1. And... we're back. You'll notice that all of your images are back as well, as are our beloved emoticons, including the infamous :foo: We have also worked with our server folks and developers to fix the issues that were slowing down the site.

    There is still work to be done - the images in existing sigs are not yet linked, for example, and we are working on a way to get the images to load faster - which will improve the performance of the site, especially on the pages with a ton of images, and we will continue to work diligently on that and keep you updated.

    Cheers,

    Fok on behalf of the entire Styleforum team
    Dismiss Notice

The Official MMA thread

Discussion in 'Entertainment, Culture, and Sports' started by Matt, May 30, 2008.

  1. Eason

    Eason Senior member

    Messages:
    14,669
    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2007
    Location:
    Bangkok
    The scores were:
    49-46
    48-47
    48-47

    I don't see how it's at all possible to get the 49-46. round 2 was arguably a 10-8 round, though forest did no visable damage to Rampage thoughout the whole fight. I'd say Round 1, 4, and 5 were rampage.
     
  2. Brad

    Brad Senior member

    Messages:
    2,297
    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2006
    Location:
    Beyond Thunderdome
    I'd say Round 1, 4, and 5 were rampage.

    You must have seen a different fight than me.
     
  3. Eason

    Eason Senior member

    Messages:
    14,669
    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2007
    Location:
    Bangkok
    Sorry it was two judges had it 48-46, and one judge had it 49-46.

    Those rounds should have gone to rampage because he came out ahead in trades every time. Forrest took him down from the clinch several times because he needed to recover. I think Forrest's face is proof that he didn't take those rounds.
     
  4. Stazy

    Stazy Senior member

    Messages:
    7,194
    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2006
    Location:
    Toronto
    forest did no visable damage to Rampage thoughout the whole fight.
    What about all those leg kicks? In the post-fight interview Rampage made it pretty clear that those hurt him pretty bad.
     
  5. Eason

    Eason Senior member

    Messages:
    14,669
    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2007
    Location:
    Bangkok
    Yeah but not enough to sway the fight. If forest had kept kicking the leg until he couldn't stand, then it would mean something. It was only 2 kicks that got him good, they just showed them over and over.
     
  6. odoreater

    odoreater Senior member

    Messages:
    8,739
    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2005
    Location:
    Elizabethtown
    I think Forrest's face is proof that he didn't take those rounds.

    Come on man, you can't be serious when you say that. The guy has a ton of scar tissue on his face and it opens up in every single fight. You can't honestly say that you're going to judge the fight by what his face looked like. The way I saw it, Forest pushed the action, he had better aggression, better "octagon control" and won this fight no question. I didn't really see Rampage do much other than throw some leather now and then. Sure he had a few punches land clean, but Forest was a lot more active and aggressive.
     
  7. Eason

    Eason Senior member

    Messages:
    14,669
    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2007
    Location:
    Bangkok
    Basically I don't think you could say anybody won that fight the way they scored it, I want round 6 until somebody gets der ass whupped.
     
  8. Matt

    Matt Senior member

    Messages:
    11,179
    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2005
    Location:
    Sunny Saigon
  9. Eason

    Eason Senior member

    Messages:
    14,669
    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2007
    Location:
    Bangkok
    I was there when he said that but I'm calling LIES
     
  10. Matt

    Matt Senior member

    Messages:
    11,179
    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2005
    Location:
    Sunny Saigon
    can anyone point me at a website where I can watch the fight (before the UFC's lawyers get hold of it)?
     
  11. capnpyro

    capnpyro Senior member

    Messages:
    553
    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2006
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    I agree, I like both fighters quite a lot, but I scored it every round for rampage except 2 which I gave 10-8 Forrest. My thinking is you can't give a split a decision to a challenger on a title shot. And that was by my eyes in no way a unanimous.
     
  12. capnpyro

    capnpyro Senior member

    Messages:
    553
    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2006
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    can anyone point me at a website where I can watch the fight (before the UFC's lawyers get hold of it)?

    mma-tv.net, you may have to donate to sign up but you'll be able to watch live/get downloads of any future fights.
     
  13. Eason

    Eason Senior member

    Messages:
    14,669
    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2007
    Location:
    Bangkok
    TVU player FTW
     
  14. Mauro

    Mauro Senior member Affiliate Vendor

    Messages:
    13,106
    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2006
    Location:
    Washington, DC and a few months out of the year in
    I am watching the fights tonight and will give my expert opinion then.
     
  15. HORNS

    HORNS Senior member

    Messages:
    15,140
    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2008
    Location:
    Waiting for Saturday to Come
    Even Rampage said that he got his ass kicked in that fight. Griffin isn't able to inflict the damage to Rampage, but the fight was Griffin's.
     
  16. Odd Morsel

    Odd Morsel Senior member

    Messages:
    377
    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2008
    Location:
    OC
    I don't see a big debate here. As odoreater said, if you go by the old standbys like octagon control and who showed more aggression, Forrest had my boy Rampage beat. Jackson still had me laughing in the post-fight, though. Supposedly Chuck is up next, but I wouldn't be too jazzed for a Rampage-Chuck III should Liddell pull out a W.
     
  17. Brian SD

    Brian SD Senior member

    Messages:
    9,760
    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2004
    Location:
    Tokyo
    Dude, please no. Machida for the title fight. Rampage vs. Jardine. I'm sick of rematches.

    To quote Jackson: You have to beat the champ to be the champ. At this event, that really didn't happen. I think Jackson should still be holding the belt.

    My opinion on this fight is this: 2 out of 3 judges gave round 1 to Griffin. That alone is bullshit. In terms of UFC rules, I do think Griffin had this fight. He outdid Jackson in control and aggression. Still, though. I don't think he deserves the belt.
     
  18. shimmyt

    shimmyt Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    82
    Joined:
    May 26, 2008
    It all basically comes down to I truly believe if this fight went to a decision that Dana was going to give it to Forrest. Rampage had his chances to finish off Forrest and wouldn't / couldn't do it. So that's on him. To the judges though check this out from mmamania.com:

    Now next match wise I said this in the bar and I'm going to say it here, Dana got a woody thinking about Forrest v Chuck (which it really should be Lyoto Machida but I can't see him getting his title fight before Chuck) in December, and Rampage v Wanderlei in January or something. Now you throw in Lyoto for either of those two fights and I could soft of see that happening too.
     
  19. odoreater

    odoreater Senior member

    Messages:
    8,739
    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2005
    Location:
    Elizabethtown
    Dude, please no. Machida for the title fight. Rampage vs. Jardine. I'm sick of rematches.

    As much as he is being hyped, I don't think Machida deserves a title shot yet. He hasn't beaten any of the top guys in his division yet. I think he needs one more fight before he gets a title shot and he needs to beat either Liddell, Silva, Rashad, or Rampage in that fight.
     
  20. Matt

    Matt Senior member

    Messages:
    11,179
    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2005
    Location:
    Sunny Saigon
    Well FWIW, Compustrike came to the same conclusion as the UFC judges.... [​IMG]
     

Share This Page

Styleforum is proudly sponsored by