UnderGround Forums
 

UnderGround Forums >> Pride Hendo vs Prime Saku


5/13/13 8:52 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
orcus
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 8/1/03
Posts: 77767

Yeah. But then we're back to decisions like Dan/Ninja and Dan/Busta being arguable, rather than obvious wins by the scoring criteria.

5/13/13 9:41 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Lazer MMA
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 4/24/12
Posts: 7801
orcus - 

Yeah. But then we're back to decisions like Dan/Ninja and Dan/Busta being arguable, rather than obvious wins by the scoring criteria.



Jons Forsberg - 1) "Effort to Finish the fight" - Hendo
2) "damage given to the opponent" - Hendo
3) "standing combinations" - Even
4) "ground control" - Ninja
5) "aggressiveness" - Even
6) "Weight" - Even (difference within 22lbs)


If you agree with the assessment above how is that "arguable" exactingly?

How do you think a larger AS (than Hendo) would have fared VS Ninja (much bigger than Hendo)?

What would be his record if he had fought NOG X 2, Lil Nog (yea they are friend and it could not happen but let's say they were not friends and fought) Arona, Wand X2, Shogun, Page and Fedor when Hendo fought them? Hendo fought the best there were lots of close fights and loses too.



5/13/13 10:25 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Wasa-B
286 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 44729
Lazer MMA - 
Kneeblock - 
Wasa-B -
Kneeblock - 

This is another fight that I never understood why it didn't happen but for the fact that Pride likely knew there was no way for Sak to win.

When the 183 lb. Division was created, Sak should have jumped into that tournament, but his relationship with Pride was already souring and he seemed to have no interest in dieting. I think the rumors of Sak truly being a natural 170 pounder are all apocryphal. He was about the same size as Dan and they should have fought. Phone Post





Yeah, its def a suprise it never happened, however why would they shield Sak from Dan when they he faced to Wand, CC, Rampage, Mezger, Igor (though GP matchup), Arona, etc?

As far as Sak being able to make 170 as "apocryphal," he was listed as 183lbs during his prime years. That is smaller than the WWs of today. He also weighed in 176 iirc for his fight with Royce. Look at him vs Newton and tell me he was bigger than him.
The reason he'd be shielded imo is because by the time Dan was even really in the conversation Sak was showing signs of decline. He had no choice with the Mezger fight since it was part of a random draw.

Honestly I think it was an easy to lose fight to a hard to market fighter so it was best avoided. Everyone else had a solid enough rep in Japan.

As for Sak's weight it's the most manipulated number in MMA history besides Rickson's win loss record. Newton was around 185 when they fought and was noticeably smaller by my recollection. I'd love to see just one photo of a scale with Sak standing on it during the Pride days. Phone Post


Per PRIDe announcer (not saying true BTW), Newton was 169 in that fight with Sak. What weights are we told Sak fought at in other fights?


He was normally listed around 183lb during his prime, i believe 176 for Royce.
5/13/13 10:29 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Wasa-B
286 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 44730
Jons Forsberg - 1) "Effort to Finish the fight" - Hendo
2) "damage given to the opponent" - Hendo
3) "standing combinations" - Even
4) "ground control" - Ninja
5) "aggressiveness" - Even
6) "Weight" - Even (difference within 22lbs)


Overall: Clearly Hendo.

I have no problem with that. However, for argument's sake, lets take aggressiveness for example. What about effective aggressivness vs being aggressive but ineffective, just for example?

Also, not sure its been mentioned but for "effort to finish the fight," Hendo also went for a guillotine early on. I just remember Hendo getting outwrestled/grappled for most of the fight and then Hendo had the flurry, nearly ending the fight briefly, then getting taken down again to end the fight.
5/13/13 10:41 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Wasa-B
286 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 44731
Lazer MMA - 
Wasa-B - 
Lazer MMA - 
Wasa-B - 
Jons Forsberg - " That you think Dan won and will debate it tooth and nail is fine but it doesnt change the fact that there was tons of DEBATE from a large amount of people on here which means they were not clear victories for him. One opinion to the contrary doesnt change that."

IMO Ninja was the least controversial of all Dan's JD wins. The controversy was started by people who didn't understand Pride's scoring system to begin with.

I understand the criteria just fine and thought Dan was lucky or that he eeked it out at best. Also, as far as finishing the fight stronger, even after Dan's flurry, Ninja got yet another td iirc.


If you understand then it's time to stop trolling. I gave you the exact points in the fight that Hendo caused the ONLY damage (in the entire fight) and was closest to finishing (by far) as Hendo was never in danger (nor took any real GNP).

It's a matter of just understand the rules.

What "luck" was there in causing the ONLY damage (in the entire fight) and being closest to finishing (by far) exactingly? WTF was the "luck" exactly?

Your still getting emotional even though ive acknowledged you described. Again, im not saying Dan didnt win the fight, however i would still not consider that a clear decision win for Dan and neither did many others. You keep running back to the judging criteria but its still up to the judges to digest everything on a whole even though Dan had the only real moment of the fight of damage, it was a very short sequence - does that override everything else in the fight? Yes, i know Ninja did little with this tds but still was in control of the majority of the fight.

