was renzo faking?

[Hypergit]

Originally Posted by LILMAC

You still haven't given a good reason why Renzo would fake it.

Yes I have cited both motivation and evidence (more than sufficient for me to have a reasonable opinion) and I'm not going to repeat myself merely because you seem content to keep doing so.

Originally Posted by JimmyMoore

[allowing his arm to break] is an example of both honor and discipline. Both of which are being questioned in this situation, and both of which are extremely relevant.

I see your point, but I disagree with it on several fundamental levels. In his case due to the Gracie 'rule' his reason for not tapping is probably the -dishonour- of doing so rather than the supposed honor of allowing the arm to break. The level of discipline could also be motivated by this fear of dishonour.

Regarding its relevance to this situation, well I'll discredit that from your new angle: It would be dishonourable for him to lose to Shamrock.

[Hypergit]

Originally Posted by DonFrye

[Renzo] OBVIOUSLY won the first round.

By getting constantly battered with strikes with no reply but some LnP? Wait, I forgot... he changed position and thought about attempting a sub so it's not LnP lol

[Mac]

Originally Posted by Hypergit

Yes I have cited both motivation and evidence (more than sufficient for me to have a reasonable opinion) and I'm not going to repeat myself merely because you seem content to keep doing so.



I see your point, but I disagree with it on several fundamental levels. In his case due to the Gracie 'rule' his reason for not tapping is probably the -dishonour- of doing so rather than the supposed honor of allowing the arm to break. The level of discipline could also be motivated by this fear of dishonour.

Regarding its relevance to this situation, well I'll discredit that from your new angle: It would be dishonourable for him to lose to Shamrock.

Your right it is pointless to repeat myself when I'm not going to get an answer. Renzo was obviously motivated to quit a fight he was winning. I did read one arguement from someone about how a broken arm hurts more than a concusion (which is true) but it's easier to fight with one good arm than without the propper motor skills which are affected by a concusion. I'm sure it's been said already, but how does Shamrock cheat and Renzo's honor gets challenged?

[JimmyMoore]

Originally Posted by Hypergit

I see your point, but I disagree with it on several fundamental levels. In his case due to the Gracie 'rule' his reason for not tapping is probably the -dishonour- of doing so rather than the supposed honor of allowing the arm to break. The level of discipline could also be motivated by this fear of dishonour.

Regarding its relevance to this situation, well I'll discredit that from your new angle: It would be dishonourable for him to lose to Shamrock.

I dont understand how that is different? The reason he refused to tap is still motivated by honor. And if he is so motivated by dishonor, why would he fake an injury? The motive of his discipline is inconsequential. The fact is that he remained discipline past the literal breaking point. Thus proving his dedication to both.

Ah yes it would, but it would be more dishonorable to fake an injury.

[Hypergit]

Originally Posted by LILMAC

Your right it is pointless to repeat myself when I'm not going to get an answer.

I agree. If you read the 'wash my hands' thread you will see more detail, but since you didn't manage to extract the info yourself here's the painfully obvious concise version...

Motivation: Avoid a humiliating loss and/or further pain
Evidence: Ridiculously disproportionate and unusual effects from the strikes

Originally Posted by LILMAC

I'm sure it's been said already, but how does Shamrock cheat and Renzo's honor gets challenged?

Shamrocks cheating has nothing whatsoever to do with Renzo's honor. It is possible, and is my belief, that both of them are guilty.

[Hypergit]

Originally Posted by JimmyMoore

I dont understand how that is different? The reason he refused to tap is still motivated by honor.

It may seem subtle, but imo it is quite different:

If he did it for honour then it suggests he has above average standards of honour. If he did it to avoid extreme dishonour he need only have average or even below average standards to harbour the motivation.

Regardless, the honour/dishonour motivation is in itself debatable - it could have been financially motivated etc.

Originally Posted by JimmyMoore

And if he is so motivated by dishonor, why would he fake an injury?

If he keeps it to himself, there is no dishonour in such an act as to all intents and purposes he didn't do it. On the other hand, if he loses to the Gracie-challenging Shammy the dishonour is, at best, significant.

Originally Posted by JimmyMoore

The fact is that he remained discipline past the literal breaking point. Thus proving his dedication to both.

I don't fully understand this point, but I think I may have already addressed it. Elaborate if you like.

Originally Posted by JimmyMoore

it would be more dishonorable [than losing] to fake an injury.

Maybe not in the Gracie family and, as I already explained, certainly not if he keeps the truth to himself. We will never know...

[Mac]

Originally Posted by Hypergit

I agree. If you read the 'wash my hands' thread you will see more detail, but since you didn't manage to extract the info yourself here's the painfully obvious concise version...

Motivation: Avoid a humiliating loss and/or further pain
Evidence: Ridiculously disproportionate and unusual effects from the strikes
.

My bad, I didn't go through the other thread for your examples. I understand this is kinda being debated on two different threads which is frustrating.

As far as motivation, he wasn't being humiliated up to that point, which is suprising, I expected Frank to win pretty easily. And as for pain the broken arm does validate this arguement.

As for evidence, unusual effects from the strikes, you could take a jab to the back of the head with less force than a knee and get seriously hurt so I can't agree with you there either.

I guess we will have to dissagree on this which is fine, I agree with you on alot of other topics so please don't take my arguement here as a sign of disrespect, that's not my intention.

[Hypergit]

Originally Posted by LILMAC

As for evidence, unusual effects from the strikes, you could take a jab to the back of the head with less force than a knee and get seriously hurt so I can't agree with you there either.

It may well be possible, just I've never seen it from that kind of knock so it must be very rare (I've seen lots of concussions etc).

Originally Posted by LILMAC

I guess we will have to dissagree on this which is fine, I agree with you on alot of other topics so please don't take my arguement here as a sign of disrespect, that's not my intention.

No worries - on matters of opinion (which this is proving to be) agreeing to disagree is where it's at man. I'm not trying to be disrespectful either, and I haven't taken anything you've said like that - s'all good.

[subman]

Originally Posted by DonFrye

Is there any chance that those knees popped an eardrum? Renzo acted like he had no equilibrium.

Check out his interview on Sherdog the next morning in the airport. He said he was fine, no overnight stay, less than an hour in the hospital. Doctor told him a "possible" concussion and to watch for headaches or vomiting, then let him go. With as "bad" as he was in the ring, unable to even stand up and all, that is VERY surprising to me.