UFC 202 Event Thread: Diaz v McGregor 2 (Information in OP)

Todd Toddington III

McGregor via Submission

The Golden Miller wrote: »

I'm only going by all the talking McGregor does. What ever happened to his anytime anywhere mantra before the first Diaz fight? Now it's spend months hatching a plan to avoid going toe to toe for 5 rounds and sneaking a points win. Bit of a come down, don't ye think?

So you're retracting your previous point and admitting it was wrong? So now it's an anytime anywhere argument which tbh makes zero sense. What exactly are you attempting to prove?

mdwexford

The Golden Miller wrote: »

Isn't McGregor always talking about fighting anyone on the whole UFC roster anywhere and anytime? Didn't he want to fight Mayweather on Mayweathers terms seeing how cocky he was in his ability? Again, I wasn't aware McGregor would spend his whole time running

Yes, he's proven he does that multiple times.

He didn't, try taking off the hate glasses and rewatch the fight.
Count how many times he ran and for how long, come back and let us know.

Tough to win three rounds and score three knockdowns if you spend your whole time running. He must be even better than I thought.

Letree

The Golden Miller wrote: »

Hard to take this result seriously when you consider that if the fight went on another round McGregor would have been on the canvas half choked to death. He was a beaten man by the end and the clock saved him from getting a proper pounding thereafter. But this is the problem with MMA and boxing etc. The round and fights have been shortened so much that if you're "technically" the better fighter you can get success from an early flurry and hide and run for the rest of the fight. The paramenters in boxing and other combat sports are always being moved to take the advantage away from the grinder and the guys who fight an honest fight with heart.

The reality is McGregor can't actually go toe to toe with Diaz and come out on top if they are put in a ring and it's a fight to a KO or TKO. It's one thing winning on points if you're clearly the better fighter and the other guy is struggling, but there's little to celebrate from the winning camp if it's a close call and the tide is going against you. Disingenuous really.

What you are advocating is a recipe for brain damage. That's hardly the future of combat sports.

ardinn

I actually cant find the ignore button - Where is it?

AgileMyth

I think the prevailing point is that if they had been playing Basketball Diaz would have won comfortably. Its only because the rules of the fight don't allow basketball that McGregor managed his sneaky victory.

The Golden Miller

mdwexford wrote: »

Yes, he's proven he does that multiple times.

He didn't, try taking off the hate glasses and rewatch the fight.
Count how many times he ran and for how long, come back and let us know.

Tough to win three rounds and score three knockdowns if you spend your whole time running. He must be even better than I thought.

He couldn't sustain it, Diaz could sustain his game and was ready for more. As I said, as time goes on the paramenters will keep moving in a direction which favors those who can't grind it out, particularly in boxing for safety reasons. When fresh and at the start of a fight, particularly if they are better technically, someone like McGregor can score some cheap early success while hiding and running for the rest of the fight. That's what we saw yesterday. We all knew he was better technically already, the only difference between this and the last fight was McGregor lasted a bit longer, but it was going in the same direction as Diaz started to turn the screw. Shorter times and time limits in general only serve to protect the weaker fighter like McGregor

Saipanne

Diaz via Submission

ardinn wrote: »

I actually cant find the ignore button - Where is it?

If you're on the phone you need to go to his profile and bring up the "full site", click User Lists and Ignore. Then go back to the touch site.

ardinn

Got it thanks - phew!

Frank Bullitt

The only people who seem to think Diaz won are his cornermen/team or people who have a horn for hatred against Conor.

Odd that.

The Golden Miller

AgileMyth wrote: »

I think the prevailing point is that if they had been playing Basketball Diaz would have won comfortably. Its only because the rules of the fight don't allow basketball that McGregor managed his sneaky victory.

