Who thinks Tim Sylvia is gunna win?

MMAPlayground.com » MMA General » General MMA Talk » Who thinks Tim Sylvia is gunna win?
« Previous Page | Next Page »
jkdskinhead
7/13/08 3:23:20PM
He was the champion because he fought people like Bob Sapp.. Yeah he beat Sammy, but Sammy has been crushed by small guys.. what do you think happens when you put a big guy in there? Honestly just watch any Choi fight, and you can seriously just start rolling on the floor from his technique.. Honeslty your standing face to face with someone and you start windmilling!?!?! THrowing verticle punches!?!! over and over while your Godzilla opponenet does the same thing.. They just put him in the ring with a bunch of other giants that have no skills like Akebono.. he just happens to be bigger then all the other giants so he wins.
Pookie
7/13/08 3:29:44PM

Posted by jkdskinhead

He was the champion because he fought people like Bob Sapp.. Yeah he beat Sammy, but Sammy has been crushed by small guys.. what do you think happens when you put a big guy in there?


Semmy Schilt is 28-3 in k-1 with his only losses coming to Choi, Aerts, and Ignashov(early in his career). What the hell are you talking about?
jkdskinhead
7/13/08 3:43:34PM

Posted by Pookie


Posted by jkdskinhead

He was the champion because he fought people like Bob Sapp.. Yeah he beat Sammy, but Sammy has been crushed by small guys.. what do you think happens when you put a big guy in there?


Semmy Schilt is 28-3 in k-1 with his only losses coming to Choi, Aerts, and Ignashov(early in his career). What the hell are you talking about?



Im obviously talking about his 14 mma losses.. since this convo is about Choi in mma.. relating to fedor...
Purge
7/13/08 3:51:05PM

Posted by jkdskinhead


Posted by Pookie


Posted by jkdskinhead

He was the champion because he fought people like Bob Sapp.. Yeah he beat Sammy, but Sammy has been crushed by small guys.. what do you think happens when you put a big guy in there?


Semmy Schilt is 28-3 in k-1 with his only losses coming to Choi, Aerts, and Ignashov(early in his career). What the hell are you talking about?



Im obviously talking about his 14 mma losses.. since this convo is about Choi in mma.. relating to fedor...



Not to mention Barnett, Kharitonov and many others.
mikevolz
7/13/08 3:53:32PM
i think tim sylvia is going to win.

stand up

i don't think sylvia will ko fedor or really hurt him, but i could see him outpointing fedor. I think fedor would be able to land a power shot or two, but ultimately loose the points battle in stand up.

Tim sylvia's jaw is weird to me, randy couture is not the hardest puncher in his division. but he put sylvia on queer street for 5 fights with 1 over hand right.

yet in arlovski sylvia 2, arlovski hit sylvia just about as hard as you can hit him, and he was fine.

so i could see sylvia outpointing him

wrestling

i think fedor has better technique, but he might have trouble with sylvia's strength.

ground

i mean honestly, does sylvia have to work any sub defense that isn't an armbar?


coupled with sylvia being more active fighting better fighters recently, and improving (which he has done). also the cut factor, and how sylvia will do ANYTHING to win a fight, even if its a snoozefest. he'll lay on top of fedor for 30 minutes if he has too. just my opinion.
Pookie
7/13/08 4:07:44PM

Posted by jkdskinhead


Posted by Pookie


Posted by jkdskinhead

He was the champion because he fought people like Bob Sapp.. Yeah he beat Sammy, but Sammy has been crushed by small guys.. what do you think happens when you put a big guy in there?


Semmy Schilt is 28-3 in k-1 with his only losses coming to Choi, Aerts, and Ignashov(early in his career). What the hell are you talking about?



Im obviously talking about his 14 mma losses.. since this convo is about Choi in mma.. relating to fedor...



