Pick'em Leagues: THE BIG SHOW CASUAL BEST OF THE REST Single Event PvP: FANTASY POOLS Betting Leagues: THE BIG SHOW BEST OF THE REST

Couture disagrees with 'Rampage' decision

Print  
  Page 1 of 2     1     2  
Posted By Message

SmileR

Buy the ticket, take the ride

SmileR Avatar
5




 
 
 


 
 
Posts:3,347
Career:1,284-761
Joined:Dec 2007
Chips:
988
They see some superficial things like Rampage moving forward the whole time in that fight and they attribute that to him winning those rounds," Couture told Paul Howard of ESPNRadio1100 in Las Vegas. "And technically that's not what was happening. It sucks to be a fighter and have that happen to you."

Link

_______________________________________
"RIP Evan Tanner, a real life trail blazer."

I was born to lead, not to read!!!!

Post #1   11/29/10 1:04:41PM   

SmileR

Buy the ticket, take the ride

SmileR Avatar
5




 
 
 


 
 
Posts:3,347
Career:1,284-761
Joined:Dec 2007
Chips:
988
Randy makes some good points in the interview, but if he doesn't agree with the fact that Rampage won he could have put forward a better argument considering how the fight with him and Vera went.

_______________________________________
"RIP Evan Tanner, a real life trail blazer."

I was born to lead, not to read!!!!

Post #2   11/29/10 1:06:49PM   

ChokeUout

In Full Mount

ChokeUout Avatar
 
 
 


 
 
Posts:645
Career:446-268
Joined:Jun 2007
Chips:
168
Kinda ironic that Randy is commenting on this, because pretty much the same thing that got Rampage the Decision also gave Randy the Decision over Vera...

Post #3   11/29/10 1:07:47PM   

bjj1605

Heavyweight Champ

bjj1605 Avatar
7
 
 
 
 


 
 
Posts:3,212
Career:1,543-899
Joined:Oct 2007
Camp: Dark Horse
Chips:
680
I completely agree. Saying "Rampage was moving forward and therefore wins the round" is throwing all of the judging criteria out the window. It's like instead of having a concrete set of rules its up to the judges personal discretion to decide who won. If you look at the unified rules of MMA, Machida won that fight. He was the more effective striker in at least 2 of the three (arguably all 3) and dominated the 3rd round (though I agree it was short of a 10-8).

Post #4   11/29/10 1:10:50PM   

SmileR

Buy the ticket, take the ride

SmileR Avatar
5




 
 
 


 
 
Posts:3,347
Career:1,284-761
Joined:Dec 2007
Chips:
988

Posted by bjj1605

I completely agree. Saying "Rampage was moving forward and therefore wins the round" is throwing all of the judging criteria out the window. It's like instead of having a concrete set of rules its up to the judges personal discretion to decide who won. If you look at the unified rules of MMA, Machida won that fight. He was the more effective striker in at least 2 of the three (arguably all 3) and dominated the 3rd round (though I agree it was short of a 10-8).



The problem with Machida's style is if someone like Rampage steps in and throws every time he comes forward it looks like he is backing him up with shots. Regardless of if they land or if anything of merit connects he is backing up his opponent and and controlling the cage. That to the educated judges offers three huge parts to scoring points, aggression, hits and cage/ring control.
Rampage also spent the majority of the fight walking down Machida which again can be classed as cage control purely because he is looking to engage and Machida is backing away from the fight.
The initial shots that Machida threw to get in are forgotten or overlooked (Which I admit is wrong) because Rampage backed him up and used aggression to do so.

I agree on principal with what Randy is saying but you've also got to look at aggression in a fight and give it the credit its worth.
Joe Rogan has had the best idea on judging I've heard in a while, which was to give all the judges multiple tv screens so they can see the action from all angles, which would stop the excuses poor judges give.

_______________________________________
"RIP Evan Tanner, a real life trail blazer."

I was born to lead, not to read!!!!