Again, i dont necessarily have any problems with the outcome, i was going for Dan that night and it was awesome when he nearly finished it but i still felt it wasnt a very strong decision. You do, thats absoulutely fine but you are in denial about what a large chunk of others thought about it.


No I know this has been beaten to death and overall posters (MMA fans) have said it was a BS decision. I feel under the rules the fight was close but Dan won. I acknowledged lots of close fights I just don't like that sooooo many posters call it a BS decision (like other of his fights) when they were not. They were close decisions but not at all unreasonable.

As far as the rebuttal to O's quote you supplied I answered it directly and you responded to that post yourself above.

In so far as calling the Shogun decision controversial, it's not a win lose question even, only a win draw question. The judges explained exactly why RD.5 was not a 10-8 (there was not enough 'damage' done to merit the 10-8). Overall Hendo did much more damage.



Shogun fight clearly should have been a draw imo, R5 clearly should have been a 10-8 imo. Yes, Hendo did more damage for sure but since we're quoting criteria with the 10 point must per round, it should have been a draw imo. Under Pride rules, Dan wins, sure...
5/13/13 10:48 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Wasa-B
286 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 44732
orcus - 
Jons Forsberg - 1) "Effort to Finish the fight" - Hendo
2) "damage given to the opponent" - Hendo
3) "standing combinations" - Even
4) "ground control" - Ninja
5) "aggressiveness" - Even
6) "Weight" - Even (difference within 22lbs)


Overall: Clearly Hendo.

I'd have to watch again. I think the point stands that whether Dan deserved the win under those criteria or not, it was not by any means an impressive showing for him or a truly decisive victory. 

I was always a little skeptical of the argument that those top 2 criteria override everything else no matter what the ratio is of those two to the other criteria. Minowa in the rematch put on a shameful display of lay and pray against Baroni for 14 minutes and in the final minute Baroni was stomping and soccer kicking the shit out of him, but still lost. Crocop clearly did more damage to Fedor than vice versa and had the lone submission attempt, but he lost a unanimous decision that no one argues with. 


Thats what I mean, its still up to the individual judge to process and quantify it all with some sujbectivity. I dont have any particular problem with the Ninja decision esp with the Pride criteria but i guess thats what i was getting at: "it was not by any means an impressive showing for him or a truly decisive victory."

As far as Minowa/Baroni II. Minowa had a long kimura attempt on Baroni from what i recall. Not exactly an impressive showing by Minowa or anything though.

CC rocked Fedor momentarily, which is the most damage of the fight, but dont see how CC could be considered the winner under any criteria. Fedor broke CC down over the course. I thought it was a pretty convincing win.
5/13/13 11:18 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Wasa-B
286 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 44733
Just actually thought of the other Sak vs Frank Sham thread, a matchup that's been talked about since back in the day when both guys were ruling on both sides of the Pacific. That's a whole combo of epic MW fights :0 fights that never happened either and each fighter with diff

Frank tapped Dan in a grappling only match but that was when Dan was completely green and no striking of course.

Too bad Zinoviev retired too, another MW fighting at LHW. I think he's the most talented guy that never stook it out / biggest what if...
5/14/13 7:11 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Bucephalus
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 05/14/13 7:11 AM
Member Since: 10/22/12
Posts: 4387
Wasa-B - The problem with quoting the criteria is that it seems to imply that its possible have some sort of quantitative certainty just because a criteria is written down on paper and that the judges can scientifically translate that to each fight. We've seen people try to argue the same with UFC or unified criteria as well. The bottom line is that there is still much subjective interpretation happening.

So that said, are we saying that Hendo, based on this said criteria, clearly and without question slam dunked the decision vs Nog? And how much of a lead does the size disadvantage cover? When Nog was 10% ahead? 25%? Ive read the Rings criteria used to justify Fedor's win over Arona and again, i dont necessarily have any huge problem with it (Fedor did have more GNP and more sub attempts iirc) but it still wasnt a very solid win for Fedor imo. And then over to Pride, the draw for Sak and Mezger for example. Most people consider that a BS decision and I dont have a problem with that because it was very close and an arguement for Mezger winning is completely fair. Though I believe Pride also had the 10kg rule in effect (as it was for the Vitor/Herring decision) but how much does that 10kg weight disadvantage cover? Its not quantifiable. It still has to be inserted subjectively.

So the question remains: How much was Nog "handicapped in points" to justify an indisputable decision for Henderson?

