Anderson Silva: "Georges just runs, It's crazy. He has a different view - to take easy fights."

[Mamou]

Instead he lost to greats like Takase and Chonan

But according to @MikeMcMann those would be great wins if he avenged them

 

[Mamou]

It sucked for GSP that he lost to Serra. No one denies that. But it does not change the FACT that him avenging that loss to Serra and recapturing his belt was still a great win for him. So you are not making any point here.

If Anderson had lost to Franklin in his second fight but then retook the belt in a trilogy instant rematch and then went on the rest of his historici win no one would not say that second win for Anderson was not big and important even if it would have been even better had he not lost the second fight.

So in closing you are again stupid and ridiculous in trying to discredit anything GSP, even some of his biggest accomplishments. Even Anderson fans are dismissing your ridiculous now.

Rich Franklin was a top tier fighter in his division and didn't win a reality show to get his title shot. No matter how you try to spin it, beating Matt Serra was not a great win, it was expected.

 

[Mamou]

That does not mean anything.

A fighters prime years or time at the top is dictated by fight age not birth age. Injuries, wear and tear, etc. Randy Couture at age 40 was far more competitive than guys I rank well above him 'all time'.

An MMA newb like you will say 'but Randy at 40 would beat X at 40 and they are similar aged' and think that is what matters. It is not. But you won't understand because you don't understand MMA.



lol at you not warping things in an attempt to win.

You cite Marquardt as 6-0 and 4-0 in the UFC to pump up his record V Anderson and in your next breath you say Alves was only 2-2 because you want to start counting his record when GSP won the belt only and count a loss after he lost to GSP. Marquardt was only a 2 fight win streak if you are consistent. But we know why you are not. But what is of most value is the overall record the fighter had in the UFC before getting a title shot. So ALL of Alves 7 wins in the UFC would be weighted heavily towards his title shot, and when GSP took the belt is irrelevant to that. So the fair comparison AGAIN is Alves 7 fight win streak in the UFC versus Marquarts 4. And Alves wins over Lytle, Hughes and Koscheck at the time were bigger than Nate's win over Dean Lister.

So in every way comparable Alves was the much better win but you won't admit and you will try to spin it because you know you cannot win this and that is because you are so stupid you cannot accept it.

Seriously, do you have a disability? Either you do or you have no idea what you're saying.

Nobody said anything about prime years with Franklin, Liddell, and Wand. Your exact words were "You don't get in the tier by getting close to a win or by beating guys who were from the fighter generation prior for their name recognition." So guess what? They're all in the same generation. Randy Couture, despite being 11 years older than Franklin and 13 years older than Wand, is also in that generation of fighters you fucking noob.

You were the one that brought up contenders at MW when Anderson won the belt. What was Alves record when GSP beat Matt Hughes on November 18th, 2006? You asked the question about the MW contenders, I answered.

 

[grimballer]

Seriously, do you have a disability? Either you do or you have no idea what you're saying.

Nobody said anything about prime years with Franklin, Liddell, and Wand. Your exact words were "You don't get in the tier by getting close to a win or by beating guys who were from the fighter generation prior for their name recognition." So guess what? They're all in the same generation. Randy Couture, despite being 11 years older than Franklin and 13 years older than Wand, is also in that generation of fighters you fucking noob.

You were the one that brought up contenders at MW when Anderson won the belt. What was Alves record when GSP beat Matt Hughes on November 18th, 2006? You asked the question about the MW contenders, I answered.

The can’t follow his own guidelines...

Funny how he just ignored wins over Liddell n wand

Chuck was favourite in that fight iirc

N wand had wins over stann, le n bisping in between his losses to franklin

 

[MikeMcMann]

But according to @MikeMcMann those would be great wins if he avenged them

Again more stupid things said by you and more lies.

If either Takase or Chonan took Anderson's UFC MW belt from him during his run and then he avenged those losses and took his belt back they would undoubtedly be big wins for him.

So again you try to strip context to make a point that you cannot make with the proper context. You need to lie to try and win your imaginary battles even as you get owned.

 

[MikeMcMann]

Rich Franklin was a top tier fighter in his division and didn't win a reality show to get his title shot. No matter how you try to spin it, beating Matt Serra was not a great win, it was expected.

and yet no one agrees with your stupidity. Not even the other Anderson fans. Matt Serra was not a top fighter, but avenging the loss and taking back his belt was a huge win for him at that point in his career, when taken in context.

 

[MikeMcMann]

Seriously, do you have a disability? Either you do or you have no idea what you're saying.

Nobody said anything about prime years with Franklin, Liddell, and Wand. Your exact words were "You don't get in the tier by getting close to a win or by beating guys who were from the fighter generation prior for their name recognition." So guess what? They're all in the same generation. Randy Couture, despite being 11 years older than Franklin and 13 years older than Wand, is also in that generation of fighters you fucking noob.