Post #5   11/29/10 1:24:26PM   

tcunningham

Combat Sport and Fitness

tcunningham Avatar
1
 
 
 


 
 
Posts:3,275
Career:508-351
Joined:Sep 2009
Chips:
642
i gave rampage the 1st 2 rounds cause of octagon control and aggression only because thats the only thing that happened in those rounds. rampage landed a few decent punches in the 2nd round but nothing very impressive. machida obviously took the 3rd round. you never know what can happen in the hands of the judges and i think that was a huge mistake on both fighters part. it kinda seemed like they were both out there to not loose instead of out there to beat this guy. it was a very irritating fight for me cause both fighter have the potential of a barnburner of a fight and yet they both stuck with safe game plans. it sounds ok if it wins the fight for you decisively but it was very close and the judges had their way with the outcome.

_______________________________________

Post #6   11/29/10 2:58:03PM   

JimiMak

WarWagon Never Die!

JimiMak Avatar
1
 
 
 


 
 
Posts:1,851
Career:454-333
Joined:Jan 2007
Camp: JT WarWagon
Chips:
219
Randy knows what's up


and I don't get how anyone can equate the Randy/Vera match to the Mach/Page match, not the same thing at all.

Post #7   11/29/10 4:50:01PM   

sparky

AV BET Record: 40-9

sparky Avatar
19
 
 
 
 


 
 
Posts:5,728
Career:2,788-1,528
Joined:Jul 2007
Camp: Team Fry Guy
Chips:
1,058

Posted by JimiMak

Randy knows what's up


and I don't get how anyone can equate the Randy/Vera match to the Mach/Page match, not the same thing at all.



Pretty damn close to the same thing!!!!

Post #8   11/29/10 5:48:40PM   

king_katool

MMA Sensei

king_katool Avatar
 
 
 


 
 
Posts:1,083
Career:325-231
Joined:Mar 2008
Chips:
199
I don't agree that aggression = octagon control

For example,

Fighter A moves forward all round throwing but not connecting, Fighter B moving back all round lands counter straights and leg kicks, IMO fighter B is controling the range against fighter A, but fighter A was the aggressor

IMO fighter B should win the round

Post #9   11/29/10 6:36:20PM   

Pookie

Remember Paul Herrera

Pookie Avatar
8
 
 
 


 
 
Posts:9,597
Career:1,887-1,050
Joined:Apr 2007
Camp: The Ringers
Chips:
1,785

Posted by king_katool

I don't agree that aggression = octagon control

For example,

Fighter A moves forward all round throwing but not connecting, Fighter B moving back all round lands counter straights and leg kicks, IMO fighter B is controling the range against fighter A, but fighter A was the aggressor

IMO fighter B should win the round



I think in this example though, Fighter B was moving back all round landing counter leg kicks occasionally.

To say that machida was landing all round is a gross over-estimation of the offensive output machida had in those first two rounds.

I think Rampages punches in the clinch and footstomps were the most effective damage done in the entirety of the first round.

_______________________________________
BJ Penn beat Frankie Edgar more times than Benson Henderson beat Frankie Edgar.

Post #10   11/29/10 6:47:20PM   

king_katool

MMA Sensei

king_katool Avatar
 
 
 


 
 
Posts:1,083
Career:325-231
Joined:Mar 2008
Chips:
199

Posted by Pookie


Posted by king_katool

I don't agree that aggression = octagon control

For example,

Fighter A moves forward all round throwing but not connecting, Fighter B moving back all round lands counter straights and leg kicks, IMO fighter B is controling the range against fighter A, but fighter A was the aggressor

IMO fighter B should win the round



I think in this example though, Fighter B was moving back all round landing counter leg kicks occasionally.

To say that machida was landing all round is a gross over-estimation of the offensive output machida had in those first two rounds.

I think Rampages punches in the clinch and footstomps were the most effective damage done in the entirety of the first round.



My example was just that an example, Im just trying to point out the difference between aggressiveness and control,

Post #11   11/29/10 7:20:29PM   

submissionartist1

KING of the COMPOUND

submissionartist1 Avatar
 
 
 


 
 
Posts:360
Career:490-392
Joined:May 2007
Camp: HighKicksRUs
Chips:
38
Rampage almost fell over a few times with thoes wiffs! TRY FASTER !TRY AGAIN!

