Couture disagrees with 'Rampage' decision |
| Posted By |
Message |
Buy the ticket, take the ride
Career record: 906-512
Season: 17-7 (#920)
Location: My big ass bed
|
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
|
|
|
Buy the ticket, take the ride
Career record: 906-512
Season: 17-7 (#920)
Location: My big ass bed
|
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
|
Advertisement |
|
ChokeUout
In Full Mount
Career record: 428-256
Season: 0-0 (#-)
Location: Wisconsin
|
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
MMA Sensei
Career record: 889-537
Season: 20-4 (#531)
Location: Chicago
|
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
|
Buy the ticket, take the ride
Career record: 906-512
Season: 17-7 (#920)
Location: My big ass bed
|
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
|
Combat Sport and Fitness
Career record: 375-265
Season: 0-0 (#-)
Location: Mean streets of Enumclaw, WA
|
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!
Career record: 379-298
Season: 0-0 (#-)
Location: talkin trash to the garbage around me
|
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
Heavyweight Champ
Career record: 987-524
Season: 14-10 (#1131)
Location: Ontario "905"
|
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
Career record: 256-188
Season: 0-0 (#-)
Location: Hamilton,ON,CA
|
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
|
Remember Paul Herrera
Career record: 1017-538
Season: 20-4 (#60)
Location: You think you can tell heaven from hell?
|
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
Career record: 256-188
Season: 0-0 (#-)
Location: Hamilton,ON,CA
|
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
Career record: 359-279
Season: 0-0 (#-)
Location: north west NJ
|
Rampage almost fell over a few times with thoes wiffs! TRY FASTER !TRY AGAIN!
|
|
Post #12 11/29/10 8:16:43PM
|
bjj1605
MMA Sensei
Career record: 889-537
Season: 20-4 (#531)
Location: Chicago
|
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
|
Remember Paul Herrera
Career record: 1017-538
Season: 20-4 (#60)
Location: You think you can tell heaven from hell?
|
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
Career record: 129-81
Season: 0-0 (#-)
Location: South Africa
|
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
|
|
