ufc 64

]that would seem more reasonable to me if it weren’t for the fact that most of the times Sherk passed his half guard, he /didn’t/ try to turtle or reverse position, but rather tried to get back to guard. Also, at least twice Sherk passed directly from full guard to side mount, which I doubt very much Florian “let” him do… not to mention I have a hard time thinking that Florian “let” him mount him twice.

Firstly, you’ve always been a cool guy, FD, but if you are going to put words in my mouth and use fallacious reasoning like I was inferring that Florian “let” Sherk do much of what he did, then I’ll have no problem being equally as assanine when posting to you.

Nevermind the fact that you ignored what I said as a qualifier: If anything, it highlights the fact that Sherk dominated positionally and still wasn’t able to do much in the way of damage. Either Kenny is phenomenal at defense and can hold off a top 3 170 lb’er for 25 minutes, or Sherk wasn’t going for the kill.

  1. Like I said, “just strong wrestlers” don’t typically pass guard repeatedly and mount BJJ black belts, and

Please. OK. Sherk isn’t “just a strong wrestler” because he could pass guard while only going for takedowns, wanting none of the stand up game, and doing no damage to his opponent while laying on him for the vast majority of the fight. That was an impressive example of a fully evolved MMA fighter who is proficient in every facet of the sport… He is now just a strong wrestler who passes well.

  1. Why would you expect “less care for a cut” from anyone, in any situation?

From anyone? No. That’s obviously the smart thing to do despite it being a boring fight style.

From a guy that went out of his way to say that having an injury is not an excuse not to fight and put himself forth as a hardcore guy that would fight under any conditions? Yes. If he wants to talk so much crap and go out of his way to insult another fighter, then he should back it up. I’m just pointing out that he is a hypocrite. I see nothing wrong with that strategy.

[QUOTE=Ford Prefect;713576]Firstly, you’ve always been a cool guy, FD, but if you are going to put words in my mouth and use fallacious reasoning like I was inferring that Florian “let” Sherk do much of what he did, then I’ll have no problem being equally as assanine when posting to you.[/quote]

I wasn’t trying to claim you were infering that - I mentioned several things (passing half guard, passing guard, mounting, and getting back control) that Sherk did demonstrating that he was pushing the action, rather than just “stifling subs and sweeps” as you initially said, and you responded that one of them (passing half guard) was due to Florian “letting” him. Since you didn’t explicitly address the others, I was noting that your opinion on the reason for one of them (passing half guard) was unlikely to be true of the others, so my statements about him being pushing the action and not just holding Florian down were still quite valid.

Nevermind the fact that you ignored what I said as a qualifier: If anything, it highlights the fact that Sherk dominated positionally and still wasn’t able to do much in the way of damage. Either Kenny is phenomenal at defense and can hold off a top 3 170 lb’er for 25 minutes, or Sherk wasn’t going for the kill.

I have no problem with stating that someone who’s been finished only once in his career and has a history of entering absolute divisions and either winning or only losing on points is phenomenal at defense.

Please. OK. Sherk isn’t “just a strong wrestler” because he could pass guard while only going for takedowns, wanting none of the stand up game, and doing no damage to his opponent while laying on him for the vast majority of the fight. That was an impressive example of a fully evolved MMA fighter who is proficient in every facet of the sport…

Why would he want any of the standup game, when he was dominating him on the ground? Sherk already beat Nick Diaz, a welterweight with a longer reach who has KOed several opponents, in the standup, so I doubt the fact that he was going for takedowns over and over indicates he has bad standup, any more than Florian doing nothing on the feet and only going for the takedowns against Kit Cope indicates that he’s a “one dimensional grappler”. If you’re beating someone in one area and having no problem getting it there or keeping it there, why would you voluntarily fight in another area where your opponent might stand more of a chance?

He is now just a strong wrestler who passes well.

…and mounts well. And gets back control well. And sweeps well.

From anyone? No. That’s obviously the smart thing to do despite it being a boring fight style.

From a guy that went out of his way to say that having an injury is not an excuse not to fight and put himself forth as a hardcore guy that would fight under any conditions? Yes. If he wants to talk so much crap and go out of his way to insult another fighter, then he should back it up. I’m just pointing out that he is a hypocrite. I see nothing wrong with that strategy.

I really don’t see where you’re coming from, here. How does not fighting at all because of an injury equate to fighting more conservatively because of a cut? If Sherk put himself forth as a “hardcore guy who would fight under any conditions”, if anything this match confirms it - despite having been cut and losing a lot of blood, Sherk /kept fighting/ for the entire five rounds, and continued working to pass and improve position even though, as you said, it’s much easier to get into guard and just “stifle sweeps and submissions”. The fact that he fought intelligently doesn’t equate to not fighting at all.