You saying he was crushed by smaller guys was in context to K-1, because you were talking about his match with choi, which was in k-1
Purge
7/13/08 4:44:49PM

Posted by mikevolz

i think tim sylvia is going to win.

stand up

i don't think sylvia will ko fedor or really hurt him, but i could see him outpointing fedor. I think fedor would be able to land a power shot or two, but ultimately loose the points battle in stand up.

Tim sylvia's jaw is weird to me, randy couture is not the hardest puncher in his division. but he put sylvia on queer street for 5 fights with 1 over hand right.

yet in arlovski sylvia 2, arlovski hit sylvia just about as hard as you can hit him, and he was fine.

so i could see sylvia outpointing him

wrestling

i think fedor has better technique, but he might have trouble with sylvia's strength.

ground

i mean honestly, does sylvia have to work any sub defense that isn't an armbar?


coupled with sylvia being more active fighting better fighters recently, and improving (which he has done). also the cut factor, and how sylvia will do ANYTHING to win a fight, even if its a snoozefest. he'll lay on top of fedor for 30 minutes if he has too. just my opinion.



I hope your right, im tired of Fedor living of his aura of invincibility. The guy reminds me of Frank Shamrock, both used to fight the elites of their time, but now they're avoiding elites for better pay. If Fedor toned it down a lil bit with the money and stuff he would have a lot more fights.
jkdskinhead
7/13/08 11:20:41PM

Posted by Pookie


Posted by jkdskinhead



Im obviously talking about his 14 mma losses.. since this convo is about Choi in mma.. relating to fedor...



You saying he was crushed by smaller guys was in context to K-1, because you were talking about his match with choi, which was in k-1



No go back to page 2 and read.. i was saying Choi was one of the worst fighters ever to be allowed to compete professionally... where did I ever mention k-1? The reason I brought up Choi is because I said Fedor looked like he was having a little trouble with his size, and Tim sylvia is a big guy too.. wtf does that have to do at all with k-1? Later on i mentioned bob sapp.. but it was acontinuation of the conversation.. i am the one who brought up choi in the first place.. Then Semmy was added, and the context of the conversation never switched automatically to k-1.. it has continued to be about fighting in general. .. i have said "fighter".. dont tell me what it was in context to.. im the one that brought it up.

Smaller guys was obviously referencing his mma career.
Naturaldisaster
7/14/08 1:43:36AM
I dont like fedor (I dont know why but he's just one of those fighters that I just dont care for). People talk about chuck liddell or forrest or other popular fighters having nut huggers, I think Fedor has the biggest nut huggers. (no offense to fedor fans). I dont have a problem with which fighters people like
Pookie
7/14/08 1:52:15AM

Posted by jkdskinhead


Posted by Pookie


Posted by jkdskinhead



Im obviously talking about his 14 mma losses.. since this convo is about Choi in mma.. relating to fedor...



You saying he was crushed by smaller guys was in context to K-1, because you were talking about his match with choi, which was in k-1



No go back to page 2 and read.. i was saying Choi was one of the worst fighters ever to be allowed to compete professionally... where did I ever mention k-1? The reason I brought up Choi is because I said Fedor looked like he was having a little trouble with his size, and Tim sylvia is a big guy too.. wtf does that have to do at all with k-1? Later on i mentioned bob sapp.. but it was acontinuation of the conversation.. i am the one who brought up choi in the first place.. Then Semmy was added, and the context of the conversation never switched automatically to k-1.. it has continued to be about fighting in general. .. i have said "fighter".. dont tell me what it was in context to.. im the one that brought it up.

Smaller guys was obviously referencing his mma career.



"Yeah he beat Sammy, but Sammy has been crushed by small guys.. "

He beat Semmy in k-1, so this reference to semmy either makes no sense at all, or your refering to k-1.

Why would it matter if semmy has been beat by small guys in mma, when his match happened in k-1.

Different sports, see why this doesnt make sense?
jkdskinhead
7/14/08 2:27:00AM

Posted by Pookie


Posted by jkdskinhead


Posted by Pookie


Posted by jkdskinhead



Im obviously talking about his 14 mma losses.. since this convo is about Choi in mma.. relating to fedor...



