Comments on: UFC 86 Recap: Griffin Proves To Be Ultimate

By: naco21

naco21 — Sat, 12 Jul 2008 23:20:42 +0000

RE-MATCH

By: roy

roy — Sat, 12 Jul 2008 22:36:17 +0000

i have seen a few judges, and i don’t know where they get them from most of them look like they have never watched a mma fight before and your right there not fans and most likely a few of them don’t understand the sport.

By: dane drebin

dane drebin — Sat, 12 Jul 2008 22:14:40 +0000

i scored it a draw and i think the title should ahve stayed with rampage but rampage can only be upset with himself for letting forest dominate round 2.

By: Jacob

Jacob — Sat, 12 Jul 2008 21:49:17 +0000

I agree with Dan’s assessment of the fight. It made a lot of sense. A lot more sense than Nichole’s comment. I mean no offense but the only differance the judges and us is the judges get to see the fights live and for free. You can’t really say the judges assessments were 100% accurate because they’re human beings. NOT gods. Just like our decisions, their’s could be swayed by personal bias; and even more so by public opinion and pure corruption. I’m not saying it happened here, but it has happened before. I didn’t think both fighters won convincingly, but most the time the win is usually given to the champ because the pressure is on the challenger to show everyone that he beat the champion without a shadow of a doubt. I didn’t see that in Forrest, but like all things in life, there are exceptions to the rules. This is on one of them. Does Rampage deserve a rematch? Most definitely. Does he deserve one right away? Definitely not. Let him work his way up like everyone else. I’m happy for Forrest because he really worked hard and it was long overdue, but remember: It’s a lot harder to keep the title than it is to win it.

By: Nichole Lesniak

Nichole Lesniak — Fri, 11 Jul 2008 02:33:25 +0000

And therein lies the difference between all of you and the judges – they are not necessarily “FANS”. They are judges. Their assessments were 100% accurate.

Forrest didn’t necessarily “win” the fight, but Rampage ABSOLUTELY lost it.

By: roy

roy — Thu, 10 Jul 2008 18:14:40 +0000

good stuff dan, nothing ridiculous about it.

By: Dan Anderson

Dan Anderson — Thu, 10 Jul 2008 18:02:40 +0000

icemanrcks- #1 how can you say “dan i think you are the only one who saw the fight wrong.” when the guy right after me says he agrees 100%, silly. #2 I LOVE FORREST! I’ve watched every one of his fights, and there’s nothing to not like about the guy. I would love to see Forrest champion, but he didn’t win that fight. #3 “copy paste the rules like you know your sh!t.” There not rules, there judging criteria. I thought it important people see that. Heck, it was the first time I read them. But the main point I wanted to get across from posting them is clean and effective striking are to be weighed first in making a decision. And that heavy efficient strikes deserve more credit than #landed. People are under a misconception that Forrest landed a ton more strikes. The fact of the matter is, in rounds 1,3,and 5 (4 being a blowout for Rampage), the strike count was pretty damn even. How many times through out the fight did Forrest make you say “damn that hurt” after landing a strike? Twice, maybe three times, the two leg kicks in the 2nd, and a punch or two in the 5th. Rampage on the other hand? Several times in each round! (except the 2nd of course) Quinton clearly landed many power punches in every round. And efficiency? Thats a joke! Christ, Forrest probably missed more punches than Rampage even threw! Rampage made Forrest look silly standing in my opinion. Even stat sites have the overall percentage landed somewhere around 33% Griffin 50% Jackson. I want to talk about control a little. I liked a post on some site, someone said something to the extent of “who cares if Griffin was more active, this isnt a dance contest”. If you watch the fight and pay attention you will see that the ONLY times Rampage backs up is when Forrest is trying to throw a combo or kick. On the other hand, Forrest backs up every time HE lands something, every time Rampage throws something, and every time Rampage took a step towards Forrest, Forrest took 2 steps back! I think Rampage controlled the pace, because even though Forrest looked busier, Rampage didn’t let him do what he wanted. He blocked the vast majority of what Forrest threw at him, picked his spots and ultimately displayed more powerful and efficient stand up. iceman, as far as me not posting anymore, this is the first time I’ve ever posted anything on internet forums. The decision on this fight bugged me so much I had to get my thoughts out there just to feel better. So don’t worry, you probably wont see me around after this one dies out, until another bad decision And did you really have to call my post ridiculous? I was pretty proud of my assessment, and it came from a guy who watched the fight with NO bias. Unlike you, Chucks boy. #1 scoring criteria = clean effective striking. Rampage clear winner 49-46

By: icemanrcks

icemanrcks — Thu, 10 Jul 2008 02:54:39 +0000

poppy im not haiting like you would say he is just not as good as people think. it isnt abbout whooping chuck wich i agree he did. he just can not fight someone with forrests style. he didnt look like the rampage he normaly dose. he was not agressive witch is brought up in dan andersons rediculious posting. forrest through him off. and i dont think he deserves to be the champion. you all say you need a big win to take a tittle well just standing around getting a big shot here or there in a fight dosent count when your the champ. the champ needs to deserve the title and hold it strong. balls out all 5 like he did with henderson. i think he will be back for it but he knows he needs to prove he is the man. with a tittle on the line you cant let it go to the judges. it was to close and being the champ too close is not what you let happen. you destroy.

By: PoppyNick

PoppyNick — Thu, 10 Jul 2008 00:09:27 +0000

Iceman which fight did you watch. Dan’s assessment of the fight is right on and exactly how I saw it as well….and I watched it 5 times. Your problem is you are a Chuck fan and he’s whooped your boys a$$ TWICE!!!! Pretty clear why you are hating on Rampage bro.

By: icemanrcks

icemanrcks — Wed, 09 Jul 2008 23:13:35 +0000

dan i think you are the only one who saw the fight wrong.you need to get off of rampages jock and realize he is not as good as you think he. is he got beat! he was controlled the whole fight not dominated but controlled. quit looking at it as a fan and just look at it in a points match. your post made me laugh my as* off. copy paste the rules like you know your sh!t. im a chuck fan but move over and let forrest have his shine in the light. or jusat quit posting all together