Friend of our site

MMA Headlines


Josh Gross

MMA Fighting

MMA Torch

MMA Weekly

Sherdog (News)

Sherdog (Articles)


Liver Kick

Fightsport Asia

Caged In

MMA Junkie

MMA Mania

Bloody Elbow



MMA Ratings

Rating Fights

MMA Convert


Fight Medicine


MMA Frenzy


Kevin Iole

Yahoo MMA Blog

MMA Betting

Search this site

Latest Articles

News Corner

MMA Rising

Audio Corner


MMA Dude Bro

Sherdog Radio

The Fightworks Podcast

Eddie Goldman

Pro MMA Radio

MMA Torch

Video Corner

Fight Hub

The Fight Nerd

Special thanks to...

Link Rolodex

Site Index

To access our list of posting topics and archives, click here.

Friend of our site

Buy and sell MMA photos at MMA Prints

Site feedback

Fox Sports: "Zach Arnold's Fight Opinion site is one of the best spots on the Web for thought-provoking MMA pieces."

Site Meter

« | Home | »

PRIDE goeth before the fall with Overeem & Shogun obliterated in Boston

By Zach Arnold | August 17, 2013

Print Friendly and PDF

Dana White was all smiles after the event, but the man has every right to be upset with the Massachusetts state athletic commission and I would not begrudge him if he didn’t return to Boston any time soon.

The judging from those appointed by MAC was nothing short of horrific. To top it all off, Tony Weeks and Sal D’Amato worked as judges for the main event. What a nightmare. The athletic inspectors assigned to the bouts were too busy either staring off into space and not watching the fighters or they were clapping for the fighters like fans. A disgraceful showing.

I thought UFC delivered in a big way for Fox Sports 1. The network’s launch has been, to put it mildly, dreadful. The Fox Sports Live program after the UFC show looks awful. The College Football show with Clay Travis is a hot mess. NBC SN stole the show today with their EPL debut. NBC gets it. I don’t think Fox does, yet.

There were some interesting production edits on the UFC telecast, including using a cageside camera with slower fps (frames per second), new music, and some new graphics. I thought most of the changes were nice, minor tweaks for the most part. Jon Anik over Mike Goldberg on the telecast turned out to be a big plus.

It is interesting to see how much pressure there is on UFC to deliver big for Fox Sports 1. No matter what ratings UFC attracts for their shows, they will either be used as proof that FS1 is here to stay or be unfairly used as a sign that the network is a failure and that UFC has no more room for growth.

Exit question: What will be the conventional wisdom in media circles if, a year from now, UFC remains the highest-rated programming on FS1 (even over college football)?

Events: UFC on Fox Sports 1 (Saturday, August 17th in Boston at the Garden)
TV: Fox Sports 1

A horrible start to UFC’s busy August fight series

Jose Aldo took his time in methodically beating up The Korean Zombie. When Zombie dislocated his shoulder, Aldo decided to kick at the injured shoulder.

Outside of Anthony Perosh winning by KO in mere seconds, Aldo’s kicking of Zombie’s shoulder may be the only memorable thing from this disastrous Rio card.

Or maybe not…

I bet Eike Batista, UFC’s Brazilian benefactor, is just thrilled.

Events: UFC 163 (Saturday, August 3rd in Rio at HSBC Arena)

Events: UFC on Fox Sports 1 (Wednesday, August 28th in Indianapolis at the Fieldhouse)
TV: Fox Sports 1

Topics: MMA, Media, UFC, Zach Arnold | 84 Comments » | Permalink | Trackback |

84 Responses to “PRIDE goeth before the fall with Overeem & Shogun obliterated in Boston”

  1. 45 Huddle says:

    UFC 163 – While UFC 161 was a definitive “no buy” for most fans, I think UFC 163 is teeters on “maybe buy”. It really only has 3 respectable fights on the card…. and even Maia/Koscheck is easy to predict.