You saying he was crushed by smaller guys was in context to K-1, because you were talking about his match with choi, which was in k-1



No go back to page 2 and read.. i was saying Choi was one of the worst fighters ever to be allowed to compete professionally... where did I ever mention k-1? The reason I brought up Choi is because I said Fedor looked like he was having a little trouble with his size, and Tim sylvia is a big guy too.. wtf does that have to do at all with k-1? Later on i mentioned bob sapp.. but it was acontinuation of the conversation.. i am the one who brought up choi in the first place.. Then Semmy was added, and the context of the conversation never switched automatically to k-1.. it has continued to be about fighting in general. .. i have said "fighter".. dont tell me what it was in context to.. im the one that brought it up.

Smaller guys was obviously referencing his mma career.



"Yeah he beat Sammy, but Sammy has been crushed by small guys.. "

He beat Semmy in k-1, so this reference to semmy either makes no sense at all, or your refering to k-1.

Why would it matter if semmy has been beat by small guys in mma, when his match happened in k-1.

Different sports, see why this doesnt make sense?



That specific match was in k-1 but the conversation i was having wasnt just about k-1, it was about Choi being a bad fighter.. so it was mentioned that Choi beat semmy.. the conversation is about fighting.. not about k-1.. i was saying semmy isnt good either, so someone saying choi beat semmy makes choi good isnt true. where are you not picking this up.. were talking if semmy is a good fighter or not.. why? because we were debating if choi was a good fighter.. why? because i was relating chois size to tim sylvia. This conversation was never about semmys k-1 record.. semmy was just thrown in there to say.. hey Choi is good because he beat a name like semmy.. (not saying choi was a good k-1 fighter, just saying he was a good fighter).. I hope u understand this time.. just because a fight happned somewhere doesnt mean we were talking about that specific org only.... this convo was about a fighters total quality.
Pookie
7/14/08 2:44:16AM

Posted by jkdskinhead


Posted by Pookie


Posted by jkdskinhead


Posted by Pookie


Posted by jkdskinhead



Im obviously talking about his 14 mma losses.. since this convo is about Choi in mma.. relating to fedor...



You saying he was crushed by smaller guys was in context to K-1, because you were talking about his match with choi, which was in k-1



No go back to page 2 and read.. i was saying Choi was one of the worst fighters ever to be allowed to compete professionally... where did I ever mention k-1? The reason I brought up Choi is because I said Fedor looked like he was having a little trouble with his size, and Tim sylvia is a big guy too.. wtf does that have to do at all with k-1? Later on i mentioned bob sapp.. but it was acontinuation of the conversation.. i am the one who brought up choi in the first place.. Then Semmy was added, and the context of the conversation never switched automatically to k-1.. it has continued to be about fighting in general. .. i have said "fighter".. dont tell me what it was in context to.. im the one that brought it up.

Smaller guys was obviously referencing his mma career.



"Yeah he beat Sammy, but Sammy has been crushed by small guys.. "

He beat Semmy in k-1, so this reference to semmy either makes no sense at all, or your refering to k-1.

Why would it matter if semmy has been beat by small guys in mma, when his match happened in k-1.

Different sports, see why this doesnt make sense?



That specific match was in k-1 but the conversation i was having wasnt just about k-1, it was about Choi being a bad fighter.. so it was mentioned that Choi beat semmy.. the conversation is about fighting.. not about k-1.. i was saying semmy isnt good either, so someone saying choi beat semmy makes choi good isnt true. where are you not picking this up.. were talking if semmy is a good fighter or not.. why? because we were debating if choi was a good fighter.. why? because i was relating chois size to tim sylvia. This conversation was never about semmys k-1 record.. semmy was just thrown in there to say.. hey Choi is good because he beat a name like semmy.. (not saying choi was a good k-1 fighter, just saying he was a good fighter).. I hope u understand this time.. just because a fight happned somewhere doesnt mean we were talking about that specific org only.... this convo was about a fighters total quality.