You were the one that brought up contenders at MW when Anderson won the belt. What was Alves record when GSP beat Matt Hughes on November 18th, 2006? You asked the question about the MW contenders, I answered.

Yes but Chuck and Wand were well past their prime fighting years when they fought Franklin and that is what matters in proper context. Not their age nor that they simply fought at the same time you f*cking dummy. Chuck is still fighting now and only you would think beating him now is the same as beating Machida, Vitor, Hendo, Weidman, Jacare, Rockhold, during that groupings run. A group that Franklin could never break into or compete with at that level with a win.

 

[Mamou]

Again more stupid things said by you and more lies.

If either Takase or Chonan took Anderson's UFC MW belt from him during his run and then he avenged those losses and took his belt back they would undoubtedly be big wins for him.

So again you try to strip context to make a point that you cannot make with the proper context. You need to lie to try and win your imaginary battles even as you get owned.

No, they still wouldn't be big wins because they aren't great fighters and he would be expected to win them.

and yet no one agrees with your stupidity. Not even the other Anderson fans. Matt Serra was not a top fighter, but avenging the loss and taking back his belt was a huge win for him at that point in his career, when taken in context.

There are plenty of people that agree with me, not many that agree with you though. Beating a guy that you should've smashed in the first place is not a huge win.

Yes but Chuck and Wand were well past their prime fighting years when they fought Franklin and that is what matters in proper context. Not their age nor that they simply fought at the same time you f*cking dummy. Chuck is still fighting now and only you would think beating him now is the same as beating Machida, Vitor, Hendo, Weidman, Jacare, Rockhold, during that groupings run. A group that Franklin could never break into or compete with at that level with a win.

And Franklin wasn't past his prime fighting years when he fought them? You can make all the excuses you want, but he is 3-0 against those 2 who are both arguably top 5 LHWs of all time.

And I noticed you didn't answer my question about the WW contenders when GSP beat Hughes for the title. I wonder why...

This has been you for this entire discussion

 

[MikeMcMann]

No, they still wouldn't be big wins because they aren't great fighters and he would be expected to win them.



There are plenty of people that agree with me, not many that agree with you though. Beating a guy that you should've smashed in the first place is not a huge win.



And Franklin wasn't past his prime fighting years when he fought them? You can make all the excuses you want, but he is 3-0 against those 2 who are both arguably top 5 LHWs of all time.

And I noticed you didn't answer my question about the WW contenders when GSP beat Hughes for the title. I wonder why...

This has been you for this entire discussion

...

ya you're an idiot but that has already been established prior.

Chuck was the favorite going into his first fight with Randy. He lost. And yet when he did win after not once but twice no one (except an idiot like you) would not say those were not big wins in his career.

If Anderson was a favorite to almost everyone if not everyone he fought during his prime run. had he lost to any of them, and then avenged that loss to regain his belt and an idiot like say that was not a big or important fight in his career you would laughed out of the room.

 

[Perrichet]

But according to @MikeMcMann those would be great wins if he avenged them

They were that bad they never amounted to anything further. I mean Takase was 4-7

 

[Mamou]

ya you're an idiot but that has already been established prior.

Chuck was the favorite going into his first fight with Randy. He lost. And yet when he did win after not once but twice no one (except an idiot like you) would not say those were not big wins in his career.

If Anderson was a favorite to almost everyone if not everyone he fought during his prime run. had he lost to any of them, and then avenged that loss to regain his belt and an idiot like say that was not a big or important fight in his career you would laughed out of the room.

If Anderson lost to Lutter then came back and won the rematch, nobody would call it a "great" win like you do with the Serra win. As a matter of fact, if the rolls were reversed, i'm sure you'd have a different stance on it, but since it's GSP you have to do damage control because you're an obvious nuthugger

 

[MikeMcMann]

If Anderson lost to Lutter then came back and won the rematch, nobody would call it a "great" win like you do with the Serra win. As a matter of fact, if the rolls were reversed, i'm sure you'd have a different stance on it, but since it's GSP you have to do damage control because you're an obvious nuthugger

Ya sorry it would be a great win for any champ who lost his belt to avenge a loss and win back his belt.

You are so stupid and ridiculous that now you are calling @Shaddows a GSP nuthugger when he is one of Anderson's biggest fans and typically one of GSP's biggest critics. But in your idiocy only a GSP nuthugger would think that, and that is because you are stupid,

 

[The Crow]

Anderoid nut huggers are trying so hard. Lmmfao

 

[Mamou]

Ya sorry it would be a great win for any champ who lost his belt to avenge a loss and win back his belt.

You are so stupid and ridiculous that now you are calling @Shaddows a GSP nuthugger when he is one of Anderson's biggest fans and typically one of GSP's biggest critics. But in your idiocy only a GSP nuthugger would think that, and that is because you are stupid,

Please show me where I said anything about Shaddows, I'd love to see it.