    FOX Sports 1 – A FOX worthy 3 hour card…. Plus they are giving us 2 hours of prelims on top of that. Can’t ask for much more then that. Have to wonder how the prelims will work moving forward. My guess is that they will eventually be pushed over to FOX Sports 2 once it is in full swing.

    FOX Sports 2 – Not as good as the 1st FOX Sports card, but still solid. Sara McMann has a wonderful sporty/nerdy combo going on that makes me want to watch her every time she fights.

    UFC 164 – The better of the two PPV’s this month. Really looking forward to Henderson/Grant and Mir/Barnett.

    As a side note, right now the UFC has 12 PPV’s scheduled for the year through the end of November. It looks like they will end the year with 14, as my guess is that they will have two in December. It seems like they continue to not learn. From all accounts (besides the gate which was sold based on a better card), UFC 160 did horrible. They don’t have the star power to do 14 PPV’s and 4 FOX cards.

  2. RST says:

    I love Korean Zombie, but is he really that good? Is that a good fight?

    It seems to me that kind of like flamderson, that although Aldo is technically 145, or in flamdersons case 185,that they are so vastly ahead in physical talent that they should be fighting bigger dudes. People your own weight cannot compete with you. I understand that its technically fair in a lawyerball trt way. To quote that trt sage Dr. belfort, “I’m not doing anything illegal”. But I respect Aldo more for repeatedly mentioning every intention on moving up after he holds it down for a respectable period.

    • Alan Conceicao says:

      Zombie is gonna get blown away. That card is more about giving the fans in Brazil a hometown guy winning.

  3. Diaz's cashed bowl says:

    Bellator was better this week.
    The 163 co main and main event were real Rory fights, the top UFC guys fight not to lose in the 205 division. No real meaning to the fights either since you never know who dana will pick as the lucky guy!

  4. 45 Huddle says:

    I didn’t watch the PPV, but any fight where one fighter only lands 27 total strikes over 15 minutes and loses…. Can’t be called a robbery. And he only threw 61 total strikes.

    Think about that for a second. Machida threw 4 strikes per minute over the course of the fight.

    I saw the post fight show, and Bisping said Machida needs to be more active in his fights.

    • Tradition Rules says:

      I agree, and I was pulling for Machida.

      It was his fight to lose, and that is what he did.

      Sucks about KZ’s shoulder, just so weird how it popped out.

      I was telling my friend, he needs to work the angles more, don’t stand in front of Aldo. That is what his corner even told him between rounds, and he still tried to come head on. When he was aggressive, he looked much better, but I understand, with someone like Aldo, all it takes is one small opening for him to finish a fight

  5. Megatherium says:

    Nevada judges still go on the road show no matter where it travels to. Bearing this in mind, the decision wasn’t really all that surprising. I was three-quarters expecting it, actually. Two late takedowns=two rounds in the bank, pretty well no matter what in Nevada.

    But having said that 30/27 Machida.

  6. michael. says:

    I instantly could tell that something was going to be strange about the decision when I saw Bruce Buffer’s face when he was about to announce the winner of the Machida/Davis-fight :D

  7. Steve4192 says:

    I have a hard time getting too upset about that decision. Both guys sucked. Machida because he was inactive and Davis because he was ineffective. Sure, Machida probably should have won the decision because he only shat the bed whereas Davis shat the bed and vomited, but I’m not going to cry any tears for him. The only outcome that really would have made me happy in that fight is if both guys went home with an ‘L’ on their record.

  8. david m says:

    Such a terrible decision. I wrote a blog post about it if anyone is interested:

    • Megatherium says:

      Good writeup david m. In this case Sal D’Amato, Rick Winter and Chris Watts were the indispensable Americans. Viewers need to take the broadcasters warnings that “we’re in Brazil/Japan/Canada” with a grain of salt while they wait for Bruce Buffer’s final call. It’s Nevada judges worldwide baby!