If thats what you meant then it was pointless to put it in the, but semmy has been crushed by smaller guys. Since it has nothing at all to do with the beginning of the sentence.

Its like saying, Yeah michael jordan led the bulls to the championships multiple times... but he struck out ALOT.
If you dont bridge between the 2 sports (NBA - MLB / K-1 - MMA) the sentence structure itself delivers what youre trrying to say incorrectly.
jkdskinhead
7/14/08 2:58:48AM

Posted by Pookie


Posted by jkdskinhead


Posted by Pookie


Posted by jkdskinhead


Posted by Pookie


Posted by jkdskinhead



Im obviously talking about his 14 mma losses.. since this convo is about Choi in mma.. relating to fedor...



You saying he was crushed by smaller guys was in context to K-1, because you were talking about his match with choi, which was in k-1



No go back to page 2 and read.. i was saying Choi was one of the worst fighters ever to be allowed to compete professionally... where did I ever mention k-1? The reason I brought up Choi is because I said Fedor looked like he was having a little trouble with his size, and Tim sylvia is a big guy too.. wtf does that have to do at all with k-1? Later on i mentioned bob sapp.. but it was acontinuation of the conversation.. i am the one who brought up choi in the first place.. Then Semmy was added, and the context of the conversation never switched automatically to k-1.. it has continued to be about fighting in general. .. i have said "fighter".. dont tell me what it was in context to.. im the one that brought it up.

Smaller guys was obviously referencing his mma career.



"Yeah he beat Sammy, but Sammy has been crushed by small guys.. "

He beat Semmy in k-1, so this reference to semmy either makes no sense at all, or your refering to k-1.

Why would it matter if semmy has been beat by small guys in mma, when his match happened in k-1.

Different sports, see why this doesnt make sense?



That specific match was in k-1 but the conversation i was having wasnt just about k-1, it was about Choi being a bad fighter.. so it was mentioned that Choi beat semmy.. the conversation is about fighting.. not about k-1.. i was saying semmy isnt good either, so someone saying choi beat semmy makes choi good isnt true. where are you not picking this up.. were talking if semmy is a good fighter or not.. why? because we were debating if choi was a good fighter.. why? because i was relating chois size to tim sylvia. This conversation was never about semmys k-1 record.. semmy was just thrown in there to say.. hey Choi is good because he beat a name like semmy.. (not saying choi was a good k-1 fighter, just saying he was a good fighter).. I hope u understand this time.. just because a fight happned somewhere doesnt mean we were talking about that specific org only.... this convo was about a fighters total quality.



If thats what you meant then it was pointless to put it in the, but semmy has been crushed by smaller guys. Since it has nothing at all to do with the beginning of the sentence.

Its like saying, Yeah michael jordan led the bulls to the championships multiple times... but he struck out ALOT.
If you dont bridge between the 2 sports (NBA - MLB / K-1 - MMA) the sentence structure itself delivers what youre trrying to say incorrectly.



Your point doesnt work at all and my sentence fits fine.. you know why.. because I wasnt talking about two seperate sports.. I was talking about fighting in general.. as I have already explained many times..

YOu have a fight in k-1. then you have a fight in mma.. you win them both.. there fore you won two fights in a row..

You won a baskeball game.. then you won a baseball game.. you won two games in a row.. do i really have to break things down to the kindergarden level?
Pookie
7/14/08 3:04:51AM
Dude youre grammar sucked, simple as that. It misled me to think you said something that youre insisting you did not say. Why? because it was grammatically incorrect, simple as that. End of converstation.
jkdskinhead
7/14/08 3:22:23AM

Posted by Pookie

Dude youre grammar sucked, simple as that. It misled me to think you said something that youre insisting you did not say. Why? because it was grammatically incorrect, simple as that. End of converstation.