McGregor fans holding to the far out analogies for comfort. A better analogy would be soccer. If the technically better soccer team dominates a game for 90 minutes like the technically superior fighter but can't score, do they win because they got in more attacks? Maybe we should we get judges into soccer to weigh up draws like in combat sports.

mdwexford

The Golden Miller wrote: »

He couldn't sustain it, Diaz could sustain his game and was ready for more. As I said, as time goes on the paramenters will keep moving in a direction which favors those who can't grind it out, particularly in boxing for safety reasons. When fresh and at the start of a fight, particularly if they are better technically, someone like McGregor can score some cheap early success while hiding and running for the rest of the fight. That's what we saw yesterday. We all knew he was better technically already, the only difference between this and the last fight was McGregor lasted a bit longer, but it was going in the same direction as Diaz started to turn the screw. Shorter times and time limits in general only serve to protect the weaker fighter like McGregor

Who won round 4?

The Golden Miller

mdwexford wrote: »

Who won round 4?

He got a bit of second wind but had faded again. Round 5 was all about whether Diaz could get the takedown or not because it was accepted McGregor was done for at that stage

Saipanne

Diaz via Submission

Stop feeding it...

Depp

McGregor via Submission

The Golden Miller wrote: »

He got a bit of second wind but had faded again. Round 5 was all about whether Diaz could get the takedown or not because it was accepted McGregor was done for at that stage

what are you on about?

everlast75

The Golden Miller wrote: »

McGregor fans holding to the far out analogies for comfort. A better analogy would be soccer. If the technically better soccer team dominates a game for 90 minutes like the technically superior fighter but can't score, do they win because they got in more attacks? Maybe we should we get judges into soccer to weigh up draws like in combat sports.

Depp

McGregor via Submission

love firas' breakdowns, great watch if youve a few minutes spare!

AgileMyth

The Golden Miller wrote: »

McGregor fans holding to the far out analogies for comfort. A better analogy would be soccer. If they technically better soccer team dominates a game for 90 minutes like the technically superior fighter but can't score, do they win because they got in more attacks? Maybe we should we get judges into soccer to weigh up draws like in combat sports.

I'm not a McGregor fan. Nor am I using any kind of analogy. Simply suggesting that your idea of drawing up a new set of rules to convince yourself Diaz is better than McGregor is a bit stupid.

Your football analogy is a bit retarded, which to be fair is in keeping with the content of your posts in general. They are different sports and therefore have different rules. But even still the two teams have an allotted amount of time to score as many points as possible. The team that scores the most wins. So pretty much the same.

cletus

So, Golden Miller, you are essentially suggesting that every fight in MMA should be two fighters standing toe toe, bashing each other in the face until one of them falls down? Were you perhaps one of the few who believed Diaz the elder beat Carlos Condit?

What about a grappler taking down a striker? Is that also not really fighting?

Do you fight yourself? If so do you employ similar stratagies to the ones you've outlined in this thread?

Devastator

McGregor via Submission

ahahahahahahaha so Diaz couldn't get it done inside 5 rounds but if it went over 5 rounds he would defo win hahahahahaha


My plan was to wait approx 36hours after the fight to come back in this thread, presuming all the blow ins,trolls and downright skiprats would be gone....obviously it needs more time!

what are you talking about, football is decided on scored goals as to who wins or loses. if a team scores the most goals, then in your mind they're not the deserving winner on that night in those particular 90 mins??

it should just go on infinitely until your "more technical side" wins correct?
you do know these contests have time limits and round numbers for a reason??

also you say conor was on his back and choked out, where there to be a 6th round? so let me get this straight here Nostradamus, Nate was knocked on his arse twice at least by a smaller man, whilst Nate was at his freshest in the fight and couldn't put a fatigued mcgregor away in 25 minutes. And you're saying what he couldn't do in 25 he was suddenly going to achieve without doubt in your mind, in another 5 mins??? so only conor would be tirred in that extra round, nate would be fine??

what an inordinate amount of shyte that is!!!

sonofenoch

McGregor via Submission

JoeyJJ wrote: »

If my aunt had balls she'd be my uncle....

If Diaz had a whip and Conor a gun who would win?

It's the same nonsense point as the other fella Sterling came out with (are they the same poster) .....if the fight went six rounds? if the fight had no ending???


if a football match was 45mins Ireland beat France and qualify for the quarter finals.....if the Olympic 100m final is stretched to 5,000m Mo Farah is Olympic sprint champion.......none of it makes senses to any rational mind

kumate_champ07

The Golden Miller wrote: »

Well no, the longer a fight goes on the more Diaz gets on top. The fact McGregor needs specialised set tactics and Diaz will just goes out and fights is telling i.e McGregor can't go and beat him straight up. Kind of goes against all the talking McGregor does about being able to beat any man at any time. Would he go for another 5 rounds with Diaz today? Doubtful. Would Diaz be ready to rock? Certainly

and how has that worked out for Diaz in his career?

its a sport, not a 'fight'

Originally Posted by The Golden Miller View Post
"Well no, the longer a fight goes on the more Diaz gets on top. The fact McGregor needs specialised set tactics and Diaz will just goes out and fights is telling i.e McGregor can't go and beat him straight up. Kind of goes against all the talking McGregor does about being able to beat any man at any time. Would he go for another 5 rounds with Diaz today? Doubtful. Would Diaz be ready to rock? Certainly "




you mean by straight up, conor wouldn't stand in font of a taller, heavier man and therefor play to his opponents strengths and against conors own obvious physical disadvantage?? and there's no point being a late starter if you're on your arse in the 1st round!! so from then on you're depending on the other guy slowing down so??

so basically bare knuckle traveler boxing is what you liken the ideal situation to be??

Charizard

Devastator wrote: »

ahahahahahahaha so Diaz couldn't get it done inside 5 rounds but if it went over 5 rounds he would defo win hahahahahaha


My plan was to wait approx 36hours after the fight to come back in this thread, presuming all the blow ins,trolls and downright skiprats would be gone....obviously it needs more time!

But I like reading here to

The Golden Miller

AgileMyth wrote: »

I'm not a McGregor fan. Nor am I using any kind of analogy. Simply suggesting that your idea of drawing up a new set of rules to convince yourself Diaz is better than McGregor is a bit stupid.

Your football analogy is a bit retarded, which to be fair is in keeping with the content of your posts in general. They are different sports and therefore have different rules. But even still the two teams have an allotted amount of time to score as many points as possible. The team that scores the most wins. So pretty much the same.

When it's a draw though, no precedence is given to one team over the other because they attacked more. They both still get one point. Unlike combat sports, where there is a winner drawn up because he got in a few extra shots, of which many of them have little to no effect i.e like a soccer team going forward with a blunt attack and can't win. The soccer team isn't then just given the win because it happened to get in a few extra attacks. Diaz is like the defensive team who didn't get in as many shots, but what he did throw by the end was more/just as effective as McGregor was finished by that point whereas Diaz was ready for more. The point is the fight was a draw, and as such there should be no winner in certain contests, same as in soccer. I wasn't the one who brought in analogies from other sports like basketball, simply worked off the same logic.

cletus wrote: »

So, Golden Miller, you are essentially suggesting that every fight in MMA should be two fighters standing toe toe, bashing each other in the face until one of them falls down? Were you perhaps one of the few who believed Diaz the elder beat Carlos Condit?

What about a grappler taking down a striker? Is that also not really fighting?

Do you fight yourself? If so do you employ similar stratagies to the ones you've outlined in this thread?

Well if the grapler takes down the striker he takes him down, the fact McGregor didn't take down Diaz is the crux of the point here

rusty cole wrote: »

what are you talking about, football is decided on scored goals as to who wins or loses. if a team scores the most goals, then in your mind they're not the deserving winner on that night in those particular 90 mins??

it should just go on infinitely until your "more technical side" wins correct?
you do know these contests have time limits and round numbers for a reason??

also you say conor was on his back and choked out, where there to be a 6th round? so let me get this straight here Nostradamus, Nate was knocked on his arse twice at least by a smaller man, whilst Nate was at his freshest in the fight and couldn't put a fatigued mcgregor away in 25 minutes. And you're saying what he couldn't do in 25 he was suddenly going to achieve without doubt in your mind, in another 5 mins??? so only conor would be tirred in that extra round, nate would be fine??

what an inordinate amount of shyte that is!!!

The soccer analogy is obviously lost on you. I'm talking about if it's a draw, one team isn't given precedence because they got more attacks in to no avail

The longer the fight goes on the more Diaz gets on top. Are you actually trying to suggest if they went for another 5 rounds we wouldn't know who would win? Resorting to pedantry now

sonofenoch wrote: »

It's the same nonsense point as the other fella Sterling came out with (are they the same poster) .....if the fight went six rounds? if the fight had no ending???


if a football match was 45mins Ireland beat France and qualify for the quarter finals.....if the Olympic 100m final is stretched to 5,000m Mo Farah is Olympic sprint champion.......none of it makes senses to any rational mind

Wasn't that exactly the excuse of McGregor fans after the first round? But, but, but he won the first round.....And what happens if it's a draw after 90 minutes? Does the team who got in more attacks automatically get the win, despite those extra attacks being of no effect? Like McGregors hitting? Got more in but Diaz kept coming back. They were to little avail?

sonofenoch

McGregor via Submission

rusty cole wrote: »

you mean by straight up, conor wouldn't stand in font of a taller, heavier man and therefor play to his opponents strengths and against conors own obvious physical disadvantage?? and there's no point being a late starter if you're on your arse in the 1st round!! so from then on you're depending on the other guy slowing down so??

so basically bare knuckle traveler boxing is what you liken the ideal situation to be??

He's a fan of Paddy Doherty and the 'dirty go' ....bite an ear off and hawwwk spit

Zero-Cool

McGregor via Submission

Firas Zahabi explains why Conor McGregor won the fight, but hey, what would that guy know.

FYI, He had a bet with GSP that Conor would lose so it's a clear unbiased analysis.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SZ-kyJTXSLg

Frank Bullitt

The Golden Miller wrote: »

When it's a draw though, no precedence is given to one team over the other because they attacked more. They both still get one point. Unlike combat sports, where there is a winner drawn up because he got in a few extra shots, of which many of them have little to no effect i.e like a soccer team going forward with a blunt attack and can't win. The soccer team isn't then just given the win because it happened to get in a few extra attacks. Diaz is like the defensive team who didn't get in as many shots, but what he did throw by the end was more/just as effective as McGregor was finished by that point whereas Diaz was ready for more. The point is the fight was a draw, and as such there should be no winner in certain contests, same as in soccer. I wasn't the one who brought in analogies from other sports like basketball, simply worked off the same logic.



Well if the grapler takes down the striker he takes him down, the fact McGregor didn't take down Diaz is the crux of the point here



The soccer analogy is obviously lost on you. I'm talking about if it's a draw, one team isn't given precedence because they got more attacks in to no avail

The longer the fight goes on the more Diaz gets on top. Are you actually trying to suggest if they went for another 5 rounds we wouldn't know who would win? Resorting to pedantry now



Wasn't that exactly the excuse of McGregor fans after the first round? But, but, but he won the first round.....And what happens if it's a draw after 90 minutes? Does the team who got in more attacks automatically get the win, despite those extra attacks being of no effect? Like McGregors hitting? Got more in but Diaz kept coming back. They were to little avail?

Mate, just stop. You're making an arse of yourself here.

You're making up fairytale scenarios to try and make a point that isn't worth making. Why would there ever be a 10 round fight? And why would Diaz not just get the job done within the 5 then?

McGregor won fair and square. Just deal with it.

cletus

Pretty sure this is a troll job, but I'll give it one more go. Ignore the grappler scenario in my post-

Are you are essentially suggesting that every fight in MMA should be two fighters standing toe toe, bashing each other in the face until one of them falls down? Were you perhaps one of the few who believed Diaz the elder beat Carlos Condit

Do you fight yourself? If so do you employ similar stratagies to the ones you've outlined in this thread?

Could you address these points also if you have the time

everlast75

@ The Golden Miller- it's UFC not Rock em Sock em Robots...