You're confused. I pointed to the criteria because you have repeatedly denounced the decision without once mentioning that RINGS judged its matches differently than any MMA organization in history. Not exactly a small factor to ignore. My pointing that out has nothing to do with assuming "quantitative certainty". You're the one presuming that there is an objective dimension to judging by arguing that the decision wasn't legit. Whether you agree or not, Dan won the fight. That's how judging works. It's always subjective and it's always final. Yet you continue to spout one baseless argument after another about Dan's wins being "questionable"... about his opponents having the 'flu'.. and so on. Sorry to break it to you champ but that's not the way it works. Anything can happen in this sport and decisions are final.. and the fact remains that Dan Henderson has some of the most impressive wins on his resume than any fighter in MMA history. Deal with it.
5/14/13 7:18 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Lazer MMA
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 4/24/12
Posts: 7803
Wasa-B - 
Lazer MMA - 
Wasa-B - 
Lazer MMA - 
Wasa-B - 
Jons Forsberg - " That you think Dan won and will debate it tooth and nail is fine but it doesnt change the fact that there was tons of DEBATE from a large amount of people on here which means they were not clear victories for him. One opinion to the contrary doesnt change that."

IMO Ninja was the least controversial of all Dan's JD wins. The controversy was started by people who didn't understand Pride's scoring system to begin with.

I understand the criteria just fine and thought Dan was lucky or that he eeked it out at best. Also, as far as finishing the fight stronger, even after Dan's flurry, Ninja got yet another td iirc.


If you understand then it's time to stop trolling. I gave you the exact points in the fight that Hendo caused the ONLY damage (in the entire fight) and was closest to finishing (by far) as Hendo was never in danger (nor took any real GNP).

It's a matter of just understand the rules.

What "luck" was there in causing the ONLY damage (in the entire fight) and being closest to finishing (by far) exactingly? WTF was the "luck" exactly?

Your still getting emotional even though ive acknowledged you described. Again, im not saying Dan didnt win the fight, however i would still not consider that a clear decision win for Dan and neither did many others. You keep running back to the judging criteria but its still up to the judges to digest everything on a whole even though Dan had the only real moment of the fight of damage, it was a very short sequence - does that override everything else in the fight? Yes, i know Ninja did little with this tds but still was in control of the majority of the fight.

Again, i dont necessarily have any problems with the outcome, i was going for Dan that night and it was awesome when he nearly finished it but i still felt it wasnt a very strong decision. You do, thats absoulutely fine but you are in denial about what a large chunk of others thought about it.


No I know this has been beaten to death and overall posters (MMA fans) have said it was a BS decision. I feel under the rules the fight was close but Dan won. I acknowledged lots of close fights I just don't like that sooooo many posters call it a BS decision (like other of his fights) when they were not. They were close decisions but not at all unreasonable.

As far as the rebuttal to O's quote you supplied I answered it directly and you responded to that post yourself above.

In so far as calling the Shogun decision controversial, it's not a win lose question even, only a win draw question. The judges explained exactly why RD.5 was not a 10-8 (there was not enough 'damage' done to merit the 10-8). Overall Hendo did much more damage.



Shogun fight clearly should have been a draw imo, R5 clearly should have been a 10-8 imo. Yes, Hendo did more damage for sure but since we're quoting criteria with the 10 point must per round, it should have been a draw imo. Under Pride rules, Dan wins, sure...


We never knew for sure that 'damage' WAS the official measure of 'clean and effective' striking until the official judges explanation. It's true that Shogun threw down pitter patter on Hendo (tons of it) and that's why one of the greatest finishers in the game ever did not finish. Hendo never in danger. I see the point of the definition myself, what good is a great position if you do nothing with it really and cause minimal damage?

Moreover Hendo did not get beat that bad in RD.4. Before the huge uppercut he had gotten the crucifix and a TD. He actually controlled most of the rd. Many argued at least a 10-10. I gave Shogun the round though.

Basically Hendo beat the living crap out of Shogun until he was completely gassed and hit with the uppercut. Frankly there were enough unanswered shots in RD.3 to stop it. Many argued that because of the damage done in rd.3 it was much more of a 10-8 then rd. 5 was. It's a very close race inbetween fans on this one (win draw). It was a PRIDe fight though LOL. Yea Hendo 10/10 in pride.


5/14/13 9:27 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Wasa-B
286 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 44739
Bucephalus - 
Wasa-B - The problem with quoting the criteria is that it seems to imply that its possible have some sort of quantitative certainty just because a criteria is written down on paper and that the judges can scientifically translate that to each fight. We've seen people try to argue the same with UFC or unified criteria as well. The bottom line is that there is still much subjective interpretation happening.

So that said, are we saying that Hendo, based on this said criteria, clearly and without question slam dunked the decision vs Nog? And how much of a lead does the size disadvantage cover? When Nog was 10% ahead? 25%? Ive read the Rings criteria used to justify Fedor's win over Arona and again, i dont necessarily have any huge problem with it (Fedor did have more GNP and more sub attempts iirc) but it still wasnt a very solid win for Fedor imo. And then over to Pride, the draw for Sak and Mezger for example. Most people consider that a BS decision and I dont have a problem with that because it was very close and an arguement for Mezger winning is completely fair. Though I believe Pride also had the 10kg rule in effect (as it was for the Vitor/Herring decision) but how much does that 10kg weight disadvantage cover? Its not quantifiable. It still has to be inserted subjectively.

