UnderGround Forum >> Coach: Condit did as much damage from bottom

Attila - So basically he's saying Conduit should have won the decision. Pure retardation.

Wasa-B - 

Porkchop - Too bad this isnt the ultimate damage causing championships. Also, if damage is the most important thing, how much does blood count for? Carlos was a bloody mess from the last minute of the first round till the end of the fight.

Carlos fought a great fight but Georges is undoubtedly the better fighter.

Dont think WJ once said Carlos was the better fighter and should have taken the decision.

He also did not say damage is the only factor. But as we know damage is a major factor. Actual damage should be weighed higher than superficial damage which is often what a cut and blood is. Im not saying Condit wasnt "hurt" at all by that elbow that caused the cut but he sure wasnt stunned or really hurt by it imo.

Asking "how much blood counts for in itself" is also the wrong view to take. Blood is superficial. In itself, it doesnt mean a whole lot. Cuts can be caused from strikes that do not actually hurt the fighters at all.

WJ also acknowledged the tds and top control and imposing GSP's will on the ground.

SinCityHustler -

What mistake did GSP make vs Serra?  That was by far his toughest fight.  Lets say he hadn' tsurrendered, how do you thin kthat fight turns out?  No contest, Matt Serra was by far his toughest.  I thought Condit pushed him pretty good too but obviously no where as near as Serra who made GSP quit.  

Wasa-B - 

Rickson's Aura - I got nothing against Condit, but Winklejohn is a moron. GSP has Fedor-like skin. Just because he cuts easier doesn't mean Condit should have won which is what Winklejohn is trying to say. Condit also got hit with forearms/elbows that didn't mark up his face. Other than that one kick, GSP beat him on the feet as well.

I think your interpretation could also be called moronic as well for thinking that's what Winkeljohn was trying to say.

Its true that GSP marks up pretty easy but its also true that Condit was hitting GSP's head all night from his guard. WJ acknowledged GSP's tds, top control, etc. In terms of Condit doing more damage standing, i would agree. I wouldnt say Carlos won the overall standup battle but to say he did more damage is not incorrect imo.

What i got out of this is that WJ thinks Condit did as much damage from the bottom as GSP did on top. I dont think thats incorrect. GSP did not get a whole lot of quality or quantity of GNP on the ground. I think GSP won but i dont disagree necessarily that Condit did as much damage on the ground.

the only reason this fight was any good was because Condit couldn't run from his back...

( I kid...sort of)

UGSlapshot - Condit is not as dangerous as Diaz is on the ground, GSP may decision Diaz but trying to say Condit is more of a threat off his back is because of his performance doesn't really wash IMO.

Porkchop - 

Wasa-B - 

Porkchop - Too bad this isnt the ultimate damage causing championships. Also, if damage is the most important thing, how much does blood count for? Carlos was a bloody mess from the last minute of the first round till the end of the fight.

Carlos fought a great fight but Georges is undoubtedly the better fighter.

Dont think WJ once said Carlos was the better fighter and should have taken the decision.

He also did not say damage is the only factor. But as we know damage is a major factor. Actual damage should be weighed higher than superficial damage which is often what a cut and blood is. Im not saying Condit wasnt "hurt" at all by that elbow that caused the cut but he sure wasnt stunned or really hurt by it imo.

Asking "how much blood counts for in itself" is also the wrong view to take. Blood is superficial. In itself, it doesnt mean a whole lot. Cuts can be caused from strikes that do not actually hurt the fighters at all.

WJ also acknowledged the tds and top control and imposing GSP's will on the ground.

Damage is not a major factor to who wins the fight. The only thing that matters is how the fighters fight.

My point, which you must have missed, is that all damage is superficial unless it effects how the fighters fight.

If damage was the most important thing, no one would attack the body because that damage isn't as obvious as facial damage.

My other point is that WJ seems to be stating a case for Carlos winning the fight in his eyes. The better man won.

