Rumors of Anderson vs G.S.P. for UFC 206.
The below person supposedly broke the news of Conor vs Eddie @ 205
It could very well be true. From my understanding GSP is through with his USADA test and Anderson announced he has a fight coming up.
https://twitter.com/UnderBridgeMMA/status/784442566947119104
The below person supposedly broke the news of Conor vs Eddie @ 205
It could very well be true. From my understanding GSP is through with his USADA test and Anderson announced he has a fight coming up.
https://twitter.com/UnderBridgeMMA/status/784442566947119104
The Stefan Struve fight looked comical with the size difference. Certain angles made it look worse than it was.
Dan Henderson was absolutely exhausted between rounds. Tough fight. Some are claiming robbery. I think Bisping did more to win the rounds and won according to the rules of MMA. It will be interesting to see the score cards to see what rounds were given to who and if any judge gave a 10-8 for round 1.
Dan Henderson was absolutely exhausted between rounds. Tough fight. Some are claiming robbery. I think Bisping did more to win the rounds and won according to the rules of MMA. It will be interesting to see the score cards to see what rounds were given to who and if any judge gave a 10-8 for round 1.
Round 1 SHOULD have been 10-8 imo. Honestly thought they could have gone draw with a 10-8 round 1 and Hendo winning the 2nd. Bisping winning isn't some great injustice or anything but he damn well better know that his time with that belt is limited. He'll almost certainly lose it next time out.
A draw was possible. It just all depends on how you score the rounds. 10-8 can be argued for round 1 and round 2 can be argued for Hendo. I thought at least one Judge would have seen it that way.
I also think Hendo might have made a mistake with that last kick he through that let Bisping be on top of him for the last few seconds of the 5th. Judges are swayed by what happens at the end of rounds. It just might have cost him that round and the fight.
Edit: Forgot to in include the below ....... Scorecard
http://www.mmafighting.com/2016/10/9/13216202/michael-bisping-vs-dan-henderson-2-ufc-204-scorecard
I also think Hendo might have made a mistake with that last kick he through that let Bisping be on top of him for the last few seconds of the 5th. Judges are swayed by what happens at the end of rounds. It just might have cost him that round and the fight.
Edit: Forgot to in include the below ....... Scorecard
http://www.mmafighting.com/2016/10/9/13216202/michael-bisping-vs-dan-henderson-2-ufc-204-scorecard
I was surprised to hear so many people call that first round a 10-8 for Hendo. Felt like bisping controlled the tempo and threw more for the majority of that round and did well getting in and out until that one big right hand which dropped him. A 10-8 round is for a fighter who is overwhelmingly dominant in that round which I feel hendo wasn't, easy 10-9 if you ask me.
I agree it was no 10-8. For me a 10-8 is as a dominate round as you can get without it being stopped. 10-7 should only be possible with a point deduction. If you are beating someone bad enough in an MMA match to warrant a 10-7 then the fight should be stopped.
The ACTUAL definition by which a round is determined to be a 10-8 is as follows:
''A round is to be scored as a 10-8 Round when a contestant overwhelmingly dominates by striking or grappling in a round''.
Anyone that thinks round 1 was a 10-8 needs to understand what a 10-8 actually is. Henderson would have needed to do a LOT more to get that score. This isn't boxing, where a knockdown is pretty much automatically a point deduction. MMA (these days) is far more about domination or time spent in control.
''A round is to be scored as a 10-8 Round when a contestant overwhelmingly dominates by striking or grappling in a round''.
Anyone that thinks round 1 was a 10-8 needs to understand what a 10-8 actually is. Henderson would have needed to do a LOT more to get that score. This isn't boxing, where a knockdown is pretty much automatically a point deduction. MMA (these days) is far more about domination or time spent in control.
While I agree that you can't really take much away from a win like that, on the whole I'm enjoying the whole Bisping-as-champion era.
Is he the best fighter in his division? Nope. He's probably not even in the top four. But could he beat any one of those top four on any given night? I'd say he's at least a live dog against any of them. And has he bought some much needed fun, personality and entertainment to the division? Absolutely.
Plus it's not like there's a #1 guy behind him who pretty clearly should have the belt right now. The middleweight title picture is a mess, and will continue to be so through at least the end of the year.
I can see this being a bit like the Robbie Lawler title reign at welterweight: a guy who everyone thought was probably past the title contention point of his career, somehow binks the win for the belt, and then goes on to have some fights that are all the more fun because of the very real chance he could lose any of them.
Is he the best fighter in his division? Nope. He's probably not even in the top four. But could he beat any one of those top four on any given night? I'd say he's at least a live dog against any of them. And has he bought some much needed fun, personality and entertainment to the division? Absolutely.
Plus it's not like there's a #1 guy behind him who pretty clearly should have the belt right now. The middleweight title picture is a mess, and will continue to be so through at least the end of the year.
I can see this being a bit like the Robbie Lawler title reign at welterweight: a guy who everyone thought was probably past the title contention point of his career, somehow binks the win for the belt, and then goes on to have some fights that are all the more fun because of the very real chance he could lose any of them.
Michel_11 said:
I think mileage on that will vary a lot depending on where you come from. If you're British, then Bisping is almost certainly a legend of the sport. If you're not, maybe he's not.
In much the same way that some American or Brazilian fighters may or may not be "legends of the sport" depending on where you come from and what your experience with the sport has been.
There are a few stats to back up the idea that Bisping is a legend of the sport though. First English fighter to main event a UFC card, first English fighter to win a UFC title, most wins in UFC history. Those achievements (especially the last one) aren't nothing.
I understand your point of view. But my comment was analyzing globally, a legend is one of the best in the sport. And Bisping definitely not come close to many great fighters.OzExorcist said:
Stats must be analyzed not only coldly looking at the numbers, we have to see the quality of opponents among several other factors.OzExorcist said:
Rashad Evans lost
Dan Henderson lost
Wanderlei Silva lost
Chael Sonnen (!!) lost
Vitor Belfort lost
In summary Bisping's wins until 2014 were against fighters who are no big deal.
Now won a fight well questionable against an Henderson with 46 years old, as well as the victory over semi retired Anderson Silva which Bisping was saved by the bell. Against Luke Rockhold, the american came in with great pride and he was really surprised, was a great victory.