      • david m says:

        Thanks. I subsequently saw the official scorecards somewhere on the intrawebs, and one of the judges gave the third round to Phil. I mean, what can you even say? It was a clear 30-27 fight.

        • edub says:

          The second round was clearly Davis’s round, so it wasn’t clearly 30-27.

          The first round was close, but it should have been Machida’s and the 3rd wasn’t even questionable.

          In the end it was close to obvious for a 29-28 Machida victory.

        • david m says:

          Why do you think the 2nd was clearly Davis? I am interested in your opinion.

        • edub says:

          Outstruck, and outgrappled. The two pillars of MMA.

          IMO, the thought that Machida’s striking was much better in the second round is completely off. I think it was closely won by Machida, and then Phil hit the takedown and landed good shots on the ground. A close, but clear round for Phil.

        • edub says:

          IMO, Machida won the third by the biggest margin. Phil won the second by the next biggest, and Machida won the 1st which was the closest round of the match.

  9. RST says:

    Thats weird about Machida. I haven’t seen the fight yet but every PBP I read gave a unanimous decision to Machida. But you cant say that Phil didn’t do anything either. Getting Machida down twice is as good as taking someone a less elusive guy down 10 times. Maybe it should have been a 5 rounder. A rematch would also be acceptable IMO seeing as there really isn’t much else to do with 205 as long as Jones is in it.

    But 13 year olds dont like Machida anyway, I dont imagine dana’s twitter buddies will be demanding that.

  10. Diaz's cashed bowl says:

    “Dana and Joe have confirmed, with a strong victory by Glover, that he “probably” gets the winner of the Jon Jones fight.”

    Have we heard that before? Yeah, presaged prior to every fight at 205

  11. 45 Huddle says:

    I have seen more then a few comment online that Machida’s takedown defense should have “scored him points”.

    Stupid, Stupid, Stupid.

    Defense doesn’t score you anything. It just prevents somebody from scoring on you.

    Does a blocked shot in basketball get you points? Nope. Does a strikeout in baseball get you a run? Nope.

    In wrestling, judo, and BJJ, stopping a takedown does not score the athlete any points. It just prevents his opponent from scoring.

    Machida stopping 8 takedowns scored him nothing. It did give Phil Davis a slight advantage in aggression. That’s it.

    • RST says:

      does out striking win a round?

      Once again I haven’t seen the fight yet.

    • nottheface says:

      According to the Unified Rules though takedown defense should be scored

      “G. Fighting area control is judged by determining who is dictating the pace, location and position of the bout. Examples of factors to consider are COUNTERING A GRAPPLER’S ATTEMPT AT TAKEDOWN BY REMAINING STANDING and legally striking, taking down an opponent to force a ground fight, creating threatening submission attempts, passing the guard to achieve mount, and creating striking opportunities.”

      “I. Effective defense means AVOIDING being struck, TAKEN DOWN or reversed while countering with offensive attacks.”

      • RST says:


        I’m not always a rule follower,
        but they are true and its good to know them.

      • david m says:

        I wonder if Huddle will respond to this, lol.

        How about those 2013 UFC main events! LOL at anyone who was more excited for Aldo vs Zombie than Tito vs Rampage.

        • 45 Huddle says:

          I did respond. And you should read my comment. You might learn something about MMA.

      • 45 Huddle says:

        You didn’t capitalize the entire quote nor the right part of it…

        You wrote: “Examples of factors to consider are COUNTERING A GRAPPLER’S ATTEMPT AT TAKEDOWN BY REMAINING STANDING and legally striking”

        Machida landed 27 strikes the entire fight. It says countering AND striking. The key word is “and”. Not just countering a takedown. He countered takedowns AND then did not strike. He gets no points for that based on the rules you posted.

        “I. Effective defense means AVOIDING being struck, TAKEN DOWN or reversed while countering with offensive attacks.”

        The key word in that is “while”. He didn’t avoid being taken down “while” countering and offensive attack. So he gets no points for it.

