Post subject: Re: [SPOILERS] UFC 111 - St. Pierre vs. Hardy Discussion
Posted: Mon Mar 29, 2010 8:57 am
Special
Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2009 7:43 pm Posts: 373
3TIMES wrote:
gsp was straight PUSS 4 not standing with hardy & the 2 sub's he almost got go's 2 show how hardcore hardy really is 4 not TAPPING & he's no good on his back
Thats bollox IMO. GSP wasnt a pussy for not standing - just smart - he knew hed have a much lower chance of winning on the feet. Cant really argue with his tactics.
The second part of what you wrote - ridiculous! Hardy was great on his back in this fight. Yes - he needs to work on his wrestling big time as he was forced to defend the whole time, but on his back he did himself proud. Its not at all where he wanted the fight, but look, he lasted 5 rounds with GSP - only gave GSP 2 submission attempts, and escaped both times - avoided lots of GSPs attempts for dominant positions like the crucifix, and when GSP did get a dominant position Hardy was able to keep moving and stay out of danger.
Seriously. If Hardy was so bad off his back he would have taken WAAAAY more damage than he did, and likely not have made it through the 5 rounds against one of the best P4P in the world. Hardy was a warrior, but as usual, always thinking. Just because of his image people think hes a mindless brawler - nothing could be further than the truth.
Post subject: Re: [SPOILERS] UFC 111 - St. Pierre vs. Hardy Discussion
Posted: Mon Mar 29, 2010 9:12 am
Special
Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:00 pm Posts: 784 Location: Australia
I agree with GSP and others here. The technique used on that Kimura attempt was horrible. I was screaming at the TV for him to yank it up and rotate it, could of finished the fight there easily.
Post subject: Re: [SPOILERS] UFC 111 - St. Pierre vs. Hardy Discussion
Posted: Mon Mar 29, 2010 4:36 pm
Special
Joined: Fri Oct 02, 2009 10:49 am Posts: 545
Gotta say great event, Anyone think GSP kinda reminds me of hughes now no slams but just nullifies the fight.
Hardy did well we gotta remind everybody this was GSP, the guy thats taken down BJ, Hughes, Serra these are all skilled fighters so its a bit hard to call hardy for getting taken down.
Post subject: Re: [SPOILERS] UFC 111 - St. Pierre vs. Hardy Discussion
Posted: Mon Mar 29, 2010 5:50 pm
Joined: Sun Mar 21, 2010 1:28 pm Posts: 21
subvertbeats wrote:
I agree Fitch wouldnt stand a chance again with GSP. In FItchs defence though you only recounted part of the story there. Fitch doesnt want to fight Kos because they're teammates at AKA. I dont think that fight will happen, but, I dont see Fitch fighting GSP unless he gets through Alves again first.
Personally, I think that they need to suck it up. They both want title shots, but they aren't willing to do it on camera? If you guys are willing to bang it out in your gym (which Fitch declared that they would do), why aren't you willing to do it on PPV? I don't think these guys should be allowed to pick and choose their opponents if they want a title shot. They constantly call out that they are ready for GSP and want a shot at the belt and Dana offers them a #1 contenders fight. The fact that Fitch admits that they are willing to fight each other in their own gym, but not on camera. So the "we don't want to fight each other" argument is out the window.
PMBR wrote:
Palhares/Drwal No sooner did I get the phrase "this guy has killer leg locks" out of my mouth before this fight was over. 90 day suspension to Palhares for not letting the move go soon enough. I think this fight is a good example of why the heel hook needs to be banned. Drwal looks as thought something has been torn and he tapped almost immediately.
subvertbeats wrote:
Well, I saw this fight ending 2 ways - the way it actually did end, or with Drwal KO'ing Palhares if he could keep it on the feet. I picked wrong. I completely disagree about the heel hook though. The heel hook was not the issue here. The issue was Paul Harris not letting go of it.
The hold itself is dangerous. The difference between a heel hook and other submission maneuvers is the amount of time between when you realize you need to tap and when something breaks/rips/tears. All other moves cross your pain threshold before an injury because you realize that you are in serious trouble.