I wasn’t trying to claim you were infering that - I mentioned several things (passing half guard, passing guard, mounting, and getting back control) that Sherk did demonstrating that he was pushing the action, rather than just “stifling subs and sweeps” as you initially said, and you responded that one of them (passing half guard) was due to Florian “letting” him. Since you didn’t explicitly address the others, I was noting that your opinion on the reason for one of them (passing half guard) was unlikely to be true of the others, so my statements about him being pushing the action and not just holding Florian down were still quite valid.

See. In my opinion. Pushing the action is trying to win the fight via KO or sub; not just changing positions.

Also, I only a “bunch” of times Florian let him. I believe his only sweep was from such an occasion. I never said the majority of times, most of the time, half the time, or even close to half the time. I merely said a bunch, which in my mind is a handful. I felt I did address the other times when I stated that Sherk dominated positionally. I thought it was clear. If not, then I needed to be clearer. I don’t see how it could be clearer than saying Sherk dominated positionally, but I’ll try.

I have no problem with stating that someone who’s been finished only once in his career and has a history of entering absolute divisions and either winning or only losing on points is phenomenal at defense.

But I do. Submission grappling is far different from MMA as we all know. This is all besides the point because it is blatantly obvious to anyone watching that Sherk wasn’t going for the kill. He was obviously protecting the cut as you’ve said so yourself. Unless you are saying that what you said in your other post was inaccurate or a lie. Which is it?

I have no problem with protecting a cut as it is only following the rules the best he can to go for a win although I will still say it was snooze fest and lay n’ pray. I am allowed to think its a boring way to fight, right? If not, could you email my opinion to me after every fight so I’ll know what is exciting to me and what isn’t? I also take exception from all the trash he talked about him being a “real” fighter as opposed to one who worries about injuries.

Why would he want any of the standup game, when he was dominating him on the ground? Sherk already beat Nick Diaz, a welterweight with a longer reach who has KOed several opponents, in the standup, so I doubt the fact that he was going for takedowns over and over indicates he has bad standup, any more than Florian doing nothing on the feet and only going for the takedowns against Kit Cope indicates that he’s a “one dimensional grappler”. If you’re beating someone in one area and having no problem getting it there or keeping it there, why would you voluntarily fight in another area where your opponent might stand more of a chance?

Did Florian make a good attempt at finishing Cope?

Did Sherk make a good attempt at finishing Kenny, or was he content to get the takedown, maybe pass, and throw little, choppy shots?

This is my bone of contention. I think it’s rather obvious that any good fighter will want to limit any advantage another fighter has over him. When it was apparent that Sherk was outmatched on his feet, then he definately should have taken it down and tried to win there. It’s the nature of his “trying to win” which I don’t like. Trying to win to me means that he’s actively going for the sub or KO. If I want to see somebody win on takedowns and positioning, then I’ll go to a wrestling match. When I want to see some somebody push the action for a KO or sub, I watch MMA. If somebody doesn’t try to do this and grinds out a decision through positional domination, then I say it’s a boring fight.

Am I allowed to have the opinion that fights that have one fighter that just endlessly goes for takedowns and attempts to win mainly on controlling position is a boring fight? This is allowed right?

…and mounts well. And gets back control well. And sweeps well.

And submits and ko’s or at the very least comes close to submitting or ko’ing from those dominating postions well… Oh wait. That never happenned.

I guess the only thing we can do is agree that my opinion on what constitutes a boring fight and boring fighter are in fact wrong. If you’d be kind of enough to give me a link to the section of the rules of at the “being an MMA fan” website that provides what I should think is exciting and what is boring, then I would appreciate it. It would help us avoid such exchanges in the future.

I really don’t see where you’re coming from, here. How does not fighting at all because of an injury equate to fighting more conservatively because of a cut? If Sherk put himself forth as a “hardcore guy who would fight under any conditions”, if anything this match confirms it - despite having been cut and losing a lot of blood, Sherk /kept fighting/ for the entire five rounds, and continued working to pass and improve position even though, as you said, it’s much easier to get into guard and just “stifle sweeps and submissions”. The fact that he fought intelligently doesn’t equate to not fighting at all.

You yourself said his strategy changed after the cut. He didn’t throw any bombs and didn’t try to open up in an effort to protect the cut. If a guy is going to go out of his way to insult another fighter for being equally smart, then I’m going to expect him to still try to punch the guy through the mat or go for subs after he gets cut. Otherwise, he is just being a hypocrite.

I just read on another forum that Sherk actually injured his rotator cuff a week before the fight and didn’t tell anyone until after.

This could be the reason for his lay and pray game plan.

Didn’t hear about that. If it is true, then I take back the hypocrit statement since he got into the cage injured.

His lay n pray came about after he got though. It’s tough to say if he still would have done that had he not got cut. Still a boring fight, imo.