        So based on what you even posted, Machida does not score any points.

        Actually everything you posted shows that merely stopping a takedown scores a fighter no points. They have to do some sort of OFFENSE from that blocked takedown in order for them to score “points” in the eyes of the judges.

        Thank you for strengthening my position.


        This is also why the rules need to be re-written. Why are they even mentioning takedown defense in the rules if in the same sentence is says that it only counts if you score offense from it? Why not just state that you need to score offense?

        It would be like in wrestling the rules said: “If you block a shot and then shoot an effective takedown, you get two points.” That is how MMA rules are written.

        When really, they can just say: “If you score an effective takedown you get two points.” The defense before it is meaningless.

        • 45 Huddle says:

          And at the end of the day…. It makes sense.

          If not one strike is thrown for an entire fight…. And Phil Davis shoots on Lyoto Machida 20 times. If Machida stops all 20 of those shots…. Should he win the fight?

          The answer is obviously no. He did nothing in the fight except try to stop his opponent. He didn’t try to win the fight in the slightest. Not one ounce of offense. Phil Davis should be the victor because at least he attempted offense in the fight. It might have been failed offense, but it is still more of an attempt then his opponent.

          In no major sport that I can think of does defense score you points. The closest I can think of is a sack in the endzone gets the team 2 points. But if you really think about it, there was still action on their part to do something to their opponent.

          All defense is supposed to count for is simple…. It stops your opponent from scoring. That is it. Nothing more, nothing less. Not to mention that in the 3 major grappling arts MMA pulls from…. Wrestling, BJJ, & Judo…. Stopping a takedown does not benefit the defensive athlete.

        • 45 Huddle says:

          And lastly…

          If Lyoto Machida throws a head kick at Phil Davis… And Phil Davis puts his arm up to block it…. Does Phil Davis score points for it?

          The answer is obviously no. But you think they should for grappling?

          See how absurd you are the way you are interpreting the rules?

        • 45 Huddle says:

          Even the ABC gets it…

          Last year they suggested to get rid of “effective grappling” as a criteria. Defense is it’s own reward by not allowing your opponent to score. It doesn’t create scoring.

        • edub says:

          45 is right here: Blocked takedowns don’t score points when they aren’t capitalized on. Machida capitalized on them in the third round (the clearest round of the fight for everybody but the moron who scored it for Davis).

          He didn’t in the second, and he only did a small amount in the first.

        • nottheface says:

          First off, you argued that defense plays no part in the scoring of a contest, so I highlighted those parts of the Unified Rules that does list it as something to take into consideration, with the qualifiers given. Here is the simplified version I bring up all the time on how it should be considered by judges:

          If a fighter stuffs a takedown but then is hit by his opponent, then stopping the takedown isn’t rewarded because it really did nothing for him defensively. If it’s stopped and the fighter then strikes his opponent he’s rewarded for keeping it standing. and if he stops the takedown but both fighters strike each equally other the one stuffing the takedown is given the slight advantage in the exchange because he kept it standing.

          As for Davis being rewarded for being more aggressive
          “Effective aggressiveness means moving forward and landing a legal strike.”
          If Philis moving forward and not landing, which he wasn’t then he isn’t to be rewarded for being aggressive.

          The same is true for a takedown. Just trying a takedown is not rewarded for being aggressive. Aggressiveness is only rewarded when one advances and lands legal strikes.

          i scored the fight 30-29. The first two saw minimal offense, aggressiveness was about equal (Machida was actually advancing and striking in the first) and 2 takedowns that did little. It was a wash. Or as the rules state:
          “a round is to be scored as a 10-10 round when both contestants appear to be fighting evenly and neither contestant shows clear dominance in a round;”

          The third was overwhelmingly Machida’s, who not only out stuck Davis, but defended takedown, often catching Phil with a knee as he came in (countering). All areas – offense, defense, area control, were Machida’s in the 3rd while Phil gets no points for aggressiveness because he was unable to land anything.