What grade are you in anyways? Because you can't be an adult with reading comprehension skills like this.

 

[grimballer]

ya you're an idiot but that has already been established prior.

Chuck was the favorite going into his first fight with Randy. He lost. And yet when he did win after not once but twice no one (except an idiot like you) would not say those were not big wins in his career.

If Anderson was a favorite to almost everyone if not everyone he fought during his prime run. had he lost to any of them, and then avenged that loss to regain his belt and an idiot like say that was not a big or important fight in his career you would laughed out of the room.

Wait...

Are you comparing losing to couture to losing to Serra?!?

N just when you think you can’t sink any lower..

Following your logic Anderson or any other fighter would have a better career if they lost to every single of their opponents n then beat them in a rematch

Somehow Anderson resume would look better if he lost to guys like: lutter, Côté n Thales n then beat them in a rematch?

Losing, n then winning a rematch is better than just winning once?

 

[MikeMcMann]

Please show me where I said anything about Shaddows, I'd love to see it.

What grade are you in anyways? Because you can't be an adult with reading comprehension skills like this.

The problem we keep having is you are painfully stupid.

You say just upthread that only a GSP nuthugger can think the Serra win, in which GSP avenged the loss where he lost his belt and got his belt back was a big win for him.

Do I have to quote Shaddows saying he thinks it was a big win for him?

Do I then have to use a kindergarten approach with to comprehension to connect the dots for you on how you are directly then saying Shaddows must be a GSP nuthugger then if he thinks that?

OR can you get someone to read this to you so you can comprehend it?

 

[MikeMcMann]

Wait...

Are you comparing losing to couture to losing to Serra?!?

N just when you think you can’t sink any lower..

No but if you are an idiot you might jump to that wrong conclusion.

I made the FACTUAL point that beating someone you were FAVORITE over can still be a big and important win after it wa said it could not be.

Following your logic Anderson or any other fighter would have a better career if they lost to every single of their opponents n then beat them in a rematch

And wrong and directly because or your continued stupidity.

I have never said GSP's record is BETTER because he lost to Serra and won his belt back and in fact I said it would have been better if he never lost and had the continuous reign.

But that does not change the FACT that is still a big and important win for GSP to avenge that loss and regain his belt.

Both can be true if you are not an idiot.

Somehow Anderson resume would look better if he lost to guys like: lutter, Côté n Thales n then beat them in a rematch?

Losing, n then winning a rematch is better than just winning once?

If your stupid you might think that. I don't.

 

[Mamou]

The problem we keep having is you are painfully stupid.

You say just upthread that only a GSP nuthugger can think the Serra win, in which GSP avenged the loss where he lost his belt and got his belt back was a big win for him.

Do I have to quote Shaddows saying he thinks it was a big win for him?

Do I then have to use a kindergarten approach with to comprehension to connect the dots for you on how you are directly then saying Shaddows must be a GSP nuthugger then if he thinks that?

OR can you get someone to read this to you so you can comprehend it?

"but since it's GSP you have to do damage control because you're an obvious nuthugger"

Reading comprehension, that's all I have to say

 

[Mamou]

Wait...

Are you comparing losing to couture to losing to Serra?!?

N just when you think you can’t sink any lower..

Following your logic Anderson or any other fighter would have a better career if they lost to every single of their opponents n then beat them in a rematch

Somehow Anderson resume would look better if he lost to guys like: lutter, Côté n Thales n then beat them in a rematch?

Losing, n then winning a rematch is better than just winning once?

He thinks being a slight favorite and losing then coming back and winning the rematch(s) is the same as being a -1300 favorite and losing then winning the rematch.

Just let it go, he seriously has some sort of disability.

 

[MikeMcMann]

He thinks being a slight favorite and losing then coming back and winning the rematch(s) is the same as being a -1300 favorite and losing then winning the rematch.

Just let it go, he seriously has some sort of disability.

I'll just re-quote myself since you are not worthy or smart enough for more original thought...

I made the FACTUAL point that beating someone you were FAVORITE over can still be a big and important win after it wa said it could not be.

You stated this upthread...

It's not a great win if it's expected.

That is an absolute statement. What you are saying there is that ANYONE who is a favorite in a fight and wins does not get a 'great win' over that opponent as it was expected.

It was a stupid thing for you to write and I am glad to see you now trying to back track from it.

if instead you want to now say there is a range for said favorite where it does not qualify as being a great win you should post your clarification.

But regardless your point is wrong as others, including Anderson fans have pointed out in laughing at you. Losing a fight, losing your belt and then avenging that loss and regaining your belt will always be considered a great and significant win. I would offer to bet you and start a thread asking who thinks that is a great win for GSP and who does not to prove to you, you are wrong. But you have not manned up and taken a bet offered yet. I know why.