No you already admitted to understanding that i wrote: choi beat semmy, but semmy has been crushed by alot of little guys.. im insisting that i didnt use the words k-1 or mma.. and i dont care how bad my grammar was.. its obivous i didint say k-1 or mma... grammatically incorect or not it has nothing to do with the fact that i didnt say k-1.. i said semmy vs choi, and semmy vs little guys.. which doesnt mean k-1.. it jsut means fought them
Pookie
7/14/08 3:27:26AM

Posted by jkdskinh


Posted by Pookie

Dude youre grammar sucked, simple as that. It misled me to think you said something that youre insisting you did not say. Why? because it was grammatically incorrect, simple as that. End of converstation.



No you already admitted to understanding that i wrote: choi beat semmy, but semmy has been crushed by alot of little guys.. im insisting that i didnt use the words k-1 or mma.. and i dont care how bad my grammar was.. its obivous i didint say k-1 or mma... grammatically incorect or not it has nothing to do with the fact that i didnt say k-1.. i said semmy vs choi, and semmy vs little guys.. which doesnt mean k-1.. it jsut means fought them



So youre saying you can judge a fighter's (semmy) loss in k-1(to choi) as inconsequential OR Non-impressive(either or), because in MMA he lost to alot of little guys?

"choi beat semmy, but semmy has been crushed by alot of little guys"

I dont see how this could mean anything other than the two scenario's.
jkdskinhead
7/14/08 3:36:44AM

Posted by Pookie


Posted by jkdskinh


Posted by Pookie

Dude youre grammar sucked, simple as that. It misled me to think you said something that youre insisting you did not say. Why? because it was grammatically incorrect, simple as that. End of converstation.



No you already admitted to understanding that i wrote: choi beat semmy, but semmy has been crushed by alot of little guys.. im insisting that i didnt use the words k-1 or mma.. and i dont care how bad my grammar was.. its obivous i didint say k-1 or mma... grammatically incorect or not it has nothing to do with the fact that i didnt say k-1.. i said semmy vs choi, and semmy vs little guys.. which doesnt mean k-1.. it jsut means fought them



So youre saying you can judge a fighter's (semmy) loss in k-1(to choi) as inconsequential OR Non-impressive(either or), because in MMA he lost to alot of little guys?

"choi beat semmy, but semmy has been crushed by alot of little guys"

I dont see how this could mean anything other than the two scenario's.



No.. im am obviously stating that i think Choi's victory over semmy was "non-impressive" because semmy lost to little guys.. so just because choi beat someone like semmy doesnt mean a thing.. because i dont think semmy is great...

semmy was only in my comment because I was talking about Choi.. as i have already explained

beating semmy doesnt make choi a great fighter, because semmy gets beat by midgets.
Pookie
7/14/08 3:44:27AM

Posted by jkdskinhead


Posted by Pookie


Posted by jkdskinh


Posted by Pookie

Dude youre grammar sucked, simple as that. It misled me to think you said something that youre insisting you did not say. Why? because it was grammatically incorrect, simple as that. End of converstation.



No you already admitted to understanding that i wrote: choi beat semmy, but semmy has been crushed by alot of little guys.. im insisting that i didnt use the words k-1 or mma.. and i dont care how bad my grammar was.. its obivous i didint say k-1 or mma... grammatically incorect or not it has nothing to do with the fact that i didnt say k-1.. i said semmy vs choi, and semmy vs little guys.. which doesnt mean k-1.. it jsut means fought them



So youre saying you can judge a fighter's (semmy) loss in k-1(to choi) as inconsequential OR Non-impressive(either or), because in MMA he lost to alot of little guys?

"choi beat semmy, but semmy has been crushed by alot of little guys"

I dont see how this could mean anything other than the two scenario's.



No.. im am obviously stating that i think Choi's victory over semmy was "non-impressive" because semmy lost to little guys.. so just because choi beat someone like semmy doesnt mean a thing.. because i dont think semmy is great...

semmy was only in my comment because I was talking about Choi.. as i have already explained

beating semmy doesnt make choi a great fighter, because semmy gets beat by midgets.