PMBR wrote:
GSP vs Hardy Hardy came into the fight with an awful, awful gameplan. He tried to stop the takedown, and was so worried about it that he seemed very hesitant with his hands. He was gunshy for most of the opportunities he had. GSP's takedowns are amazing, and you aren't going to stop them. You might as well swing for the fences until he takes you down, then stand back up as soon as possible and do it all over again. Dan Hardy impressed me though with his mental and physical toughness. I think the ref should have stepped in and stopped the fight during those submissions. Pride and determination is what prevented Hardy from tapping and he showed a bit of disregard for his own safety. GSP being unable to finish left him with a very frustrated look on his face for most of the night. Georges did exactly what he needed to do. He got the takedowns and he went for lots of submissions. He got 2 submissions in deep, but when Hardy didn't tap, Georges should have looked to land a choke. It took a lot of class on Georges' part to not break Hardy's arm last night. It looked as if he briefly had an internal moral argument as to whether or not he should.
subvertbeats"I couldnt DISAGREE more....
Hardys gameplan was sound - If he couldve kept it on the feet he would have. He knew he couldnt stuff the takedowns, and anytime they were on the feet he was looking for opportunities - you're doing him a big disservice to think that hes just some swinging brawler - Hardy is a very cerebral fighter - he wouldnt go out there swinging haymakers trying to get a lucky punch - or he wouldve been taken down even quicker than he was. Hes a fantastic counter puncher and he was waiting for a tiny opening. GSP never gave it too him though, and once on the ground kept him there for so much of the fight, then outcome was inevitable.[/quote]
I'm not downplaying the talents of Dan Hardy. I am being a realist about the skills of GSP. We all knew that if GSP got it to the ground, he would dry-hump his way to victory. Dan Hardy needed to swing for the fences, but didn't get off the shots. He tried to counter strike during the shots instead of pushing the pace. Look at the fight statistics. Hardy threw a power punch 11 times in that entire fight and connected with nothing. If you want to be like Matt Serra and catch GSP with a punch, you need to press the action and take it to him. You can't let Georges dictate the pace of a fight or you will end up on your back for the duration of the round.
Im also in complete disgreement with what you're saying about the sub attempts. The ref shouldve stopped it? What?!! Hardy grimaced for a second during the armbar, but in both attempts, his hips were able to move his body into a position to take the pressure off his extended joints and ligaments. He didnt not tap just because of his heart - his technique got him out of those sub attempts - and after the fight even GSP felt that his technique in applying the subs was lacking. Dana got it right - Hardy showed immense potential and he needs to work on his wrestling base, and one day he could well be champ.
I've got one name for you: Razak Al-Hassan.
When he fought Steve Cantwell, he looked perfectly calm and fine. It was quite obvious that he was in a ridiculous armbar and that he was at high risk of having it snapped. He refused to tap out, knowing what could happen to him. Steve Cantwell didn't have the discipline of Georges St. Pierre. Steve realized that he wasn't going to get the tapout, so he snapped his arm. Even after the break Al-Hassan looked calm. We should not let fighters have their limbs snapped because they are too prideful to tap out.
Go back and watch that kimura again. Georges face is one that acknowledges the situation he is in. I don't think that Hardy got out of the kimura. I think that Georges let it go when he realized that he wasn't going to earn the submission.
Post subject: Re: [SPOILERS] UFC 111 - St. Pierre vs. Hardy Discussion
Posted: Mon Mar 29, 2010 6:13 pm
Special
Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2009 5:55 am Posts: 400
Great hook by Palhares. It was over before I even blinked. He should have let go a little earlier though.
Wallace looked massive and did well in the take downs but it was not smart to do this. He should have stayed on his feet as he hit Hamman enough times to go for the KO, but instead he went for a take down after. Maybe to save some energy but wrong game plan imo.
Matt brown looked poor. Definitely not the best match of the evening although Ricardo finished him off in a spectacular way.
Nate Diaz showed character, speed and did very well. Like they say when he gets punched once he returns 4 punches.