So the question remains: How much was Nog "handicapped in points" to justify an indisputable decision for Henderson?

You're confused. I pointed to the criteria because you have repeatedly denounced the decision without once mentioning that RINGS judged its matches differently than any MMA organization in history. Not exactly a small factor to ignore. My pointing that out has nothing to do with assuming "quantitative certainty". You're the one presuming that there is an objective dimension to judging by arguing that the decision wasn't legit. Whether you agree or not, Dan won the fight. That's how judging works. It's always subjective and it's always final. Yet you continue to spout one baseless argument after another about Dan's wins being "questionable"... about his opponents having the 'flu'.. and so on. Sorry to break it to you champ but that's not the way it works. Anything can happen in this sport and decisions are final.. and the fact remains that Dan Henderson has some of the most impressive wins on his resume than any fighter in MMA history. Deal with it.

I never once heard the criteria brought up for the Hendo fight until this thread. Its been mentioned from the get-go regarding Fedor/Arona.

Yeah, i was really hoping that by pointing out the universally known fact that Dan's got a laundry list of questionable decisions, more than any other fighter so far, that those decisions would be over-turned. Its final? Dam!

That you think by bringing this up must also mean that i dont think he has a legendary and most one of the most impressive resumes in the sports' history too right? Much like i cant be a Fedor fan and also think Jones would have beaten him in his prime at the same time.

I think if there is any dealing to be had, its that you accept that Dan earned the name "Decision Dan" for a reason and that doesnt mean he's not great. Probably easier if you dont take this shit so personally like Lazer.

You also seem to imply that because judges call it one way, and how thats final, thats how judging works ya know, that must mean the rest of the world saw it that way. ie, that there are no shitty decisions in MMA.

Im still curious to all those questions i posed above btw.
5/14/13 9:28 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Wasa-B
286 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 44740
Lazer MMA - 
Wasa-B - 
Lazer MMA - 
Wasa-B - 
Lazer MMA - 
Wasa-B - 
Jons Forsberg - " That you think Dan won and will debate it tooth and nail is fine but it doesnt change the fact that there was tons of DEBATE from a large amount of people on here which means they were not clear victories for him. One opinion to the contrary doesnt change that."

IMO Ninja was the least controversial of all Dan's JD wins. The controversy was started by people who didn't understand Pride's scoring system to begin with.

I understand the criteria just fine and thought Dan was lucky or that he eeked it out at best. Also, as far as finishing the fight stronger, even after Dan's flurry, Ninja got yet another td iirc.


If you understand then it's time to stop trolling. I gave you the exact points in the fight that Hendo caused the ONLY damage (in the entire fight) and was closest to finishing (by far) as Hendo was never in danger (nor took any real GNP).

It's a matter of just understand the rules.

What "luck" was there in causing the ONLY damage (in the entire fight) and being closest to finishing (by far) exactingly? WTF was the "luck" exactly?

Your still getting emotional even though ive acknowledged you described. Again, im not saying Dan didnt win the fight, however i would still not consider that a clear decision win for Dan and neither did many others. You keep running back to the judging criteria but its still up to the judges to digest everything on a whole even though Dan had the only real moment of the fight of damage, it was a very short sequence - does that override everything else in the fight? Yes, i know Ninja did little with this tds but still was in control of the majority of the fight.

Again, i dont necessarily have any problems with the outcome, i was going for Dan that night and it was awesome when he nearly finished it but i still felt it wasnt a very strong decision. You do, thats absoulutely fine but you are in denial about what a large chunk of others thought about it.


No I know this has been beaten to death and overall posters (MMA fans) have said it was a BS decision. I feel under the rules the fight was close but Dan won. I acknowledged lots of close fights I just don't like that sooooo many posters call it a BS decision (like other of his fights) when they were not. They were close decisions but not at all unreasonable.

As far as the rebuttal to O's quote you supplied I answered it directly and you responded to that post yourself above.

In so far as calling the Shogun decision controversial, it's not a win lose question even, only a win draw question. The judges explained exactly why RD.5 was not a 10-8 (there was not enough 'damage' done to merit the 10-8). Overall Hendo did much more damage.



Shogun fight clearly should have been a draw imo, R5 clearly should have been a 10-8 imo. Yes, Hendo did more damage for sure but since we're quoting criteria with the 10 point must per round, it should have been a draw imo. Under Pride rules, Dan wins, sure...


We never knew for sure that 'damage' WAS the official measure of 'clean and effective' striking until the official judges explanation. It's true that Shogun threw down pitter patter on Hendo (tons of it) and that's why one of the greatest finishers in the game ever did not finish. Hendo never in danger. I see the point of the definition myself, what good is a great position if you do nothing with it really and cause minimal damage?

Moreover Hendo did not get beat that bad in RD.4. Before the huge uppercut he had gotten the crucifix and a TD. He actually controlled most of the rd. Many argued at least a 10-10. I gave Shogun the round though.