Post #12   11/29/10 8:16:43PM   

bjj1605

Heavyweight Champ

bjj1605 Avatar
7
 
 
 
 


 
 
Posts:3,212
Career:1,543-899
Joined:Oct 2007
Camp: Dark Horse
Chips:
680

Posted by SmileR


Posted by bjj1605

I completely agree. Saying "Rampage was moving forward and therefore wins the round" is throwing all of the judging criteria out the window. It's like instead of having a concrete set of rules its up to the judges personal discretion to decide who won. If you look at the unified rules of MMA, Machida won that fight. He was the more effective striker in at least 2 of the three (arguably all 3) and dominated the 3rd round (though I agree it was short of a 10-8).



The problem with Machida's style is if someone like Rampage steps in and throws every time he comes forward it looks like he is backing him up with shots. Regardless of if they land or if anything of merit connects he is backing up his opponent and and controlling the cage. That to the educated judges offers three huge parts to scoring points, aggression, hits and cage/ring control.
Rampage also spent the majority of the fight walking down Machida which again can be classed as cage control purely because he is looking to engage and Machida is backing away from the fight.
The initial shots that Machida threw to get in are forgotten or overlooked (Which I admit is wrong) because Rampage backed him up and used aggression to do so.

I agree on principal with what Randy is saying but you've also got to look at aggression in a fight and give it the credit its worth.
Joe Rogan has had the best idea on judging I've heard in a while, which was to give all the judges multiple tv screens so they can see the action from all angles, which would stop the excuses poor judges give.




I guess I just expect the judges (who's job is to professionally judge MMA bouts) to have enough technical knowledge to understand the exchanges better than "he was moving forward so he wins." And I wouldn't say Rampage was "walking down Machida" I think he was chasing him and whiffing. And he may have been "backing him up with shots" but I don't see how not getting punched means you lose the round. Machida was backing away and not getting hit. So now not getting punched is a bad thing?

I also think Couture/Vera and Page/Machida is a horrible comparison. Couture/Vera saw Randy get dropped several times and taken down and mounted. It was also primarily contested against the cage, while this fight had both more grappling and more striking.

In regards to the TV thing I actually though of that idea a long time ago. I'm pretty sure I even posted it one here. Not that I expect anyone to believe me though. Props to anyone who takes the time to search it and post it in this thread.

Post #13   11/29/10 10:12:41PM   

Pookie

Remember Paul Herrera

Pookie Avatar
8
 
 
 


 
 
Posts:9,597
Career:1,887-1,050
Joined:Apr 2007
Camp: The Ringers
Chips:
1,785
Not saying that i think Rampage was dominantly walking machida down...

But i will say that he cut off the cage from him continuously, and thats something that no other fighter besides shogun has accomplished against machida. I think his forward movement was very much a sign of octagon control because of the fact that he wasnt chasing machida, he was cornering him.

_______________________________________
BJ Penn beat Frankie Edgar more times than Benson Henderson beat Frankie Edgar.

Post #14   11/29/10 10:21:49PM   

vomitshovel

MMA Regular

vomitshovel Avatar
 
 
 


 
 
Posts:229
Career:136-93
Joined:Nov 2009
Camp: Xtreme Fight Militia
Chips:
24
If keeping up constant aggression, well not aggression, but a constant pace forward - wins you fights. IF IT DOES. Then, technically, if one fighter backs up another fighter for 5 minutes and not one blow is thrown by either man, The aggressor should win. However we know that it would be a draw round. So to be honest judging to that criteria puts counter punchers at a major disadvantage.
It's kinda the stand up version of the B.J.J guy VS the wrestler.
B.j.j guy can lye on his back for 5 minutes working towards subs and maybe throw up a triangle or 2, unsuccessfully - while the wrestler lays and prays, and guess who will win.....
Seems the judging is against you if you play smart

Post #15   11/30/10 3:08:02AM   
 
  Page 1 of 2     1     2