Rickson's Aura - 

Wasa-B - 

Rickson's Aura - I got nothing against Condit, but Winklejohn is a moron. GSP has Fedor-like skin. Just because he cuts easier doesn't mean Condit should have won which is what Winklejohn is trying to say. Condit also got hit with forearms/elbows that didn't mark up his face. Other than that one kick, GSP beat him on the feet as well.

I think your interpretation could also be called moronic as well for thinking that's what Winkeljohn was trying to say.

Its true that GSP marks up pretty easy but its also true that Condit was hitting GSP's head all night from his guard. WJ acknowledged GSP's tds, top control, etc. In terms of Condit doing more damage standing, i would agree. I wouldnt say Carlos won the overall standup battle but to say he did more damage is not incorrect imo.

What i got out of this is that WJ thinks Condit did as much damage from the bottom as GSP did on top. I dont think thats incorrect. GSP did not get a whole lot of quality or quantity of GNP on the ground. I think GSP won but i dont disagree necessarily that Condit did as much damage on the ground.

You're just as delusional as Winklejohn in that case. Other than a kick, GSP landed the better and cleaner shots standing. Credit to Condit for taking them. The majority of the power strikes on the bottom were landed by GSP. Fedor's face looked much worse than Crocop's in their fight but we all know who won that fight on the ground and the feet.

Your posts insinuates that GSP only had the edge on takedowns and top control. That is ridiculous.

Samoa - GSP v Penn I was a split decision win; I would think that's a tougher win than 50-45 unanimous decision wins?

fapout -

MartinLav - I don't think he did any damage from the bottom. The dammage was done from the kick and top position ground and pound of Carlos. He nearly finished him there...

Other then that it was pretty loopsided.

agreed.

Boofhead3 -

fapout -

MartinLav - I don't think he did any damage from the bottom. The dammage was done from the kick and top position ground and pound of Carlos. He nearly finished him there...

Other then that it was pretty loopsided.

agreed.

1

irishman84 -

Porkchop - 

Wasa-B - 

Porkchop - Too bad this isnt the ultimate damage causing championships. Also, if damage is the most important thing, how much does blood count for? Carlos was a bloody mess from the last minute of the first round till the end of the fight.

Carlos fought a great fight but Georges is undoubtedly the better fighter.

Dont think WJ once said Carlos was the better fighter and should have taken the decision.

He also did not say damage is the only factor. But as we know damage is a major factor. Actual damage should be weighed higher than superficial damage which is often what a cut and blood is. Im not saying Condit wasnt "hurt" at all by that elbow that caused the cut but he sure wasnt stunned or really hurt by it imo.

Asking "how much blood counts for in itself" is also the wrong view to take. Blood is superficial. In itself, it doesnt mean a whole lot. Cuts can be caused from strikes that do not actually hurt the fighters at all.

WJ also acknowledged the tds and top control and imposing GSP's will on the ground.

Damage is not a major factor to who wins the fight. The only thing that matters is how the fighters fight.

My point, which you must have missed, is that all damage is superficial unless it effects how the fighters fight.

If damage was the most important thing, no one would attack the body because that damage isn't as obvious as facial damage.

My other point is that WJ seems to be stating a case for Carlos winning the fight in his eyes. The better man won.

yeah ur right bro... Its crazy to weigh how physically damaged someone is over how many times they got tackled and controlled in determining who won a FIGHT. Who cares if after the fight is over the winner is sitting with an ice pack on his hamburgered face, obviously on queer street and in complete fucking agony while the loser is by comparison, QUITE FUCKING DANDY! Not to mention the fact that while GSP looked good at times and was effective particularly with that elbow, the true delusion is those people describing Condit's effectiveness as limited to "one headkick" when its impossible for any but the most moronic individuals to look at postfight GSP and conclude that one strike did all that damage. He was cut under both eyes and on the bridge of his nose, had an enormous hematoma on his right hemisphere (from the hk), and was knotted up/ purple from the eyebrows up from elbows/ strikes from the bottom. NBK WAS more effective from bottom and GSP's face is the proof

irishman84 - 

Porkchop - 

Wasa-B - 

Porkchop - Too bad this isnt the ultimate damage causing championships. Also, if damage is the most important thing, how much does blood count for? Carlos was a bloody mess from the last minute of the first round till the end of the fight.