Thats MMAmath that crosses over 2 different sports. And you don't understand why its not making sense to people?

Different rules cause different fighters to excel.
Beating Semmy in k-1 makes Choi a great k-1 fighter, Semmy's mma record will not reflect on Choi's mma record because they are two different sports.

Im not saying choi is going to have an outstanding career, but to say that hes one of the worst to ever step foot into an mma match by this reasoning is absolutely ridiculous.
jkdskinhead
7/14/08 3:56:54AM

Posted by Pookie



Thats MMAmath that crosses over 2 different sports. And you don't understand why its not making sense to people?

Different rules cause different fighters to excel.
Beating Semmy in k-1 makes Choi a great k-1 fighter, Semmy's mma record will not reflect on Choi's mma record because they are two different sports.

Im not saying choi is going to have an outstanding career, but to say that hes one of the worst to ever step foot into an mma match by this reasoning is absolutely ridiculous.



Once again im not talking about mma, so it woulndt be mma math.. im talking about fighting in general, so it would be fight math. I couldnt argue that semmy is not great in k1 so far.. im argueing hes not a great fighter.

And all that aside.. i was talking about tim sylvia, fedor, and choi.. im not the one who originally brought semmy into the conversation.. im ot the one who originally mentioned choi vs semmy.... so if ur gonan keep inssiting that when i say the word "fight" it means mma.. then you should be yelling at whoever brought up semmy, when i was talking about fedor, tim, and choi fighting.

"Posted by juanez13

wow dude you need to get your facts straighten up, Hong Man choi worst fighter ever?..just cus you've never seen him fight before doesnt mean he sucks, in K1 he has done well, and even defeated semmy schilt, which not many people can say that fight now. Also, there is no comparison between Choi and Sylvia, Choi is 350lbs while Tim is 265lbs, BIG weight + height difference (choi is like a bigger version of sylvia, standing wise, but with much better standup), which makes it all that much harder to take him down. If you want to compare Fedor's past opponents to Sylvia, Semmy Schilt its the closest, which fedor took down, mounted and beat on from 3 rounds.

I do think Sylvia has a reasonable chance of pulling the upset , but the comments you made to back up for opinion have no truth behind them.

the ways most likely ways i see Sylvia winning this fight are by a cut, or by decision. But still taking Fedor to win."
mikevolz
7/14/08 9:19:04AM

Posted by jkdskinhead


Posted by Pookie



Thats MMAmath that crosses over 2 different sports. And you don't understand why its not making sense to people?

Different rules cause different fighters to excel.
Beating Semmy in k-1 makes Choi a great k-1 fighter, Semmy's mma record will not reflect on Choi's mma record because they are two different sports.

Im not saying choi is going to have an outstanding career, but to say that hes one of the worst to ever step foot into an mma match by this reasoning is absolutely ridiculous.



Once again im not talking about mma, so it woulndt be mma math.. im talking about fighting in general, so it would be fight math. I couldnt argue that semmy is not great in k1 so far.. im argueing hes not a great fighter.

And all that aside.. i was talking about tim sylvia, fedor, and choi.. im not the one who originally brought semmy into the conversation.. im ot the one who originally mentioned choi vs semmy.... so if ur gonan keep inssiting that when i say the word "fight" it means mma.. then you should be yelling at whoever brought up semmy, when i was talking about fedor, tim, and choi fighting.

"Posted by juanez13

wow dude you need to get your facts straighten up, Hong Man choi worst fighter ever?..just cus you've never seen him fight before doesnt mean he sucks, in K1 he has done well, and even defeated semmy schilt, which not many people can say that fight now. Also, there is no comparison between Choi and Sylvia, Choi is 350lbs while Tim is 265lbs, BIG weight + height difference (choi is like a bigger version of sylvia, standing wise, but with much better standup), which makes it all that much harder to take him down. If you want to compare Fedor's past opponents to Sylvia, Semmy Schilt its the closest, which fedor took down, mounted and beat on from 3 rounds.

