Who Thinks Rampage won last night

[mike_p_barnett2@hotm]

Someone tell me the last time someone took a belt like this with 1 good round and a bunch of leg kicks.. plz remind me of a time when the title changed hands like this ... OFF A DRAW... 2 judges gave round 1 to forrest.. HE GOT KNOCKED DOWN.. THAT MEANS HE LOST THE ROUND.

[Kealoha]

I dont belive these people who think forrest deserves this belt. Please explain how by winning the 2nd round and maybe the 5th. In EVERY round except the 2nd Rampage connected with more head and body punches alot more bottom line check the stats and in the fourth Forrest hit Rampage twice so why isnt that a 10-8 round Rampage took forrest down once in the 1st and once in the 4th twice if you count that kinda slam his whole body was off the ground so why not. And once again leg kicks dont win championships and Rampage had more effective striking overall.

[dagreat1]

Originally Posted by Diegonightmare

So it was a calculated thing by Rampage?

Couple of questions for you then - why does he look so disgusted standing there with Buffer before any of the scores are read off? That look is of a man who knows he lost. .

Damn bro, you're like a pesky little kid.

Could it be possible that Rampage knew going into the fight that if it was close Forrest may very well get the decision (hint hint Liddell vs Jardine going to SD and Bisping vs Hamill)? Could it be possible that Rampage was dissapointed that he didn't knock Forrest the fuck out like he intended to?

Originally Posted by Diegonightmare

Why did he ask Ibarra, with clear trepidation, in his corner immediately after the fight, "you think I won that one?" You're stating that Rampage "knew" (quote-unquote) all along that he won the fight and made this calculated decision to put on a brave face in the ring. When did he acquire this conviction, in the few seconds between asking Ibarra "you think I won that one?" and when he stood there with a dejected look on his face? .

Is it possible that Rampage knew how close the fight was, thought he won it but wanted his corner's opinion? Is that strange to you? Abnormal, out of the ordinary for a fighter to ask his corner's opinion in a close fight.? How dare he ask his corner's opinion, clearly that means he knew he lost the fight.

Originally Posted by Diegonightmare

Especially, after the scores are starting to be read, before the actual winner is announced, Rampage is shaking his head no. Now let's put yourself in his position, believing what you claim he believed. He thinks he won the fight. When the scores are coming in and before any winner is announced, he's shaking his head and it's very clear from his expression that he knows he lost. But why should it be clear before the winner's announced? He won that fight!

Please dude. .

Same shit, could he not have had an idea that if the fight was close there was just as good if not more of a chance that Forrest would get the nod? I guess the Balboa story missed you during the pre-fight build-up for the past 5 months. Goldie only reiterated it 15 times during the fight, I guess a 16th time was needed in order for you to take into account the possiblity, no?

Originally Posted by Diegonightmare

Finally, if "this was Rampage being intelligent" and "he didn't want to burn bridges", why within hours did he claim he won the fight? Does that mean that's Rampage being unintelligent and now he's willing to burn bridges? Makes no sense, bra. Logic has failed you.

How many casual fans (which make up some 90% plus of MMA fans) watch post event conferences? How many casual fans even know that Rampage is protesting the decision? Gimme a fucking break, logic has failed you miserably. You simply disregard ANYTHING that doesn't favor your arguement.

Could it also not be possible that Rampage acted on impulse immediately following the loss in the Rogan interview and when he had time to marinade on it more (and with his corner reiterating that they felt he won the fight) that his opinion changed?

It's all possible, I'm just stating opinion, sorry it differes from yours big boy.

Originally Posted by Diegonightmare

I don't mean to pick on you personally dude...I've argued this with many others too. I seriously think that some folks are in major denial over this fight, and on multiple levels I'm interested to understand why they are so vociferous in the face of what I view as being pretty clearly wrong.

So I'm being fairly sharp with you, but I'm also keeping it cordial. I trust you'll respond in kind.

Bitch please, don't ridicule and then claim to be keeping it kind. It's an internet message board, do your worst, I'm not biting my tongue for anybody.

[sandywh]

Originally Posted by Kealoha

I dont belive these people who think forrest deserves this belt. Please explain how by winning the 2nd round and maybe the 5th. In EVERY round except the 2nd Rampage connected with more head and body punches alot more bottom line check the stats and in the fourth Forrest hit Rampage twice so why isnt that a 10-8 round Rampage took forrest down once in the 1st and once in the 4th twice if you count that kinda slam his whole body was off the ground so why not. And once again leg kicks dont win championships and Rampage had more effective striking overall.

Considering that the poll here is showing that people think Forrest won, at a 2:1 ratio nonetheless, and considering that Forrest Griffin is wearing the gold, maybe you should explain to us how Jackson did anything worthy of winning the fight.

Sure he landed more punches, but how much of that was counter punching or simply more than reactionary? Other than the first round, when did Jackson control the pace?

And just for your information, leg kicks do win fights. Especially when those leg kicks are nearly dabilitating, and they keep your opponent backing up for 4 rounds.

So please educate us oh wise one.

On a personal note, if you run around neg repping anyone with a contradictory opinion, you won't last very long here.

[chungt79]

Originally Posted by sandywh

Considering that the poll here is showing that people think Forrest won, at a 2:1 ratio nonetheless, and considering that Forrest Griffin is wearing the gold, maybe you should explain to us how Jackson did anything worthy of winning the fight.

Sure he landed more punches, but how much of that was counter punching or simply more than reactionary? Other than the first round, when did Jackson control the pace?

And just for your information, leg kicks do win fights. Especially when those leg kicks are nearly dabilitating, and they keep your opponent backing up for 4 rounds.

So please educate us oh wise one.

