Quinton Jackson

Afro · #1 (**permalink**) 02-16-2007, 02:34 PM

Whats this guy gotta do to get some respect?

- He Outwrestles Matt Lindland

- He beats Marvin Eastman on the feet

- He beats Ricardo Arona on the ground

yet people are still not satisfied? theres a set round in which Rampage has to win his fights, and a set fashion that he has to win them in.. its ridiculous, im not saying hes gonna beat Chuck but wtf?

How come Rampage gets ridiculed for letting Eastman get out of the 1st round but Chuck gets no ridicule for going 4 rounds with Jeremy Horn

and how about this, people get so upset when someone doesnt add Chuck to there Top 10 strikers but he struck with Tito for 3 rounds before finishing him and Tito is an awful striker!

im doin too much Chuck bashing but im just saying.. Rampage gets all the ridicule, and its not just Chuck but other fighters arent impressive in certain fights and no one mentions it.

Bobcat1 · #2 (**permalink**) 02-16-2007, 02:45 PM

Chuck dominated Horn hands down. He knocked him down at least 6 times during that whole fight. There was never any question that who was going to win, in anyone's eyes. Horn was a bloody mess when he quit in round 4.

Rampage won his fight, but he's also been touted as an elite fighter. He didn't dominate Eastman up until the knockout.

And last, Horn has been around a long time, and has fought a lot more noteworthy opponents than Eastman, in my view.

Now, while Rampage's performance should not earn him any criticism, but, considering the billing that was given him before the fight, I personally just expected that he'd be more dominant against Eastman.

Afro · #3 (**permalink**) 02-16-2007, 02:47 PM

but all Horn can do is BJJ! he cant wrestle, he cant strike hes a clear cut BJJ fighter

Rampage goes in there against a guy who has great MT and Kickboxing and beats him on the feet by KO in the 2nd round in his UFC DEBUT and gets highly ridiculed for that

but it took a supposed Top 10 striker 4 rounds to beat a guy with ZERO striking skills.

how much more dominate should Rampage be? he didnt try to take Eastman down, he fought Eastmans game and beat him at it by Round 2 and he gets ridiculed for this? for not beating a guy in Round 1? lol.. so RAmpage isnt allowed to warm up a bit in his first fight in front of the most people hes ever fought in front of.. hes gotta go out there and beat every by Round 1, anything out of Round 1 is a letdown but yet Chuck is allowed all the rounds he needs right? and again its not just Chuck but hes the best example.

Mac · #4 (**permalink**) 02-16-2007, 02:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Afro Samurai

Whats this guy gotta do to get some respect?

- He Outwrestles Matt Lindland

- He beats Marvin Eastman on the feet

- He beats Ricardo Arona on the ground

yet people are still not satisfied? theres a set round in which Rampage has to win his fights, and a set fashion that he has to win them in.. its ridiculous, im not saying hes gonna beat Chuck but wtf?

How come Rampage gets ridiculed for letting Eastman get out of the 1st round but Chuck gets no ridicule for going 4 rounds with Jeremy Horn

and how about this, people get so upset when someone doesnt add Chuck to there Top 10 strikers but he struck with Tito for 3 rounds before finishing him and Tito is an awful striker!

im doin too much Chuck bashing but im just saying.. Rampage gets all the ridicule, and its not just Chuck but other fighters arent impressive in certain fights and no one mentions it.

EDITEDI don't ridicule Rampage, I think he's a great fighter and a great character. I think Chuck will win but I'm not staking my lfe to it. i see this as a 50/50 fight it coukd go either way. As far as the Horn/Eastman comparison, the only thing Eastman has over Horn is power and maybe a little striking. To me Horn is a much more dangerous opponent.

As far as the top 10 striker thing, I think most people think that since Chuck has KO power and finishes his fights with strikes he should be top ten. I know you don't think he's technically great but he counter punches as well as anybody and can KO with one shot.

aperfectmatrix · #5 (**permalink**) 02-16-2007, 02:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Afro Samurai

Whats this guy gotta do to get some respect?

- He Outwrestles Matt Lindland

- He beats Marvin Eastman on the feet

- He beats Ricardo Arona on the ground

yet people are still not satisfied? theres a set round in which Rampage has to win his fights, and a set fashion that he has to win them in.. its ridiculous, im not saying hes gonna beat Chuck but wtf?

How come Rampage gets ridiculed for letting Eastman get out of the 1st round but Chuck gets no ridicule for going 4 rounds with Jeremy Horn

and how about this, people get so upset when someone doesnt add Chuck to there Top 10 strikers but he struck with Tito for 3 rounds before finishing him and Tito is an awful striker!

im doin too much Chuck bashing but im just saying.. Rampage gets all the ridicule, and its not just Chuck but other fighters arent impressive in certain fights and no one mentions it.

I agree with most of your points, but was he really beating Arona on the ground? I don't remember much from the fight other than the accidental headbutt after the power slam.

As far as striking with Tito, Tito did not do much striking. Whenever Chuck would try to engage Tito just went into a standing fetal position and tried a ridiculous sprawl leaving no room for Chuck to land shots until the latter part of the first round and the last round.