Basically Hendo beat the living crap out of Shogun until he was completely gassed and hit with the uppercut. Frankly there were enough unanswered shots in RD.3 to stop it. Many argued that because of the damage done in rd.3 it was much more of a 10-8 then rd. 5 was. It's a very close race inbetween fans on this one (win draw). It was a PRIDe fight though LOL. Yea Hendo 10/10 in pride.



So what you're saying is that criteria doesnt mean shit, only when you want it to.
5/14/13 9:31 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Wasa-B
286 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 44741
And just to be fair, Fedor beat Arona in Rings and the Rings criteria was always mentioned to defend it but as a Fedor fan, I still dont consider that a solid win for him.
5/14/13 9:38 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Wasa-B
286 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 44742
Also, regarding Wand's "flu," Im only mentioning it because there are reports that he was sick and i think it showed. I also think Hendo was injured or something was wrong with him vs Shields. I think ive mentioned that in this thread too. I think its clear both Wand and Dan were not themselves in Wand/Dan II and Dan/Jake.

Also, that Wand also got KTFO badly just prior to the Dan rematch is unfortunately a cold hard fact.
5/14/13 9:38 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
kingkoopa
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/12
Posts: 2077
Can someone post a poll for pride dan vs prime saku Phone Post
5/14/13 11:30 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Wasa-B
286 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 44744
Hahaha....oh my, just rewatched the Nog/Hendo I fight for the first time in forever....you guys are in complete denial and/or complete Dan nutriders if you think that decision wasnt controversial.

K so what exactly in Rings criteria, id like to hear this, had Dan winning and winning in crystal clear fashion? Defending subs musta been the #1 criteria.

R1 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4gYzOf2rEPY
R2 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LE-DKTmAsag
ER https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PCXwX9mJKUU

The extra round does cut out early here, dont recall Dan beheading Nog or anything in the remaining moments though. You know you're on the wrong side of something when both Orcus and Whistleblower disagree with you.
5/15/13 1:47 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Bucephalus
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 05/15/13 1:47 AM
Member Since: 10/22/12
Posts: 4389
Wasa-B - I never once heard the criteria brought up for the Hendo fight until this thread.


That pretty much sums up your position.

I remember the criteria being discussed online right after the fight. It's nothing new. The fact is that both Dan and Nog knew the game they were playing and Dan won. Your entire argument presumes that the fight should have been judged like an MMA fight when 1. it was not MMA and 2. the criteria was explicitly conveyed to both fighters before they fought (Dan confirmed this personally)

Athletes compete within the bounds of established rules. You can't evaluate them as if they were competing under a different rule set.
5/15/13 2:46 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Wasa-B
286 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 44745
Lazer MMA - 
Wasa-B - 
Lazer MMA - 
Hendo dominated the first 8 minutes of the fight with Newton forcing him to the ground and issuing GNP before he made a rookie mistake and stood up.

Hendo beat the Hitman squarely in the 1st fight, there was little debate (uneventful fight in all).

Arona won that fight squarely but Hendo had TD's and top control for periods too.

Likewise with Ninja Hendo also had Td's and top control and caused the only damage in the fight. Ninja newver close to finishing the fight (PRIDe rules).

LOL at Hendo having tds and top control on Ninja, he had like 1 or 2 tds at most where Ninja quickly got out of them all. He spent the majority of the fight on his back. So much for "debate WTF happened exactingly in the fights."


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0aD6as4_l7U

Wow he said a single point about the most fuckin unimportant part of the post in a single fight and that's his argument, AND it case closed LMFAO. Of course he's as wrong and ignorant as he was about Hendo's record (which I proved was an unimpressive 6-3) surprise surprise.

This is only half the fuckin fight. "caused the only damage in the fight. Ninja never close to finishing the fight (PRIDe rules)." Review 8:15 to 8:45 of the tape. That's were under PRIDe rules he won the fight. He caused the only major damage right there in the fight and was closest to finishing the fight (Hendo never in danger).

Then review 4:30, 4:38, 7:15 & 10:05 of the tape. I think you'll find more than 2 TD's in just this half of the fight.
Tome to quit. Please!

So which part is "fuckin unimportant" about the tds and top control? The part where you said it or i questioned it?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_L6bLO_ddSY

Nice that you left the first round out too, the 10 minute first round where Dan spends about 8.30 min out of it on his back. True, Ninja doesnt really beat the crap out of Dan but is working steadily with GNP from side mount though nothing really connect too solidy. He throws a lot of knees from sidemount but nothing looks to connect really flush. He does try 1 key lock (never gets anywhere) and completely forgot about the soccer kick at the end of the round (this you probably conveniently forgot) where it clearly hurts Dan as he holds his face after and takes a few seconds to get up.

Already acknowledged Dan went for the standing guillotine. Dan also got a td where Ninja got out of immediately.

Ok so R2:

Ninja again on top from the beginning to about 4:30 where Dan eats a nice knee to the head btw and lol, what kind of td is at 4:30 for Dan, anyhow, that's known as a "sprawl," son.