        • edub says:

          I don’t mind that score.

          My biggest problems with this fight have been the scoring of the third round for Davis by one of the judges, the thought that it was a 30-27 fight by other people who think Machida was far ahead in the striking in the first two rounds, and the decision itself. In that order.

        • RST says:

          “he didn’t avoid being taken down”

          Thats what you said!

        • 45 Huddle says:

          Um no… when they both strike each other after a failed takedown offense… the guy stuffing the takedown does not get a slight advantage. Once again… you are scoring it based on defense being the more important aspect… and that is completely wrong.

          And in the real world… if things are close… the more aggressive fighter is going to get the nod 9 out of 10 times. It’s like that in boxing too. Judges like to see fighters who are pushing the action. So while it is nice to say that the failed takedown means nothing…. in real life… in really close rounds… it is a deciding factor.

          At the end of the day… Machida needs to double hit output in order to get more wins and away from close decisions. He is the problem here. Not the scoring criteria. Not the judges. Machida is a fighter who tries not to fight and then is baffled when he loses a close decision.

        • nottheface says:

          We are not discussing how I or you would like to see it scored, we are discussing how judges using the Unified Rules are supposed to score it.
          Reread the rules, go talk to Nick Lemby, and then get back to me.

        • 45 Huddle says:

          There is a real world application to the rules.

          10-10 rounds are allowed within the rules. Yet no judge gives them out.

          Just like super close rounds typically go to fighters who are the most aggressive, despite it not being in the rules.

          That is the reality of the situation.

          And we have already gone over how you can’t read the rules properly.

          And the ABC has already said they should get rid of “effective defense”.

        • nottheface says:

          You know, i forgot about the ABC rule change. Which makes me wonder why the UFC doesn’t list those rules as the official rules on their website. Trying to find out if those changes are actually being used right now and if the UFC is using them in Brazil as well.

        • Megatherium says:

          Flush the unified rules.

  12. klown says:

    30-27 Machida.

  13. RST says:

    I do understand that the more “aggressive” fighter looks like he won. But I expect that from 13 year olds! Not from connoisseurs or alleged judges…

    • RST says:

      I dont really have all that big of a problem with the decision. Machida won. But playing it so close is his own decision. What I feel like I regret more, is 13 year olds assertion that machida’s style is a fault! What Machida does is frikken amazing! Its sad that the mma community looks past that.

  14. Jonathan says:

    Worst Decision Ever!


    Was Rutten vs Randleman for the UFC Heavyweight Strap.

  15. david m says:

    45 you are not smart enough to argue with. It is a waste of time. You are literally too dumb to make a cogent argument; all you do is spam the board and make strawman arguments. If this were sherdog you would have been banned long ago for incessant trolling.

    That was an absolutely clear 30-27 fight.

  16. RST says:

    I had a bad feeling for Shogun going into this. He’s just seemed so passive and uninterested for a year or two. And sonnen is a bad matchup for a muyThai guy as usual.

    (Especially a Muy Thai guy with infamously weak ground game.)

    Shogun will always have the skills to put on a good show against another striker. But he hasn’t brought the heart to force the fight were he wants it for awhile. Maybe he lost interest when his older brother retired. He should probably admit that his heart isn’t in it and hang it up. (Isn’t losing to chael sonnen all the proof he needs?!)

    Travis brown is coming on strong! Now he’s got Struve, Gob and Reem on his mantlepiece. Not too shabby. Reem continues to be dangerous in a flurry, just like he always was.

  17. 45 Huddle says:

    Remember when all of the anti-UFC fans… The ones who used to root for Strikeforce and now root for Bellator…. Were proclaiming that Alistair Overeem was the greatest fighter in the world?

    After 3 fights in the UFC, I don’t think anybody would now complain if he got cut. This is why I laugh when people try to put Michael Chandler in the Top 3. There are 15 Michael Chandlers in the UFC… And a lot of them with more experience.

