One time whilst watching an UFC event with my wife, she saw a promo by Matt Hamill. She asked what country he was from because she couldn't place the accent. -_- In her defence, English is like her 3rd language.
Read a good story about Matt Hamill yesterday...some idiot wanted a photo with him to put on facebook but was also saying "he ain't that good a fighter but the photo will be cool".....his mate was saying "don't say that man, he's a UFC fighter!"....the idiot said "it doesn't matter...he can't hear me"....(Matt Hamill is deaf)...Matt Hamill fixed him with a stare and said "I can read lips though "bottom-hole"!"...**** exits stage left
That is one of the silliest comments I have heard - UFC 1-2 were good and everything else wasn't? Even if i am generous and let you mean the first 10 EVENTS, its still a ridiculous comment because some of those matches were sub-bar brawl level
God, no. After the first event, they became VERY predictable until cross-training became a thing. Any striker vs. a grappler (barring Sumo) ended up with the striker on the ground, getting choked or mauled with punches. Any striker vs. striker was essentially bad slap-fighting with an occasional hard punch or kick until the fight went to the ground, and from that point on, two guys who didn't understand the ground game would flail around until one guy accidentally choked the other, or the guy on top made the guy on the bottom bleed. Grappler vs. grappler were long, drawn-out affairs with the top man sitting in the bottom man's guard and head-butting him while they both threw short, ineffective punches and slaps to the ribs or back of the head. Any Sumo wrestler was going to get knocked out. Most participants were gassed after two minutes. This year alone we've seen two or three knockouts due to spin wheel kick in the UFC. Flying knees, Judo throws, technical striking/boxing combinations, and relentless submission attempts are far more common than they've ever been. I own the first 10 UFC's on VHS, and bust them out now and then. Also have the first five PRIDE events on DVD, as well as EFC and KOTC from the late 90's/early 2000's, and I watch old Pancrase and Vale Tudo events on Youtube all the time. As someone who has followed MMA since the mid-1990's, I have no idea why people would say the product at its infancy is better than the product today. Sure, I'd like to see some one-night tournaments, open weight classes, and head butts, but the skill and conditioning level is leagues ahead of the early days. I'd go so far as to say that a smaller champ like Jose Aldo would cut a swath through most of those early tournaments, based on skill and athleticism alone. You think Pat Smith could stop his takedowns? You think he couldn't outstrike Royce Gracie?
Bother me? Not at all....It just doesn't make any sense. Opinions are fine, but the early UFC's had some of the WORST matches ever. What was it you believe makes them superior?
I enjoy fighters like Hidehiko Yoshida who are in pride but something within these new ufc fights just seem boring
How many of the early events have you actually seen? I am talking up to about UFC 30 or so. You do know Pride folded a considerable time ago don't you?
There's also some thought that more stringent drug tests might be to blame. Guys who would previously use 'roids or other banned PEDs to recover are more fearful of doing so. Add to that a rather bloated roster that's made the UFC more likely to cut fighters, and I can see why a fighter would rather pull out and keep their contract than take a loss and lose their job. Finally, the UFC is putting on more cards than ever, averaging about two a month. I think we're just naturally going to see an increase in overall injuries because of the much larger number of overall fighters involved, though it does seem like big-name pull-outs are increasing. I would rather have seen Pettis fight Aldo instead of KZ, and Cruz, skilled as he's been in the past, should have been stripped of his title by now.
The best UFC fighters now are smart, tactical, and precise. Like any sport, from soccer to fencing, technical competition makes it less approachable if you don't know what's going on. Learn some more about the sport and you'll realize it's got a lot more complexity and strategy (not to mention athleticism) compared to the early UFCs. A lot more.
agreed. there were way too many beatings back then. they just were not good fights. the sport has evolved tremendously over the last 20 years--for the better.
I don't see how a person who has seen a lot of UFC matches can come to that conclusion. There were a handful of really amazing fights in the early days of the UFC, but there were a lot of really terrible ones too. The overall standard has increased so much that I don't see how you can think things have gotten worse over time.