4:38 Dan gets a td, and Ninja is back on his feet at 4:48.

5:00 Ninja with another td

5:40 Dan with a nice right to start R3, clinch,

6:00 Dan takes some knees to the nuts

7:15 Dan with a td, 7:29 Ninja is out, Dan with some nice knees in the scramble out

8:00 Dan with a throw (you missed this! OMG), 8:06 Ninja is out, Dan again with nice knees in the scramble out

8:15 - 8:45 approx, Dan on the attack with a flurry, Ninja is hurt (and yes, I remember this just fine without rewatching it)

Both guys in the clinch in the corner, Ninja tired but Dan too, nothing happens, they get broken

10:05 Ninja actually with the double but Dan rolls it over, ref breaks to restart in the middle @ 10:30, Ninja yet again out at 10:34

10:45 Ninja with another td, moves immediately to half

11:43 Fight ends with Dan on his back (sorry Forsberg, as i remember, Dan didnt end this as strongly as you thought anyhow, criteria or not)

So.........the fight is pretty much how i remembered, I'd say Dan had 4 tds without counting the roll over on Ninja's double at 10:05 as Ninja got out immediately as he did with each of Dan's 4 other tds.

So he had 4 td, 5 if we count the reversal, so you got me on remembering just 2 from years ago but probably felt like that because Dan had ZERO top control on any of the tds so looks like I was pretty on imo.

Again, im not really mad at the decision, yes Dan came closest to finishing but was that enough? If it was and it apparently was in the judges' eyes, I was fine with that back then and fine with it now but cant believe anyone would call that a clear undebatable (let alone convincing) for Dan or that someone would have a problem with calling it debatable.
5/15/13 2:47 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Wasa-B
286 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 44746
Btw, hows that for BLOW!BY!BLOW!?
5/15/13 2:50 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Wasa-B
286 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 44747
Bucephalus - 
Wasa-B - I never once heard the criteria brought up for the Hendo fight until this thread.


That pretty much sums up your position.

I remember the criteria being discussed online right after the fight. It's nothing new. The fact is that both Dan and Nog knew the game they were playing and Dan won. Your entire argument presumes that the fight should have been judged like an MMA fight when 1. it was not MMA and 2. the criteria was explicitly conveyed to both fighters before they fought (Dan confirmed this personally)

Athletes compete within the bounds of established rules. You can't evaluate them as if they were competing under a different rule set.

Like how your dodging all my other honest questions about this criteria business (ie. attemping to have real discussion on this) and conveniently the most important question of all:

"K so what exactly in Rings criteria, id like to hear this, had Dan winning and winning in crystal clear fashion? Defending subs musta been the #1 criteria. "

Or the question on quantifying how much Nog was handicapped by the size advantage? I guess that meant all of his sub attempts (read: effort to finish the fight.....or did that only count in Pride and have no bearing in Rings?) didnt happen - it was a wash, yeah?
5/15/13 7:54 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Lazer MMA
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 4/24/12
Posts: 7824
Wasa-B - 
Bucephalus - 
Wasa-B - The problem with quoting the criteria is that it seems to imply that its possible have some sort of quantitative certainty just because a criteria is written down on paper and that the judges can scientifically translate that to each fight. We've seen people try to argue the same with UFC or unified criteria as well. The bottom line is that there is still much subjective interpretation happening.

So that said, are we saying that Hendo, based on this said criteria, clearly and without question slam dunked the decision vs Nog? And how much of a lead does the size disadvantage cover? When Nog was 10% ahead? 25%? Ive read the Rings criteria used to justify Fedor's win over Arona and again, i dont necessarily have any huge problem with it (Fedor did have more GNP and more sub attempts iirc) but it still wasnt a very solid win for Fedor imo. And then over to Pride, the draw for Sak and Mezger for example. Most people consider that a BS decision and I dont have a problem with that because it was very close and an arguement for Mezger winning is completely fair. Though I believe Pride also had the 10kg rule in effect (as it was for the Vitor/Herring decision) but how much does that 10kg weight disadvantage cover? Its not quantifiable. It still has to be inserted subjectively.

So the question remains: How much was Nog "handicapped in points" to justify an indisputable decision for Henderson?

You're confused. I pointed to the criteria because you have repeatedly denounced the decision without once mentioning that RINGS judged its matches differently than any MMA organization in history. Not exactly a small factor to ignore. My pointing that out has nothing to do with assuming "quantitative certainty". You're the one presuming that there is an objective dimension to judging by arguing that the decision wasn't legit. Whether you agree or not, Dan won the fight. That's how judging works. It's always subjective and it's always final. Yet you continue to spout one baseless argument after another about Dan's wins being "questionable"... about his opponents having the 'flu'.. and so on. Sorry to break it to you champ but that's not the way it works. Anything can happen in this sport and decisions are final.. and the fact remains that Dan Henderson has some of the most impressive wins on his resume than any fighter in MMA history. Deal with it.