Jim Miller had a tough night. Could have gone either way but I was happy to see him win.
Fitch dominated and did what he had to do. Make sure he hardly gets punched and just neutralize his opponent by taking it to the floor and slowly punch his way to victory. Maybe not as entertaining but very effective.
Pellegrino looked sharp and what a nice way to end the match. Great choke and great fight.
Carwin was awesome like usual. He is so massive but in control of his arms. Mir's body looked ok but he did not impress me at all. I think Carwin deserves the actual belt and I think he will take it away from Brock by another knock out.
GSP did what he had to do. Take down Hardy and out skill him there. But I have to say that Hardy showed real heart and did what he could. Not tapping out surprised me totally. But we have to be honest, GSP is just too fast and skilled for probably all fighters in his weight class. He can do stand up, defence and ground work and not many can beat him even on one of those skills. However there is always a surprise possible.
Post subject: Re: [SPOILERS] UFC 111 - St. Pierre vs. Hardy Discussion
Posted: Mon Mar 29, 2010 9:01 pm
Special
Joined: Tue Jun 09, 2009 1:56 pm Posts: 268
Great event all round. 4.5 out of 5.
A shame about the Palhares/Drwal fight being over so quickly after a slip, but the sub tenchnique was excellent (even if it was held too long).
Diaz looked good at WW. A complete clone of his brother's fighting style now.
The Wallace/Hamman fight was excellent. So entertaining. Granted, Wallace needs to drop some muscle, or keep it standing as Foxy says - he could have won that fight in the first round with the damage he was doing to Hamman's head at times.
Miller/Bocek was another great battle that was (somewhat) suprisingly close. Good fun to watch.
Fitch/Saunders was everthing we all expected. It ain't pretty, but it is effective and it works for Fitch and so you can't blame him. I do wish he'd put more into his punches from time to time, though, and at least look more damaging/trying to finish. You never know, he might finish that way, too. Based on the press conference, I don't think he's going to be next in line like he hopes. Kos/Daley I think will get it for sure.
Loved the Carwin/Mir fight. It was exactly as I'd thought it would go. And take away the time spent circling each other at the start and then almost 15 seconds of unneccesary punishment Mir took at the end, and that fight time suddenly got a lot shorter still. Carwin is one scarily powerful dude...
The main event lived up to everything the vast majority of people were expecting. GSP was awesome and Hardy was very impressive in defeat. I'm with subvertbeats on these issues: GSP is in no way diminished by fighting his stengths against his opponent's weakness - that's up to the opponent to fix, not GSP.
The only downpoint for me was that the amount of booing at times during the event was really poor - to the extent that refs were calling for action when guys were working on the floor, and Miragliotta even kept separating guys working while standing against the cage. What is up with that?! Let the guys fight!
Also, you can't rely on the ref stopping the fight on their own judgement for submissions where the guy isn't tapping. He's not tapping for a reason: either cos he can handle the pain (and damn the injury), or because the technique isn't properly applied. In both cases the fighter could end up escaping the hold, so why are we rewarding the opponent for a sub attempt that hasn't worked? Yes, the kimura GSP had in this particular fight, he did appear to let go because he was amazed/confused Hardy hadn't tapped and he knew that something was going wrong with the hold or he was just wasting energy, but if Hardy doesn't want to tap then the ref shouldn't award GSP the win prematurely. Would imagine every fight stopped like that would see an immediate appeal by the loser.
Post subject: Re: [SPOILERS] UFC 111 - St. Pierre vs. Hardy Discussion
Posted: Mon Mar 29, 2010 10:22 pm
Joined: Sun Mar 21, 2010 1:28 pm Posts: 21
There is no difference in a referee stopping a fight because a guy refuses to tap to an armbar as opposed to a ref stopping a fight while somebody is trying to prevent getting KO'd. How many times do you see guys who are getting punched over and over and over again but don't want to quit? Hell, your Frank Mir example proves MY point. You wanted that fight stopped 15 seconds earlier, but Mirgoliatta waited for Frank to go completely limp.