    And FOX Sports 1 rating don’t mean too much today. Neither does this weeks programming.

    In 6 months to 1 year…. Lets see where things are at. This is a long term thing.

    With that said, anything below 500,000 is bad out of the gate and anything over 1 Million would be a huge success.

    • RST says:

      Whats Reem getting paid? They’ll want to keep him for a good price. He’s got a marketable look and fighting style. But I could have sworn they paid for him through the nose back when they first signed him to fight Brock.

    • Jonathan says:

      Whoever claimed that Overeem was the best in the world?

      The only thing I ever remember ANYONE saying is that this dude was on roids, and we were proven right.

      I don’t think that people were saying he is the #1 guy.

      • 45 Huddle says:

        Are you joking?

        There were a whole host of fans claiming he was #1 for a long time.

        • 45 Huddle says:

          Brent Brookhouse summed it up perfectly…

          “The Browne loss actually makes Overeem one of the biggest busts in UFC history. He had some really questionable drug test stuff happen before he fought Brock Lesnar, then he beat that shell of Lesnar, then failed a drug test, came back to get KO’ed by Bigfoot Silva and now was KO’ed by Travis Browne. Overeem was supposed to be a PPV draw, long-time heavyweight champion/contender, not a guy who legitimately should not even sniff the top 10.”

        • Jonathan says:

          Are you joking? Because I seriously do not remember anyone saying that he was the number 1 heavyweight.

          The only thing I remember saying about Overeem was that he was juicing.

    • nottheface says:

      I can’t think of one media member with the exception of Jesse Holland who ever rated Overeem #1. There were people that were saying they’d like to see how he’d do against the top UFC fighters (as well as the top Strikeforce fighters) because on paper, he was very intriguing. As for how Chandler would do in the UFC, lets not forget that 3 years ago people were claiming that the WEC and SF lightweights would get killed in the shark tank that was the UFC.

      • 45 Huddle says:

        1) When did I say media? I said fans. And a lot of them were saying Overeem was #1.

        2) The WEC matchmakers and the UFC matchmakers were the same people. You do realize this. So bringing up the WEC as an example of how people outside the UFC can win titles in the UFC is an invalid position to take.

        3) A valid position to look at is how bigger organizations since the fall of Pride have done at crowning UFC Champions. Strikeforce, Affliction, IFL, EliteXC, & Bellator…. Any fighter who has competed in one of these organizations and then competed in the UFC…. Only ONE fighter has ever won the UFC Championship. And that was Cain Velasquez. And he had exactly ONE fight in Strikeforce and certainly was not built up there.

        So until proven otherwise, nobody else besides Zuffa is capable of both scouting and creating #1 fighters in the world. I am sure that will change at some point in the future. The law of averages means it is bound to happen. But it certainly isn’t going to happen at any rate to make much a dent in the UFC’s power to find and develop top level talent.

        • edub says:

          “The WEC matchmakers and the UFC matchmakers were the same people.”

          Incorrect. Sean Shelby was known well by Joe Silva before the purchase, and was given the position by Zuffa because of that. He was not a Zuffa employee before the purchase.

    • edub says:

      There’s 15 Micheal Chandler’s in the UFC like Ben Henderson clearly beat Frankie Edgar in their second fight.

      Michael Chandler is a top 5 fighter because he beat Alvarez while Eddie was ranked high, and other people that were ahead of him have either left the weight class or lost a few times.

  18. Darkmader says:

    Sheldon Adelson was a part of a rant on the post-press conference with Dana White. Zach, what’s the deal with him?
    If you google him, 6 links down he’s mentioned with Dr. Oz :-)

    Ed. — What was the exact quote?

  19. Darkmader says:

    “Three people died making this watch”

    Conor McGregor has the natural charisma, unlike Sonnen, which is fake and derived from old school pro-wrestling promos that 85% of the UFC wouldn’t understand or know. The Superstar Billy Graham famous promo was almost word for word.