I do think Sylvia has a reasonable chance of pulling the upset , but the comments you made to back up for opinion have no truth behind them.

the ways most likely ways i see Sylvia winning this fight are by a cut, or by decision. But still taking Fedor to win."




im not sure who said this but

comparing semmy schilt to tim sylvia? aside from being tall and a striker what is the similarity between the 2? comparing fedor's performance vs schilt vs how he will potentially do against sylvia is a terrible conclusion. much less comparing choi to any other mma fighter.

schilt was 22-10-1 when he fought fedor, sylvia is 24-4 with his only losses coming to ufc heavyweight champions. and has only been finished by submission. (by mir, nog, and arlovski) advantage sylvia.

Gipper
7/14/08 2:55:33PM
big tim obviously has a chance. he has been a top 5 hw for a long time now. it would be the biggest upset ever though.
RMFG_187
7/14/08 3:08:12PM
Tim vs Semmy in K-1 match, and I got my cash on Tim

Semmy is confusing to most fighters cuz of his size and the ability to go 3 rounds more than once a night.

Tim is also confusing because of his size, and has the ability to go 5 rounds.

would be an even fight but I'd take Tim.


as for comparing Tim vs Fedor to Semmy vs Fedor is ridiculous.

Fedor by Sub round 1
jkdskinhead
7/14/08 3:57:18PM

Posted by mikevolz



im not sure who said this but

comparing semmy schilt to tim sylvia? aside from being tall and a striker what is the similarity between the 2? comparing fedor's performance vs schilt vs how he will potentially do against sylvia is a terrible conclusion. much less comparing choi to any other mma fighter.

schilt was 22-10-1 when he fought fedor, sylvia is 24-4 with his only losses coming to ufc heavyweight champions. and has only been finished by submission. (by mir, nog, and arlovski) advantage sylvia.




All i was trying to say way back in the beggining like 80 pages ago was that I think Fedor can have trouble with big guys, as he looked like he was struggling with Choi a bit.
ko-kbo130
7/14/08 3:59:33PM

Posted by RMFG_187

Tim vs Semmy in K-1 match, and I got my cash on Tim

Semmy is confusing to most fighters cuz of his size and the ability to go 3 rounds more than once a night.

Tim is also confusing because of his size, and has the ability to go 5 rounds.

would be an even fight but I'd take Tim.


as for comparing Tim vs Fedor to Semmy vs Fedor is ridiculous.

Fedor by Sub round 1


tim- decent mma striker with no k-1 experience semmy- one of the best k-1 strikers. how do you explain that prediction with some intelliegence
ko-kbo130
7/14/08 4:05:44PM

Posted by jkdskinhead


Posted by mikevolz



im not sure who said this but

comparing semmy schilt to tim sylvia? aside from being tall and a striker what is the similarity between the 2? comparing fedor's performance vs schilt vs how he will potentially do against sylvia is a terrible conclusion. much less comparing choi to any other mma fighter.

schilt was 22-10-1 when he fought fedor, sylvia is 24-4 with his only losses coming to ufc heavyweight champions. and has only been finished by submission. (by mir, nog, and arlovski) advantage sylvia.




All i was trying to say way back in the beggining like 80 pages ago was that I think Fedor can have trouble with big guys, as he looked like he was struggling with Choi a bit.


he subbed choi in the first round. where is that having troubble?? is it because a 220lb man wen to throw a 350lb man and the bigger guy landed on top of him?
jkdskinhead
7/14/08 4:10:57PM

Posted by ko-kbo130


Posted by jkdskinhead


Posted by mikevolz



im not sure who said this but

comparing semmy schilt to tim sylvia? aside from being tall and a striker what is the similarity between the 2? comparing fedor's performance vs schilt vs how he will potentially do against sylvia is a terrible conclusion. much less comparing choi to any other mma fighter.

schilt was 22-10-1 when he fought fedor, sylvia is 24-4 with his only losses coming to ufc heavyweight champions. and has only been finished by submission. (by mir, nog, and arlovski) advantage sylvia.