Carlos fought a great fight but Georges is undoubtedly the better fighter.

Dont think WJ once said Carlos was the better fighter and should have taken the decision.

He also did not say damage is the only factor. But as we know damage is a major factor. Actual damage should be weighed higher than superficial damage which is often what a cut and blood is. Im not saying Condit wasnt "hurt" at all by that elbow that caused the cut but he sure wasnt stunned or really hurt by it imo.

Asking "how much blood counts for in itself" is also the wrong view to take. Blood is superficial. In itself, it doesnt mean a whole lot. Cuts can be caused from strikes that do not actually hurt the fighters at all.

WJ also acknowledged the tds and top control and imposing GSP's will on the ground.

Damage is not a major factor to who wins the fight. The only thing that matters is how the fighters fight.

My point, which you must have missed, is that all damage is superficial unless it effects how the fighters fight.

If damage was the most important thing, no one would attack the body because that damage isn't as obvious as facial damage.

My other point is that WJ seems to be stating a case for Carlos winning the fight in his eyes. The better man won.

yeah ur right bro... Its crazy to weigh how physically damaged someone is over how many times they got tackled and controlled in determining who won a FIGHT. Who cares if after the fight is over the winner is sitting with an ice pack on his hamburgered face, obviously on queer street and in complete fucking agony while the loser is by comparison, QUITE FUCKING DANDY! Not to mention the fact that while GSP looked good at times and was effective particularly with that elbow, the true delusion is those people describing Condit's effectiveness as limited to "one headkick" when its impossible for any but the most moronic individuals to look at postfight GSP and conclude that one strike did all that damage. He was cut under both eyes and on the bridge of his nose, had an enormous hematoma on his right hemisphere (from the hk), and was knotted up/ purple from the eyebrows up from elbows/ strikes from the bottom. NBK WAS more effective from bottom and GSP's face is the proof

Wasa-B - 

Porkchop - 

Wasa-B - 

Porkchop - Too bad this isnt the ultimate damage causing championships. Also, if damage is the most important thing, how much does blood count for? Carlos was a bloody mess from the last minute of the first round till the end of the fight.

Carlos fought a great fight but Georges is undoubtedly the better fighter.

Dont think WJ once said Carlos was the better fighter and should have taken the decision.

He also did not say damage is the only factor. But as we know damage is a major factor. Actual damage should be weighed higher than superficial damage which is often what a cut and blood is. Im not saying Condit wasnt "hurt" at all by that elbow that caused the cut but he sure wasnt stunned or really hurt by it imo.

Asking "how much blood counts for in itself" is also the wrong view to take. Blood is superficial. In itself, it doesnt mean a whole lot. Cuts can be caused from strikes that do not actually hurt the fighters at all.

WJ also acknowledged the tds and top control and imposing GSP's will on the ground.

Damage is not a major factor to who wins the fight. The only thing that matters is how the fighters fight.

My point, which you must have missed, is that all damage is superficial unless it effects how the fighters fight.

If damage was the most important thing, no one would attack the body because that damage isn't as obvious as facial damage.

My other point is that WJ seems to be stating a case for Carlos winning the fight in his eyes. The better man won.

I think you're thinking that Im using "damage" synonomously with "superficial" or "cosmetic damage" (even though I made the distinction more than once).

In some ways I agree that "damage is superficial unless it effects how the fighters fight." Sometimes its hard to tell when someone is rocked when they actually are. But its impossible to know how much "damage" good looking strikes occur so the judges (and fans) largely do weigh strikes on how solid they look to land, etc as well. Obviously a strike that lands flush with reasonable force would be weighed higher than a glancing blow but its impossible to tell how much those flush strikes really hurt any given fighter all the time.

So it sounds like you're saying, unless you can visibly see a reaction or a change in strategy as a result from striking damage ("effects how a fighter fights"), "all damage is superficial," which of course is the furthest thing from the truth. And of course a change in strategy is impossible to determine all the time as a result from damage as well. They can happen to bait, to mix it up, etc.