    I’m not going to do research, but his short notice opponent was actually better than his original match, which is unheard of. They will shoot him to the moon and will headline UK cards, and if he wins, he could be the next superstar as he has the personality to match.

    Gunner Nelson is better, and I think has more upside than him, but he’s dull as hell and lets his talking in the cage.

    If Conner is this “great” boxer and the next big thing he got hit a lot of times and his stand up isn’t all that great. He lacks head movement and agility to be elite.

  20. Subo says:

    Hey Zach,

    I keep checking back here to see your piece on how Bellator is sullying MMA’s good name by refusing to even wrist slap War Machine for his rape comments. You know, how you berated Zuffa for their treatment of Mitrione and others? Did I miss it, or is it just that you’re a massive hypocrite?

    Meh, I guess I’m not too mad. A great night like this must be like a dagger in your eye.

    • RST says:

      Subo needs a home after being dismissed from fightlinker AND bloodyelbow.

      At least he’s not too mad about it.

    • RST says:

      Speaking of bloodyelbow,
      BE now reports that chael sonnen has “taken his place” as a top 10 LHW after out wrestling a skidding Shogun so disinterested in the fight that he got into a wrestling match, you know the same way he’s lost almost every one of his losses.

      (And to imagine that Subo wasn’t even good enough for BE!)

      • The Gaijin says:

        Ignore him – he’s still the troll he always was and just looking for attention. You know when you get axed from Fightlinker for being a dickhead that’s saying something.

        Back to your basement layer at mom’s, Derek.

      • rbk says:

        And this from BE -

        “Sonnen remains a poster boy on why fighters should be getting TRT exemptions. While I don’t personally like them, they are legal and Sonnen’s career has taken a huge turn using it. Sonnen went from a failed Light Heavyweight with his biggest win being on a mentally check out Paulo Filho to being one of the best Middleweights in the world since getting on TRT. He has physically changed, becoming larger and larger, and at this point it wouldn’t be shocking if Sonnen stayed at 205-pounds has he is become large enough for the cut to 185 to become difficult for him. It isn’t a wonder drug that ensures success, but it certainly can help a fighter who just needs a little more time.”

    • Chris C says:

      We all know those in the media who ride the UFC’s nuts and those who hate them. We know the ones who will big up the UFC when they do good and defend them when something negative happens.

      Just like we know those who will ignore and downplay good UFC does and only talk about the negative things.

      There are those who root for the UFC to fail, those who root for Bellator to fail. Its not a secret at this point who they are.

      If you dont like someones opinion ignore them.

  21. 45 Huddle says:


    1.71 Million average over the 3 hour telecast.

    I don’t think anybody predicted that.


    • The Gaijin says:

      Wow – Sonnen was always a great foil, but i guess he’s a pure draw too. I think Ubereem is/was a draw too, as disappointing as his run has been.

      Goes to show you, if you put on a tv show with the names people will watch. I laugh that this blows out that stupid “bad ratings, because summer time” argument we saw earlier this summer.

      They pulled close to the Fox ratings here and that is strong.

  22. david m says:

    I watched Shogun vs Overeem 1 (from 2005); it is amazing how both guys have changed for the worse. They were both fleet of foot and moved laterally and kicked and changed angles.

    • 45 Huddle says:

      Has Alistair Overeem really changed for the worse? Or has he never been great? Just had a streak of fighting lesser opponents.

      His record in Pride was 7-7. And of those 7 wins, they included: Bazigit Atajev, Yusuke Imamura, Mike Bencic, & Hiromitsu Kanehara.

      His record against the better fighters of Pride was bad.

      And Mauricio Rua keeps coming into fights looking soft. He needs to cut down to Middleweight and get himself in shape. I’m sure all of his knee surgeries haven’t helped much either.