Personally I give Rampage all the credit he deserves. I think more and more people on here are doing so too as you see more people favoring Rampage in the future rematch. Chuck is just the golden boy so it's a lot harder to get points through to the groupies than it would be if he was fighting someone else.

Afro · #6 (**permalink**) 02-16-2007, 02:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LILMAC

I don't ridicule Rampage, I think he's a great fighter and a great character. I think Chuck will win but I'm staking my lfe to it. i see this as a 50/50 fight it coukd go either way. As far as the Horn/Eastman comparison, the only thing Eastman has over Horn is power and maybe a little striking. To me Horn is a much more dangerous opponent.

As far as the top 10 striker thing, I think most people think that since Chuck has KO power and finishes his fights with strikes he should be top ten. I know you don't think he's technically great but he counter punches as well as anybody and can KO with one shot.

No EAstman has wrestling over Horn by a longshot, and a little striking? EAstman has very good MT and Kickboxing he has MUCH better striking then Horn.

supermark21 · #7 (**permalink**) 02-16-2007, 02:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Afro Samurai

but all Horn can do is BJJ! he cant wrestle, he cant strike hes a clear cut BJJ fighter

Rampage goes in there against a guy who has great MT and Kickboxing and beats him on the feet by KO in the 2nd round in his UFC DEBUT and gets highly ridiculed for that

but it took a supposed Top 10 striker 4 rounds to beat a guy with ZERO striking skills.

how much more dominate should Rampage be? he didnt try to take Eastman down, he fought Eastmans game and beat him at it by Round 2 and he gets ridiculed for this? for not beating a guy in Round 1? lol.. so RAmpage isnt allowed to warm up a bit in his first fight in front of the most people hes ever fought in front of.. hes gotta go out there and beat every by Round 1, anything out of Round 1 is a letdown but yet Chuck is allowed all the rounds he needs right? and again its not just Chuck but hes the best example.

I love rampage but let me throw this out there: Travis Lutter, a MW ko'd Eastman, and so did a declining Belfort

Afro · #8 (**permalink**) 02-16-2007, 02:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aperfectmatrix

I agree with most of your points, but was he really beating Arona on the ground? I don't remember much from the fight other than the accidental headbutt after the power slam.

As far as striking with Tito, Tito did not do much striking. Whenever Chuck would try to engage Tito just went into a standing fetal position and tried a ridiculous sprawl leaving no room for Chuck to land shots until the latter part of the first round and the last round.

Personally I give Rampage all the credit he deserves. I think more and more people on here are doing so too as you see more people favoring Rampage in the future rematch. Chuck is just the golden boy so it's a lot harder to get points through to the groupies than it would be if he was fighting someone else.

but watch the first Tito fight, then watch the 2nd which was more impressive? he beats Tito round 2 viciously in the first one, 3rd one he lets him go to the 3rd round and while I agree ENTIRELY with the stoppage cuz Tito turned away and basically gave up, he wasnt hurting Tito bad.. but Tito did give up on that fight when he turned away..

and then you add in the Horn fight which shoulda ended a lot sooner considering again it was on the feet and Chuck is a supposed Top 10 striker, in between you got the Couture fight which was impressive but Couture was ancient by then and slipped(not an excuse but IT DID HAPPEN so you cant ignore it) and Babalu rushed in at Chuck like an idiot.. Chuck would win all his fights in the first round by KO if all his opponents did what Babalu did cuz it wasnt smart.

Quote:

Originally Posted by supermark21

I love rampage but let me throw this out there: Travis Lutter, a MW ko'd Eastman, and so did a declining Belfort

Lutter and Belfort had previous fights in the UFC, they were use to the atmosphere and Eastman had been knocked out over and over again prior to the Lutter fight that wasnt the case for the Rampage fight, and ya a declining Belfort but its a different matchup! Belfort is a guy that likes to go in there and swing with a lot of power and speed, Rampage is a finese boxer.. he doesnt go in there and try to knock you out.. he tries to wear you down with his striking, and hes natrually a wrestler.. different match-up.. fact is Eastman is a better striker then Rampage and Eastman lost on the feet.

Arona is a better grappler then Rampage, Rampage beat him on the ground

Lindland is a better wrestler then Rampage, Rampage scored more takedowns and controlled him on the ground

its just funny how Rampage gets ridiculued when hes been beating these guys at what they do best.. I think people are just too use to SLAMPAGE the bar was set too high.

Christopher Walken · #9 (**permalink**) 02-16-2007, 02:55 PM

You can put me on the list of people who have all the respect in the world for the guy.

The guys only losses in the past 5 years have come at the hand's of Wanderlei and Shogun. Plus, he is not afraid to step in there with the best in the world.

Raiders18 · #10 (**permalink**) 02-16-2007, 02:55 PM

Good post Afro, Rampage was in his UFC debut against a good stand up fighter in Eastman. Jackson even said after he was nervous and in the end he KO'd Eastman standing up. As his nerves settle we'll start to see a much more dominant Rampage in the UFC. The one who tooled Chuck and used to be MW Champ in Pride.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Christopher Walken

You can put me on the list of people who have all the respect in the world for the guy.

The guys only losses in the past 5 years have come at the hand's of Wanderlei and Shogun. Plus, he is not afraid to step in there with the best in the world.

Agreed. Good post.