A ref stops a fight because a fighter is not making an intelligent decision to quit. PERIOD.
Post subject: Re: [SPOILERS] UFC 111 - St. Pierre vs. Hardy Discussion
Posted: Mon Mar 29, 2010 10:32 pm
Special
Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2009 7:43 pm Posts: 373
PMBR wrote:
There is no difference in a referee stopping a fight because a guy refuses to tap to an armbar as opposed to a ref stopping a fight while somebody is trying to prevent getting KO'd.
the difference is a full state of conciousness
PMBR wrote:
How many times do you see guys who are getting punched over and over and over again but don't want to quit? Hell, your Frank Mir example proves MY point. You wanted that fight stopped 15 seconds earlier, but Mirgoliatta waited for Frank to go completely limp.
or more likely dont have the presence of mind to be able to?
PMBR wrote:
A ref stops a fight because a fighter is not making an intelligent decision to quit. PERIOD.
Yes indeed. PERIOD. When youve taken 4 or 5 clean shots from carwin, you cant possibly make an intelligent decision. When GSP is applying a kimura without fully controlling you and you're able to intelligently manoeuvre your hips to relieve the pressure and escape the submission then thats a completely different matter.
Post subject: Re: [SPOILERS] UFC 111 - St. Pierre vs. Hardy Discussion
Posted: Mon Mar 29, 2010 10:42 pm
Joined: Sun Mar 21, 2010 1:28 pm Posts: 21
You're acting as if there's a huge difference between mentally and physically not being able to make the right decision for your own health? I go back to the Razak Al-Hassan case. Look what happened to him because he was too prideful to make the right decision. If GSP had broken Hardy's arm, you'd all be saying the same thing.
Just because you are conscious doesn't mean you can make the right decisions. Tim Sylvia would have kept fighting Frank Mir even after having his arm broken. Are you saying that Herb Dean was wrong for stopping that fight even though the champion at the time fully intended on continuing?
Post subject: Re: [SPOILERS] UFC 111 - St. Pierre vs. Hardy Discussion
Posted: Mon Mar 29, 2010 10:43 pm
Special
Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2009 7:43 pm Posts: 373
PMBR wrote:
subvertbeats wrote:
I agree Fitch wouldnt stand a chance again with GSP. In FItchs defence though you only recounted part of the story there. Fitch doesnt want to fight Kos because they're teammates at AKA. I dont think that fight will happen, but, I dont see Fitch fighting GSP unless he gets through Alves again first.
Personally, I think that they need to suck it up. They both want title shots, but they aren't willing to do it on camera? If you guys are willing to bang it out in your gym (which Fitch declared that they would do), why aren't you willing to do it on PPV? I don't think these guys should be allowed to pick and choose their opponents if they want a title shot. They constantly call out that they are ready for GSP and want a shot at the belt and Dana offers them a #1 contenders fight. The fact that Fitch admits that they are willing to fight each other in their own gym, but not on camera. So the "we don't want to fight each other" argument is out the window.
I dont disagree, but a) I dont think it would happen and b) theres other fights Id rather see
PMBR wrote:
subvertbeats wrote:
Well, I saw this fight ending 2 ways - the way it actually did end, or with Drwal KO'ing Palhares if he could keep it on the feet. I picked wrong. I completely disagree about the heel hook though. The heel hook was not the issue here. The issue was Paul Harris not letting go of it.
The hold itself is dangerous. The difference between a heel hook and other submission maneuvers is the amount of time between when you realize you need to tap and when something breaks/rips/tears. All other moves cross your pain threshold before an injury because you realize that you are in serious trouble.
And by your argument we'd ban RNC's too. The consequences of being held a few seconds too long without oxygen to you brain are far far worse Im afraid matey...
PMBR wrote:
If you want to be like Matt Serra and catch GSP with a punch, you need to press the action and take it to him. You can't let Georges dictate the pace of a fight or you will end up on your back for the duration of the round. l
No, you need to have the takedown defence of BJ, without the size disadvantage....
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 62 guests
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum
