David Posted June 7, 2011 Author Share Posted June 7, 2011 Ever since joining Jackson, he's become a big "gameplan" guy. Since joining Jackson he's went 4-1, with three wins by submission and only one decision. I'm not sure what people want him to do? He submitted Gugerty & Gomi, and won via technical submission over Dos Anjos. Â It was clear in the Gomi match, the goal was to fluster Gomi with his movement, and then capitalise on the confusion. Good plan, but not exactly entertaining to watch him dance around the Octagon like a spaz. The goal was to win the fight, which he did by submitting Gomi at the end of the second round. It's hardly as though he went on to grind out a boring decision is it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shane O' Mac Version 2 Posted June 7, 2011 Share Posted June 7, 2011 Ever since joining Jackson, he's become a big "gameplan" guy. Since joining Jackson he's went 4-1, with three wins by submission and only one decision. I'm not sure what people want him to do? He submitted Gugerty & Gomi, and won via technical submission over Dos Anjos. Â It was clear in the Gomi match, the goal was to fluster Gomi with his movement, and then capitalise on the confusion. Good plan, but not exactly entertaining to watch him dance around the Octagon like a spaz. The goal was to win the fight, which he did by submitting Gomi at the end of the second round. It's hardly as though he went on to grind out a boring decision is it? You pretty much ignored the remainder of what I said, I did mention that his new approach is better for his career, which is obviously shown in the success he's had since joining Jackson. All I'm saying is that it's not as fun to watch as the classic wars he's had in the past. In the Gomi fight, with roughly 8 minutes of fight time, Clay's only real offense was a grazing head kick, a takedown and the submission. Is it effective? Successful? Good for his career? Of course! Is it fun to watch? Not so much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Egg Shen Posted June 7, 2011 Paid Members Share Posted June 7, 2011 Guida will still have fun fights, he just needs the right opponent to make it happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members wandshogun09 Posted June 7, 2011 Paid Members Share Posted June 7, 2011 Guida will still have fun fights, he just needs the right opponent to make it happen. Â Yeah I thought Pettis would be one of these cause h of his past form vs wrestlers and his dangerous bottom game. Clay's submission defence looked better than ever to me. Deffo wasnt a bad fight, not quite as good as I expected but very enjoyable to watch all the same. Â I remember people ragging on Clay like this before. After the Huerta fight everyone loved him. Then he fought more carefully and won 2 decisions over Mac Danzig and Nate Diaz and people were saying 'he's gone boring'. Then he had that war with Diego and everyone loved him again. Now its swung back tto hating him. He'll have another classic and everyone will forget. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Cum Doctor Posted June 7, 2011 Share Posted June 7, 2011 I actually really enjoyed the Pettis/Guida fight. Pettis constantly looked dangerous off of the back and it made for an intriguing little fight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Supremo Posted June 7, 2011 Paid Members Share Posted June 7, 2011 Maybe I need to rewatch the fight Yes, you do. I'm all for complaining when guys just lay and pray, and I'm not saying Clay hasn't been guilty of it in the past (I seem to recall his fight with Nate Diaz was just fifteen minutes of hugging), but that fight last Saturday was anything but. It was a great fight, with Clay doing way more than what you're creditting him with. Â It's funny, I used to like Guida, but I've really soured on his last few fights. He doesn't come to fight now, he comes to win a match. For his career, that's a great move, but it doesn't really help him gain fans. He's one of the most popular fighters in the company and easily the most popular fighter in his division. Listen to the crowd on Saturday. In the grand scheme of things, it doesn't seem to matter at all. Â I really hope Jim Miller gets the next LW title shot. He may not have the "personality" of Guida, but he comes to fight. That's what people pay to see, isn't it? Not really, no. In terms of what people pay for and what draws, it's always personalities, stardom and drama over the quality of the fights or fighters. That's why Clay getting a title shot would draw the best buyrate of any other contender by miles, including Miller. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swift89 Posted June 7, 2011 Share Posted June 7, 2011 I actually really enjoyed the Pettis/Guida fight. Pettis constantly looked dangerous off of the back and it made for an intriguing little fight. Â Yeah, I really enjoyed it also. It was Pettis who made it interesting though by constantly attacking off his back, had it been someone else we could have just seen Guida lay on them for 3 rounds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Posted June 7, 2011 Author Share Posted June 7, 2011 That's why Clay getting a title shot would draw the best buyrate of any other contender by miles, including Miller. I'm not that sure that anyone is going to buy a PPV because Clay Guida is on it. Aside from a select few star names, such as Couture, Liddell & Lesnar I don't think anyone really buys a UFC PPV based on one fight. Â If the UFC schedule a fight between Maynard/Edgar and Jim Miller for the lightweight strap at a forthcoming PPV event I'm guessing that the rest of the card will play into what kind of buyrate it gets. Â I could be wrong, but I think fans these days are looking for a stellar fight card altogether rather than a particular fighter or title challenger. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members wandshogun09 Posted June 7, 2011 Paid Members Share Posted June 7, 2011 Yeah I think if they had a card with say GSP vs Anderson Silva headlining, it wouldn't matter so much what else was on the card because thats a fight people will pay to see. Â Fights like that are rare though and I'd generally agree that MMA fans mostly look at a card top to bottom when deciding to buy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shane O' Mac Version 2 Posted June 7, 2011 Share Posted June 7, 2011 Maybe I need to rewatch the fight Yes, you do. I'm all for complaining when guys just lay and pray, and I'm not saying Clay hasn't been guilty of it in the past (I seem to recall his fight with Nate Diaz was just fifteen minutes of hugging), but that fight last Saturday was anything but. It was a great fight, with Clay doing way more than what you're creditting him with. So I took your advice and rewatched it. I'm seeing now that I was just upset we didn't see a more dynamic fight, Guida did do a lot more than I gave him credit for. I completely forgot that the fight ended with Clay attempting a RNC. He did manage half guard twice and side control after slipping out of Pettis' back mount. I maintain that he didn't do a whole lot on the ground, but watching more carefully, it was due to the strength of Pettis' guard, he seemed to be struggling to move into different positions a whole lot to no avail. So I guess it ended up being a styles clash of sorts which brought the action to a minimum, not for Guida's lack of trying. On a side note, I don't think I could ever judge MMA, analytically watching it sucks all the fun out of it. Â I could be wrong, but I think fans these days are looking for a stellar fight card altogether rather than a particular fighter or title challenger. Â Definitely is the case with me. That's a recent lesson learnt by me after watching 126. We had Silva, Griffin, Franklin, Jones, Belfort and Bader, and the event was pretty "meh" IMO. I have a few favourite fighters, not based on hype at all, but rather their past fight performances. I'm loving UFC 132 coming up, mainly because I get to see guys like Condit, Wandy, Leben, Siver, Wiman, Guillard and Sotiropoulos fight. Especially Sots, he's been in plenty of FOTNs and is my countryman, love that guy. Never watched Cruz and thought Faber had an okay fight in his debut, hoping to be impressed but it's not the reason I'm drawn to the card. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Supremo Posted June 7, 2011 Paid Members Share Posted June 7, 2011 That's why Clay getting a title shot would draw the best buyrate of any other contender by miles, including Miller. I'm not that sure that anyone is going to buy a PPV because Clay Guida is on it. Aside from a select few star names, such as Couture, Liddell & Lesnar I don't think anyone really buys a UFC PPV based on one fight. Â If the UFC schedule a fight between Maynard/Edgar and Jim Miller for the lightweight strap at a forthcoming PPV event I'm guessing that the rest of the card will play into what kind of buyrate it gets. Â I could be wrong, but I think fans these days are looking for a stellar fight card altogether rather than a particular fighter or title challenger. Completely disagree. Not that there's any way to particularly prove it one way or another without coming up with a bonkers equation based on each event and whether it was considered an overall good or bad card. But I do think that if you look at the buyrates and the corresponding main events there is more often than not a correlation between how that main event clicked with the public and the eventual number. Plus, a huge amount of publicity is given to the top of each card, with Countdown specials, press conferences and whatnot always focussing on the main and semi-main events, and considering they're the promotional tools used to sell each show to the casual audience I'd say they're far more important than whether the card as a whole features good fights. You think the average fan looks online and reads up on the whole card each time, prelims and all? I doubt it. Have there been many UFC events with a bad main event but a good undercard that's drew higher than expected? Â Anyway, my point was that, regardless of whether it's the main event that sells the show or the card as a whole, Clay Guida challenging for the belt will undoubtedly draw more than anyone else challenging for it. He's the biggest star in that division by far. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swift89 Posted June 7, 2011 Share Posted June 7, 2011 Edit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobbins Posted June 8, 2011 Share Posted June 8, 2011 Anyway, my point was that, regardless of whether it's the main event that sells the show or the card as a whole, Clay Guida challenging for the belt will undoubtedly draw more than anyone else challenging for it. He's the biggest star in that division by far. I dunno, Guida seems like the type of guy that pops the crowd but doesn't draw. Â 100% with Shane O'Mac and Cousin Jim Bob here. Yes, Guida can use whatever tactics he wants to further his career and win fights, but I don't have to like it. It's defensive, negative and one-dimensional. Maybe it's just a lack of appreciation for the skills of wrestling, but to me, wrestling should always be a means to an end in MMA, not an end in itself. When a guy's only offense is being fucking incredible at wrestling it makes for a high likelihood of stinky fights, and fighters who actually try and inflict some damage on their opponent or score a decisive victory with more spectacular skills are stifled and stalled into a stalemate on the ground or often just being held up against the cage with 15 minutes of failed takedowns. He's the new Matt Hughes/Sean Sherk type and I reserve the right to hate him and hope he loses every fight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Posted June 9, 2011 Author Share Posted June 9, 2011 As has been pointed out already Bobbins, Guida stopped his last three opponents, so he's hardly got a reputation as a human blanket wrestler. Â The simple fact is he was fighting against someone who is fucking phenomenal off their back. If you watch the fight you'll see that he tries on numerous occasions to try and improve his position (even at the risk of getting his own back taken, which happens at one point), but simply can't get past Pettis defensive grappling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members wandshogun09 Posted June 9, 2011 Paid Members Share Posted June 9, 2011 100% with Shane O'Mac and Cousin Jim Bob here. Yes, Guida can use whatever tactics he wants to further his career and win fights, but I don't have to like it. It's defensive, negative and one-dimensional. Maybe it's just a lack of appreciation for the skills of wrestling, but to me, wrestling should always be a means to an end in MMA, not an end in itself. When a guy's only offense is being fucking incredible at wrestling it makes for a high likelihood of stinky fights, and fighters who actually try and inflict some damage on their opponent or score a decisive victory with more spectacular skills are stifled and stalled into a stalemate on the ground or often just being held up against the cage with 15 minutes of failed takedowns. He's the new Matt Hughes/Sean Sherk type and I reserve the right to hate him and hope he loses every fight. Â Fair enough it's your right, you don't have to like the way he fights. Â To be fair, Matt Hughes is a bad example to use for the 'wrestlers who lay and pray/not inflicting damage' argument. Like him or not Hughes was never a blanket. Look back at his career, the guy has a ton of submissions/TKOs with finishes over GSP, BJ Penn, Royce, Trigg twice and even these days when he's supposed to be over the hill he's tapping BJJ blackbelts like Ricardo Almeida. Â On Sherk, around the time of his title run he was overwhelming guys with wrestling but he was relentless with ground and pound, constantly dropping elbows and punches. He went to decisions I think mainly because he lacked the power in his strikes and the guys he was fighting (Franca in particular were known for being tough to finish). Â From the Penn fight on he's been the total opposite of lay and pray on has gone too far the opposite way. He seemed to think he was Manny fuckin Pacquiao for a while totally neglecting his wrestling and tried to box every fight with his T-Rex arms to try and please the 'Just Bleed' fans. And from being so dominant he's now pretty much off the radar and I honestly think aside from his incactivity, a lot of that is down to him trying to change from the style which got him to the title in the first place. Â Like David says, I'm sure Clay would've tried to do more damage/finish but if he got too reckless then Pettis had a triangle/armbar waiting. Clay's lost fights before for being over aggressive and he's tightened up his game and is now on the most successful run of his career and is closer to a title shot than he's ever been. He's not gonna do a Sonnen and piss his chance away by taking unnecessary risks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.