Anderson "the Spider" Silva appreciation thread: Still the most incredible highlights EVER in MMA

Seven30 said:
I don't see how rationalizing "everybody does it," is any more or less pathetic than assuming someone who was popped twice (in the latter stages of their career, not during the "great run") had been using the entire time. There is no evidence to support either, yet people on both sides have no problem running with these arguments.
Click to expand...
OK, but all of the time he didn't get caught was before USADA. The FIRST TIME under USADA and the FIRST TEST out of competition he got busted. I know nothing is 100%, but that looks really bad. We don't want to be naïve about likelihoods.
 
#HESPECT !!! Matrix Silva is the King of Kings... I will always remember the Leben fight amongst others. " I am going to send him back to the easy competition in Japan" :eek: Then the GOAT was born !!!
 
The best to ever do it!
The greatest of all time
The living legend
ANDERSON SILVA
 
Silva used to drop people with jabs. I miss that Silva.
 
No doubt Silva is the GOAT of MMA striking. He was my fave for YEARS, disappointing in the end though, and not because he lost...
 
Levi_ said:
OK, but all of the time he didn't get caught was before USADA. The FIRST TIME under USADA and the FIRST TEST out of competition he got busted. I know nothing is 100%, but that looks really bad. We don't want to be naïve about likelihoods.
Click to expand...
True, but there's a large scope between coincidence, likelihoods and actuality. We can't conveniently pick & choose where we place our suspicions during an era where the testing was next to nothing.

& how do we evaluate who was likely dirty & who wasn't? Wins? Specific physical feats? Physique? Besides admission or a leak of some sort, there's no way to know who was or wasn't dirty in that regard.

I think it's much easier & more accurate to assume that most everyone was juicing, as opposed to just pinpointing people who have been caught post-usada. Assuming that the only guilty parties are those that have been popped recently.....well, THAT is a form of naivety, if you ask me.
 
Last edited:
Seven30 said:
True, but there's a large scope between coincidence, likelihoods and actuality. We can't conveniently pick & choose where we place our suspicions during an error where the testing was next to nothing.

& how do we evaluate who was likely dirty & who wasn't? Wins? Specific physical feats? Physique? Besides admission or a leak of some sort, there's no way to know who was or wasn't dirty in that regard.

I think it's much easier & more accurate to assume that most everyone was juicing, as opposed to just pinpointing people who have been caught post-usada. Assuming that the only guilty parties are those that have been popped recently.....well, THAT is a form of naivety, if you ask me.
Click to expand...
OK, but that is not an assumption I have made here, at least not the way you are characterizing it. I am talking about likelihood, not anything as black and white as you are painting it.

If you have been caught doing something, you are quite a lot more likely to have been doing it all along, or at least doing it before, than someone who has NOT been caught. If you caught your girlfriend cheating with another dude, would you think it more likely that she had cheated at other times previously than someone who you DIDN'T catch cheating?

The fact that Anderson was busted immediately under USADA also would be further evidence that he was guilty all along. Again, I am not talking absolutes like you are, I am talking likelihood; this would also move it in the direction of Anderson being a roid cheat all along.

Those who get caught really taint their legacy because there is always that lingering doubt.
 
Levi_ said:
OK, but that is not an assumption I have made here, at least not the way you are characterizing it. I am talking about likelihood, not anything as black and white as you are painting it.

If you have been caught doing something, you are quite a lot more likely to have been doing it all along, or at least doing it before, than someone who has NOT been caught. If you caught your girlfriend cheating with another dude, would you think it more likely that she had cheated at other times previously than someone who you DIDN'T catch cheating?

Those who get caught really taint their legacy because there is always that lingering doubt.
Click to expand...
Again, context means something here. If I caught my girlfriend cheating during a rough spot in our relationship, I wouldn't automatically assume that she was cheating during the prime of our relationship. I don't have reason to justify the thought. Of course there is a likelihood that it happened. Of course, her having been recently caught makes you wonder about potential previous affairs. So, yeah...there is a likelihood that it happened. Just as there is a likelihood that it didn't. There is just as much reason to believe that the cheating didn't begin until things started to go bad as there is to believe that it was happening the entire time.
 