I never once heard the criteria brought up for the Hendo fight until this thread. Its been mentioned from the get-go regarding Fedor/Arona.

Yeah, i was really hoping that by pointing out the universally known fact that Dan's got a laundry list of questionable decisions, more than any other fighter so far, that those decisions would be over-turned. Its final? Dam!

That you think by bringing this up must also mean that i dont think he has a legendary and most one of the most impressive resumes in the sports' history too right? Much like i cant be a Fedor fan and also think Jones would have beaten him in his prime at the same time.

I think if there is any dealing to be had, its that you accept that Dan earned the name "Decision Dan" for a reason and that doesnt mean he's not great. Probably easier if you dont take this shit so personally like Lazer.

You also seem to imply that because judges call it one way, and how thats final, thats how judging works ya know, that must mean the rest of the world saw it that way. ie, that there are no shitty decisions in MMA.

Im still curious to all those questions i posed above btw.


HTF can it matter the percentage when you refuse to talk about the fight to establish the percentage in the first place? Yet you want to call decisions "universally regarded as BS" to discredit the fighter.

"Dan Henderson has some of the most impressive wins on his resume than any fighter in MMA history. Deal with it."
5/15/13 10:02 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
MrColdCock
28 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 7/8/02
Posts: 3392
Bucephalus -
Wasa-B - I never once heard the criteria brought up for the Hendo fight until this thread.


That pretty much sums up your position.

I remember the criteria being discussed online right after the fight. It's nothing new. The fact is that both Dan and Nog knew the game they were playing and Dan won. Your entire argument presumes that the fight should have been judged like an MMA fight when 1. it was not MMA and 2. the criteria was explicitly conveyed to both fighters before they fought (Dan confirmed this personally)

Athletes compete within the bounds of established rules. You can't evaluate them as if they were competing under a different rule set.
Sorry, but this seems like a cop out.

I'm also interested in the specific criteria that allowed Dan to win that fight. It certainly doesn't look like a fight Dan won.

Regarding Sak vs Dan. The best version of Dan we ever saw was the Dan that beat Wand. IMO he really put it together for this fight. That Dan has a very good shot. I'd put it at 50/50. Any other version of pride Dan, it's Sak all day. Dan wouldn't finish Sak and Sak was the better wrestler, better submission guy, better gas and at least equal standing. This is one decision Dan would not steal. Phone Post
5/15/13 1:47 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Wasa-B
286 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 44748
Lazer MMA - 
Wasa-B - 
Bucephalus - 
Wasa-B - The problem with quoting the criteria is that it seems to imply that its possible have some sort of quantitative certainty just because a criteria is written down on paper and that the judges can scientifically translate that to each fight. We've seen people try to argue the same with UFC or unified criteria as well. The bottom line is that there is still much subjective interpretation happening.

So that said, are we saying that Hendo, based on this said criteria, clearly and without question slam dunked the decision vs Nog? And how much of a lead does the size disadvantage cover? When Nog was 10% ahead? 25%? Ive read the Rings criteria used to justify Fedor's win over Arona and again, i dont necessarily have any huge problem with it (Fedor did have more GNP and more sub attempts iirc) but it still wasnt a very solid win for Fedor imo. And then over to Pride, the draw for Sak and Mezger for example. Most people consider that a BS decision and I dont have a problem with that because it was very close and an arguement for Mezger winning is completely fair. Though I believe Pride also had the 10kg rule in effect (as it was for the Vitor/Herring decision) but how much does that 10kg weight disadvantage cover? Its not quantifiable. It still has to be inserted subjectively.

So the question remains: How much was Nog "handicapped in points" to justify an indisputable decision for Henderson?

You're confused. I pointed to the criteria because you have repeatedly denounced the decision without once mentioning that RINGS judged its matches differently than any MMA organization in history. Not exactly a small factor to ignore. My pointing that out has nothing to do with assuming "quantitative certainty". You're the one presuming that there is an objective dimension to judging by arguing that the decision wasn't legit. Whether you agree or not, Dan won the fight. That's how judging works. It's always subjective and it's always final. Yet you continue to spout one baseless argument after another about Dan's wins being "questionable"... about his opponents having the 'flu'.. and so on. Sorry to break it to you champ but that's not the way it works. Anything can happen in this sport and decisions are final.. and the fact remains that Dan Henderson has some of the most impressive wins on his resume than any fighter in MMA history. Deal with it.

I never once heard the criteria brought up for the Hendo fight until this thread. Its been mentioned from the get-go regarding Fedor/Arona.

Yeah, i was really hoping that by pointing out the universally known fact that Dan's got a laundry list of questionable decisions, more than any other fighter so far, that those decisions would be over-turned. Its final? Dam!

That you think by bringing this up must also mean that i dont think he has a legendary and most one of the most impressive resumes in the sports' history too right? Much like i cant be a Fedor fan and also think Jones would have beaten him in his prime at the same time.

