It's that time again. Time to celebrate the great times of yesteryear with another look at the history of early MMA. My newest story runs down a three man crew that might have sucked in the cage, but would have no problem walking a dark alley or killing your ass in your sleep. Enjoy!
but once guys started wearing gloves, he decided that shit was for pussies
That was my favorite line. Great article Svar.
He’s been running a security company in Eastern Europe and Japan for decades, and by a security company, I mean a vicious mafia goon squad.
One fantastic line in an article chock full of them. I shit you not Svartorm, that piece is probably the best I have ever read on any MMA website ever. Bravo!
Thanks dude. It's a fun series to write. Check out the other ones if you missed them. Link should be at the bottom of the web page.
Hey bro, great read. I'm gonna be stuck here for a while
Branko is one scary mofo. I've been looking up tape on all these guys
Love this intro...
"You kids don’t know nothing. Do you think MMA just fell from the sky the night TUF first aired? Do you think Randy Couture hatched from an Olympic-caliber egg with a belt around his waist? Do you think Ken Shamrock’s face always looked like lukewarm hamburger helper? Oh no, you kids missed out on EVERYTHING. This monolith of MMA is built upon the past. Jon Jones is holding a title for some weight class or another, because guys fought when we didn’t have those things."
Well I'll have to argue with the Anderson Silva not being dangerous point after reading the story about him nearly murdering his coach with a shotgun lol.
Good article, entertaining.
Well if I "nearly" did a quadruple backflip off the roof of my house, would I be an amazing acrobat?
No, I'd be crippled.
Well, I was mostly joking, but if you're going to respond with that kind of logic, I have no choice but to debate. That analogy doesn't work at all. Being dangerous doesn't require any kind of training, it requires only a state of mind, absolutely anyone can decide they want to murder people and they become instantly dangerous as a result of their mentality, whereas being an acrobat requires you to perform pretty specific feats that require practice.
You can attempt and fail to kill someone and you're still just as crazy and dangerous as if you had succeeded by any reasonable person's judgement. By the acrobat analogy logic we should set attempted murderers free because they failed at murder and are therefore not dangerous.
You'd be pretty hard pressed to find anyone who would say that a guy who gets a shotgun and hides in an alley waiting to ambush and murder someone is not dangerously mentally unstable whether they actually go through with it or not. Just the act of getting your hands on a gun and waiting would be more than enough to qualify you as extremely dangerous according to a court of law.
Like I said, I was mostly joking, but if you throw bad logic at me, there's no way I can stop myself from debating.
I CAN'T HELP MYSELF, IT'S AN ADDICTION!