Levi_ said:
OK, but that is not an assumption I have made here, at least not the way you are characterizing it. I am talking about likelihood, not anything as black and white as you are painting it.

If you have been caught doing something, you are quite a lot more likely to have been doing it all along, or at least doing it before, than someone who has NOT been caught. If you caught your girlfriend cheating with another dude, would you think it more likely that she had cheated at other times previously than someone who you DIDN'T catch cheating?

The fact that Anderson was busted immediately under USADA also would be further evidence that he was guilty all along. Again, I am not talking absolutes like you are, I am talking likelihood; this would also move it in the direction of Anderson being a roid cheat all along.

Those who get caught really taint their legacy because there is always that lingering doubt.
Click to expand...
Another major factor being ignored here is this: What if your girlfriend, still guilty, was NEVER caught? Does that mean that she never cheated? Does it mean that she is less likely to cheat because she hasn't been caught? It may influence the contrary. People who don't get caught are often likely to make another attempt. Those knowingly under suspicion don't seem to be any more likely to re-offend. They are just more likely to be suspected, presumed guilty or flat out caught again.
 
mikehunt said:
Click to expand...

635922305393527551-1649464508_chonan-silva.gif
 
Seven30 said:
Another major factor being ignored here is this: What if your girlfriend, still guilty, was NEVER caught? Does that mean that she never cheated? Does it mean that she is less likely to cheat because she hasn't been caught? It may influence the contrary. People who don't get caught are often likely to make another attempt. Those knowingly under suspicion don't seem to be any more likely to re-offend. They are just more likely to be suspected, presumed guilty or flat out caught again.
Click to expand...
This is only tangientially relevant to what I was saying. You can saw it up from 1000 angles, and it won't change the fact that someone who has been caught is much more likely to have been previously guilty. Trying to change angles that you look at it from will never make this untrue, and it is a certain logical failure to imply that it does; trying to say that those who have never been caught are equally or more likely guilty than those who have would fly in the face of not only basic logic, but a mass of studies on probabilities and human behavior. You won't make a counterpoint that somehow logically denies this; it really is not a point that can be spun.

As far as the angle you take here, someone emboldened by not getting caught is more likely to slip up and get caught in the future, again echoing my original point that those caught are those we can be more certain about.
 
Levi_ said:
This is only tangientially relevant to what I was saying. You can saw it up from 1000 angles, and it won't change the fact that someone who has been caught is much more likely to have been previously guilty. Trying to change angles that you look at it from will never make this untrue, and it is a certain logical failure to imply that it does; trying to say that those who have never been caught are equally or more likely guilty than those who have would fly in the face of not only basic logic, but a mass of studies on probabilities and human behavior. You won't make a counterpoint that somehow logically denies this; it really is not a point that can be spun.

As far as the angle you take here, someone emboldened by not getting caught is more likely to slip up and get caught in the future, again echoing my original point that those caught are those we can be more certain about.
Click to expand...
I disagree. I don't think that they are more likely to be guilty. I think they are more likely to be suspected & caught.

2 guys doing the same thing, but one of them gets caught. This will lead to the likelihood that the one who was caught will probably get caught again. Not necessarily because he is doing anything more or differently than the other. It's because his past guilt leads to more suspicion & more investigation (deservedly so). I can see how people could perceive it your way, though. You are making it seem that your position is fact based, when it is not. It is merely perception. I KNOW people who have engaged in same or similar activities. One is known, the other isn't. The perception about them is different based on that knowledge. However, their actuality is the exact same....unbeknownst to those being led by their perceptions.
 
Kung Fu bb said:
Go ahead all you guys with your dick pills and steroid jokes, no problem.

This thread is for all you sherbros who can still appreciate a true special fighter's work of art. We know almost all of these motherfuckers are on roids, but nobody did what "The Spider" did.

Most spectacular highlights ever.

The true MATRIX of MMA.

Click to expand...



His Matrix moment against Forrest was due to one of the fighters being high on Xanax.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,236,907
Messages
55,454,293
Members
174,786
Latest member
ljae89

Share this page

Back
Top