On a personal note, if you run around neg repping anyone with a contradictory opinion, you won't last very long here.

The poll doesnt mean shit. We are arguing about a decision that favored the most popular fighter in the UFC.
Rampage knocked Forrest down in first round. That gives him that round. But guess what? Two of the judges gave Forrest that round. Counter punch or not, if Rampage landed more punches, then that counts for hell of a lot.
Forrest won the second but he doesnt deserve 10-8. I've seen more dominance that were jduged 10-9. Also, Forrest did very litle damage while on top. That is no way a 10-8.
3rd and 4th round was close but Rampage should have teken it because he is the champ.
I would give very slight edge to Forrest on 5th. All in all, Challengers are suppose to take the belt away from the champ. Rampage could have won this fight if he had bigger fanbase. Even if Rampage didn't do enough to win, Forrest definitely did not do enough to take the title.

And for those of you who say Rampage knew he lost because he said so during the Rogan interview, were you born yesterday? What else should Rampage do? What would happen if Rampage spoke his mind? you guys would be sitting here cursing Rampage for being a sore loser and for disrespecting Forrest. Rampage and his corner is right in questioning this BS decision.

[Dork8503]

I am really enjoying all these posts. It gives me something to read for the next few days, or shit maybe weeks.

[sandywh]

Originally Posted by chungt79

The poll doesnt mean shit. We are arguing about a decision that favored the most popular fighter in the UFC.
Rampage knocked Forrest down in first round. That gives him that round. But guess what? Two of the judges gave Forrest that round.

I agree that Jackson won the first round, but I also wasn't sitting ringside, nevertheless, Forrest still won 2,3, & 5.

Originally Posted by chungt79

Counter punch or not, if Rampage landed more punches, then that counts for hell of a lot.

I'll be perfectly honest with you. I watched the fight 3 times, and never once did I get a sense that Rampage landed more punches. He landed harder punches, but I never got the sense that he landed more. He may have and if that's what you're precious Comubox or FightMetric says, then so be it, but the judges at ringside aren't counting punches either.

Originally Posted by chungt79

Forrest won the second but he doesnt deserve 10-8. I've seen more dominance that were jduged 10-9. Also, Forrest did very litle damage while on top. That is no way a 10-8.

To me, its not 10-8 so much because of Forrest doing tons of damage, its the fact that Rampage did NOTHING in the round. How many punches did did FightMetric give him credit for in that round? While on the ground Rampage never tried to sweep, never tried to get up, never tried to mount any sort of opposition to Forrest controlling him. That in itself warrants 10-8.

Originally Posted by chungt79

3rd and 4th round was close but Rampage should have teken it because he is the champ.

I hate that fucking statement. If that's the case then why even have the fucking fight. If all things appeared equal then the round should go to the aggressor. I had Griffin taking round 3 and Jackson taking round 4. The champ doesn't fight with the belt on, until he does the belt is up for grabs.

Originally Posted by chungt79

I would give very slight edge to Forrest on 5th. All in all, Challengers are suppose to take the belt away from the champ. Rampage could have won this fight if he had bigger fanbase. Even if Rampage didn't do enough to win, Forrest definitely did not do enough to take the title.

this is a statement from people that think they are smarter about MMA than everyone else. Rampage was obviously very popular. I can't remember seeing Forrest on Jimmy Kimmel, or ESPN, or on the cover of magazines. But I do remember seeing Jackson. Forrest might be more liked by the masses, but he is no more of a household name than Rampage. That I can promise. Forrest did plenty to take the fight. And just to blow your theory up, why did Jackson win the fight over Hendo? IMO it was much closer than this fight and Jackson won that one.

[sandywh]

Originally Posted by Dork8503

I am really enjoying all these posts. It gives me something to read for the next few days, or shit maybe weeks.

Double Post - Sue Me

I just want to remind each and everyone that I can only remember two people that called Griffin over both Shogun and Rampage going all the way back to when the fights were first announced.

Dork8503 and myself.

[Problematique]

Originally Posted by sandywh

Double Post - Sue Me

I just want to remind each and everyone that I can only remember two people that called Griffin over both Shogun and Rampage going all the way back to when the fights were first announced.

Dork8503 and myself.

I was to scared to pick him. So I didn't pick either :P

xD

[Palma]

Originally Posted by Kealoha

I dont belive these people who think forrest deserves this belt. Please explain how by winning the 2nd round and maybe the 5th. In EVERY round except the 2nd Rampage connected with more head and body punches alot more bottom line check the stats and in the fourth Forrest hit Rampage twice so why isnt that a 10-8 round Rampage took forrest down once in the 1st and once in the 4th twice if you count that kinda slam his whole body was off the ground so why not. And once again leg kicks dont win championships and Rampage had more effective striking overall.

He deserves the belt because he won the fight... Rampage shouldn't have left fate of the outcome in the judges hands is what it came down to.

Rampage won rounds 1 and 4, and Forrest won round 2 by a 10-8 score easily... rounds 3 and 5 could have gone either way. Rampage obviously didn't clearly win rounds 3 & 5, and even if he had won one of those rounds it still would have been a tie at best.

It would have been a contraversial decision either way... even if it were a draw. It's MMA, you can't just go by punches thrown and punches landed. There are way too many factors to consider.

The leg kicks didn't win the fight as the number of strikes thrown, but they did totally fuck up Rampage's gameplan and made him react to Forrest's gameplan, which did cost him the fight. So yeah, leg kicks obviously can win championships... obviously they did in this situation.

Personally I thought Rampage won, but I wasn't outraged in the slightest by the decision since it was so damn close. I think there are allot of bad/inconsistent decisions... hell I thought Grove vs. Tanner was a bad decision, but I don't think this was a bad decision.