I think if there is any dealing to be had, its that you accept that Dan earned the name "Decision Dan" for a reason and that doesnt mean he's not great. Probably easier if you dont take this shit so personally like Lazer.

You also seem to imply that because judges call it one way, and how thats final, thats how judging works ya know, that must mean the rest of the world saw it that way. ie, that there are no shitty decisions in MMA.

Im still curious to all those questions i posed above btw.


HTF can it matter the percentage when you refuse to talk about the fight to establish the percentage in the first place? Yet you want to call decisions "universally regarded as BS" to discredit the fighter.

"Dan Henderson has some of the most impressive wins on his resume than any fighter in MMA history. Deal with it."

Lazer, not only did I do just that on this page in another post, my initial questions are doing just that imo. Its you guys that arent doing that imo, you guys just keep hiding under this "criteria" thing so, again, I ask you guys:

HTF can any criteria justify that win for Hendo? What did Hendo do in that fight under Rings criteria to win that? Again, are defending subs the #1 criteria here because that's all Dan really was doing, other than being on his back.

And as far as the size disadvantage thing, again, "And how much of a lead does the size disadvantage cover? When Nog was 10% ahead? 25%?" Does the size disadvantage erase Nog's sub attempts to a wash? Super curious here.

And as far as Dan having some of the most impressive wins on his resume, i already acknowledged that above as well: "I think if there is any dealing to be had, its that you accept that Dan earned the name "Decision Dan" for a reason and that doesnt mean he's not great." Ive never once made any claim to the contrary, it seems you 2 are just on this automatic defensive mode when it comes to Hendo. He is great, he is one of the GOATs, that pretty much goes without saying. It also goes without saying that he is the benefactor of the most debatable decisions of any fighter out there. You 2 seem to be in denial over this.
5/15/13 2:06 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Wasa-B
286 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 44749
MrColdCock - 
Bucephalus -
Wasa-B - I never once heard the criteria brought up for the Hendo fight until this thread.


That pretty much sums up your position.

I remember the criteria being discussed online right after the fight. It's nothing new. The fact is that both Dan and Nog knew the game they were playing and Dan won. Your entire argument presumes that the fight should have been judged like an MMA fight when 1. it was not MMA and 2. the criteria was explicitly conveyed to both fighters before they fought (Dan confirmed this personally)

Athletes compete within the bounds of established rules. You can't evaluate them as if they were competing under a different rule set.
Sorry, but this seems like a cop out.

I'm also interested in the specific criteria that allowed Dan to win that fight. It certainly doesn't look like a fight Dan won.

Regarding Sak vs Dan. The best version of Dan we ever saw was the Dan that beat Wand. IMO he really put it together for this fight. That Dan has a very good shot. I'd put it at 50/50. Any other version of pride Dan, it's Sak all day. Dan wouldn't finish Sak and Sak was the better wrestler, better submission guy, better gas and at least equal standing. This is one decision Dan would not steal. Phone Post

Dan's striking was always better than Sak's Id say due to power but in his prime and as Dan's striking has improved over the years and is at his best in his recent UFC/SF/UFC era, in his prime Sak moved pretty quickly and mixed up his striiking and tds quite well, not like a GSP of today but pretty good for that era. I dont think it was on the level of Wand back in Pride and in Sak's prime years and Dan was always prone to getting taken down by lesser wrestlers than him as shown in the Ninja match (Ninja was much larger than Sak but never considered a great wrestler, not bad but not great).

Dan was also always very hard to finish, he's always been one of the most durable guys though his cardio was always suspect even though he was still dangerous when gassed.

Regarding the Nog/Dan decision and what Dan did specifically within the criteria to win, not holding my breathe to get an answer on that. Also seems these 2 are the only 2 in the world that believe Dan really won that night and that the rest of the world are clueless on this because of the Rings criteria completely, absolutely and indisputable meant Dan won...cuz like, defending armbars in the Rings world counts for a lot, you know?
5/15/13 4:05 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
orcus
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 8/1/03
Posts: 77777

"and the fact remains that Dan Henderson has some of the most impressive wins on his resume than any fighter in MMA history."

He has some of the most impressive names in the win column of his record. The problem, as some are pointing out, is that many of the actual in-ring performances weren't quite as impressives as that "W" would make you think; as in, you don't watch them and come away thinking "damn, Dan is sure better than that guy!"...again, half the time a significant portion of fans -- possibly even the majority in some cases -- came away thinking "Dan lost that fight".

5/15/13 6:07 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
kingkoopa
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/12
Posts: 2078
orcus -

"and the fact remains that Dan Henderson has some of the most impressive wins on his resume than any fighter in MMA history."

He has some of the most impressive names in the win column of his record. The problem, as some are pointing out, is that many of the actual in-ring performances weren't quite as impressives as that "W" would make you think; as in, you don't watch them and come away thinking "damn, Dan is sure better than that guy!"...again, half the time a significant portion of fans -- possibly even the majority in some cases -- came away thinking "Dan lost that fight".

Yup Phone Post

Reply Post

You must log in to post a reply. Click here to login.