. It's my brief thoughts on the Condit/Diaz fight and why Condit indeed won. I have been watching MMA for over a decade, and I'm not sure that everyone who watches MMA today fully understands how the sport works. Even though more people seem to feel Condit won, tons of people have told me that Diaz won simply because he was pushing forward the whole fight while Condit was running. Over the course of the fight it was evident that Condit met the criteria of the judges more so than Diaz did, and certainly on a round by round breakdown. I had Condit winning 48-47, three of the five rounds.

How is UFC 3 man? I played Pride mode in Best Buy and had a lot of fun getting head stomp and leg tkos as Cro Cop, but I'm not sure if it's worth a buy.

Seriously, Bendo's balance on one leg is uncanny. And what an odd thing to say about Pettis haha.

I doubt Henderson will go on a significant title defense/win streak, especially in this division. I gave Henderson the win 48-47 but I feel that he's still got quite a ways to go before he's able to think about having any sort of dominant reign. I'm highly skeptical this will happen, but granted, he's got a fair bit of potential.

There's still many tough fights left to be had at this weight division and I wouldn't mind seeing Gilbert Melendez join the UFC roster.

It's just a matter of time until Gilbert is brought into the UFC, they already have the rest of that Gracie stable of retards in the UFC, why not one more.

It's on, bitches!


http://bjpenn.com/mmanews/2012/03/01/ph ... 16015.html