      • david m says:

        Overeem has never been great per se (definitely very good though), but he was definitely a better fighter p4p back then. He doesn’t move anymore; in his prime, he was rangy, agile, and powerful. His chin has always been his weak spot; he should have beaten both Shogun and Liddell, but his chin and gas tank aren’t what they need to be.

      • The Gaijin says:

        Overeem is a front running bully, not much unlike Brock Lesnar was during his mma run.

        These guys both have impressive skills, Overeem moreso over Brock’s insane athleticism, but it seems that unless Overeem trucks a guy in 3 minutes or less and they don’t just back down or crumble he starts to lose his mojo and his suspect chin and “heart” can be gotten to. Perfectly on display in the Bigfoot and Browne fights.

        I’m still not very sold on Browne as a top 10 fighter or contender….though “top 10″ in heavyweight is not really a heady status.

    • RST says:

      Fighting to win is often half emotional.

      When jackson WANTS to win,
      he beats the best of them.

      When Shogun doesn’t care,
      he wastes time.

      Thats why jackson wanted the Shogun fight so bad.

      Jackson may be one of the dumbest people,
      but he’s intuitive!

      He knew that Shogun has been giving it away!

  23. Alien says:

    How was Alistair Overeem never great? Are we going to discount his 2010 K-1 World Grand Prix victory, his win over Badr Hari and his successes in the MMA ring at heavyweight because he abused TRT?

    I have to admit though that it has always been known that Overeem had a suspect chin. And at the time of his K-1 career, I could have sworn that Overeem would have been caught before making it to the final. But he made it to the K-1 final and won. And he didn’t beat bums to get there. Can’t take that away from him. He won the biggest prize in heavyweight kickboxing.

    • Megatherium says:

      Reem and Shogun need to see Vitor and Chael’s doctor if Zuffa hopes to get anything at all out of them. T-depleted, they’re a shell of their former selves obviously. Dana needs to decide if Pride guys merit exemptions.

      • Alien says:

        The TRT abuse is an insult to guys like me who have a legitimate need for TRT. I have naturally low testosterone and I need it to be able to live a normal life. Testosterone is what makes a man a man. But when Overeem comes in with ridiculous testosterone levels and when Vitor Belfort and Thales Leites come in looking like they are in (cue the GSP soundbite) the best shape of their life at their age… Come on.

        After the Overeem fight with Antonio Silva, Overeem’s testosterone test came back very low. It’s clear that Alistair’s body has trouble producing testosterone after abusing it for a few years. Shogun Rua and Wanderlei Silva are probably in the same boat. Don’t know if Big Nog, Ninja Rua and other PRIDE guys slowed down for similar reasons. Or if they just took many beatings.

    • RST says:


      What dont you understand aboot Reem is dangerous in a flurry?

      Watch Reem/Liddel and tell me there has ever been any difference except size.

      Reem jumped all over Chuck!

  24. BrownSmasher says:

    Yeah. Zak isn’t going to like this. Neither will all the haters.


    “Shortly after the finish the UFC’s debut on Fox Sports 1, UFC Fight Night 26, I questioned if the infant all-sports network was truly capable of generating strong ratings. Evidently, that was foolhardy.

    The numbers are out, and Fight Night 26 generated an average 1.71 million viewers. Those are remarkably strong numbers for a card off the primary Fox network. UFC on FX events have traditionally hovered between 950,000 viewers and 1.4 million. UFC on Fuel TV events, meanwhile, have ranged from under 200,000 (for the Korean Zombie vs. Dustin Poirier event) to under 500,000 (for Brian Stann vs. Wanderlei Silva). The 1.71 million mark for Fight Night 26 has only been beaten by one other card, which was UFC on FX: Belfort vs. Bisping, at 1.9 million.

  25. david m says:

    I wrote a new blog post about the divergent career arcs of Shogun and Chael, check it out:


To prove you're a person (not a spam script), type the security word shown in the picture.
Anti-spam image