All i was trying to say way back in the beggining like 80 pages ago was that I think Fedor can have trouble with big guys, as he looked like he was struggling with Choi a bit.


he subbed choi in the first round. where is that having troubble?? is it because a 220lb man wen to throw a 350lb man and the bigger guy landed on top of him?



As i already said earlier "yeah he put him away quickly but he didnt look comfortable fighting a big guy"

Now i know Tim isnt nearly as big as choi.. but tim is pretty damn big, and he has a pretty decent TD defense.
ko-kbo130
7/14/08 4:13:12PM

As i already said earlier "yeah he put him away quickly but he didnt look comfortable fighting a big guy"

Now i know Tim isnt nearly as big as choi.. but tim is pretty damn big, and he has a pretty decent TD defense.

would anyone look comfortable fighting a 7 foot 5 350lb person. CHoi is almost a foot taller and a 100lbs more than tim. i think even tim would look uncomfortable fighting Choi.
jkdskinhead
7/14/08 4:27:58PM

Posted by ko-kbo130


As i already said earlier "yeah he put him away quickly but he didnt look comfortable fighting a big guy"

Now i know Tim isnt nearly as big as choi.. but tim is pretty damn big, and he has a pretty decent TD defense.


would anyone look comfortable fighting a 7 foot 5 350lb person. CHoi is almost a foot taller and a 100lbs more than tim. i think even tim would look uncomfortable fighting Choi.



Choi is 7'2 not 7'5

How is choi almost a foot taller then tim? hes exactly 6 inches taller.. I gues if the word half means nearly complete then your on to something.. look mommy i got a 50 on my test!! thats almost a perfect score.
Bob Sapp is only 6'5 and he looked perfectly comfortable.. they were both standing flat footed, windmilling at each otehr for most of the fight.
Naturaldisaster
7/15/08 12:58:44AM

Posted by jkdskinhead


Posted by ko-kbo130


Posted by jkdskinhead


Posted by mikevolz



im not sure who said this but

comparing semmy schilt to tim sylvia? aside from being tall and a striker what is the similarity between the 2? comparing fedor's performance vs schilt vs how he will potentially do against sylvia is a terrible conclusion. much less comparing choi to any other mma fighter.

schilt was 22-10-1 when he fought fedor, sylvia is 24-4 with his only losses coming to ufc heavyweight champions. and has only been finished by submission. (by mir, nog, and arlovski) advantage sylvia.





All i was trying to say way back in the beggining like 80 pages ago was that I think Fedor can have trouble with big guys, as he looked like he was struggling with Choi a bit.


he subbed choi in the first round. where is that having troubble?? is it because a 220lb man wen to throw a 350lb man and the bigger guy landed on top of him?



As i already said earlier "yeah he put him away quickly but he didnt look comfortable fighting a big guy"

Now i know Tim isnt nearly as big as choi.. but tim is pretty damn big, and he has a pretty decent TD defense.



no one is gonna be comfortable fighting a guy that big. Fedor destroyed him.

I think tim will win, Its gonna be a really tough fight for tim.
ko-kbo130
7/15/08 1:06:33AM
Choi is 7'2 not 7'5

How is choi almost a foot taller then tim? hes exactly 6 inches taller.. I gues if the word half means nearly complete then your on to something.. look mommy i got a 50 on my test!! thats almost a perfect score.
Bob Sapp is only 6'5 and he looked perfectly comfortable.. they were both standing flat footed, windmilling at each otehr for most of the fight.

Sapp is still 350lbs. which is almost 100lbs more than Tim. As for choi being nearly a foot taller, thats my mistake. i thought choi was 7'5 which would make him 9 inches taller, being nearly a foot.
Pages: 1 [2] 3
Related Topics