Getbig Bodybuilding, Figure and Fitness Forums

Getbig Misc Discussion Boards => Mixed Martial Arts (MMA/UFC) => Topic started by: suckmymuscle on April 21, 2012, 09:40:29 PM

Title: UFC 145 - Jones Vs Rashad Recap
Post by: suckmymuscle on April 21, 2012, 09:40:29 PM
  It is pretty obvious that Rashad wanted to use the jab to set up the takedowns, and he did clinch with Jones a few times but didn't have the strength to take him down. This doomed him. With Jones' reach and athleticism, a stand-up war garanteed him the win.

  Rashad's speed and power did allow him to hurt Jones. He lended a good kick to Jones's temple in the first round, and then a right overhand in the second round. But Jones' reach, athleticism and versatility and those elbows assured him the win.

  I am not impressed with Jon Jones. He is very good, but not this super-dominant force people make him out to be. He is 6'5 with shoulders as wide as an oarsman and an 84" reach, and yet he couldn't finish a 5'11 man with a 76" reach.

  Based on what I saw, he would get devoured at the HW division by guys like JDS, Overeem and Cain Velasquez

SUCKMYMUSCLE.
Title: Re: Jones Vs Rashad Recap.
Post by: SuperNatural on April 21, 2012, 09:57:40 PM
Yeah, but he's not fighting in the heavyweights.  That makes all the difference.
Title: Re: Jones Vs Rashad Recap.
Post by: ecto2meso on April 21, 2012, 10:03:08 PM
^^^this exactly, they have different weight classes for a reason
Title: Re: Jones Vs Rashad Recap.
Post by: suckmymuscle on April 21, 2012, 10:07:21 PM
Yeah, but he's not fighting in the heavyweights.  That makes all the difference.

  Exactly. It's a good tactic to be 6'5 with an 84" reach and fight at a lower weight class than you own, and then carb deplete for 2 months to make 205 lbs, then step onstage with a real lean body mass 20 lbs to 30 lbs greater than your opponent with the 10" greater reach. Brilliant strategy to get easy wins.

SUCKMYMUSCLE
Title: Re: Jones Vs Rashad Recap.
Post by: AC Slater on April 21, 2012, 10:58:33 PM
 Exactly. It's a good tactic to be 6'5 with an 84" reach and fight at a lower weight class than you own, and then carb deplete for 2 months to make 205 lbs, then step onstage with a real lean body mass 20 lbs to 30 lbs greater than your opponent with the 10" greater reach. Brilliant strategy to get easy wins.

SUCKMYMUSCLE

this is the truth.  Personally I think jon jones is a coward for not fighting at heavyweight - he was so much bigger than rashad it was ridiculous.
Title: Re: Jones Vs Rashad Recap.
Post by: reclifter on April 21, 2012, 11:02:01 PM
  It is pretty obvious that Rashad wanted to use the jab to set up the takedowns, and he did clinch with Jones a few times but didn't have the strength to take him down. This doomed him. With Jones' reach and athleticism, a stand-up war garanteed him the win.

  Rashad's speed and power did allow him to hurt Jones. He lended a good kick to Jones's temple in the first round, and then a right overhand in the second round. But Jones' reach, athleticism and versatility and those elbows assured him the win.

  I am not impressed with Jon Jones. He is very good, but not this super-dominant force people make him out to be. He is 6'5 with shoulders as wide as an oarsman and an 84" reach, and yet he couldn't finish a 5'11 man with a 76" reach.

  Based on what I saw, he would get devoured at the HW division by guys like JDS, Overeem and Cain Velasquez

SUCKMYMUSCLE.

You are an idiot.  Jones has destroyed everyone at 205. He does have flaws, but has improved in every fight. He is not at his full potential yet.

Who can beat Jones at 205?
Title: Re: Jones Vs Rashad Recap.
Post by: reclifter on April 21, 2012, 11:04:51 PM
this is the truth.  Personally I think jon jones is a coward for not fighting at heavyweight - he was so much bigger than rashad it was ridiculous.

Anyone that makes weight at weigh-ins is legit. End of discussion. Walking around at 230 is not a true HW.
Title: Re: Jones Vs Rashad Recap.
Post by: TRIX on April 21, 2012, 11:41:36 PM
he looks like a swimmer

(http://resources3.news.com.au/images/2011/07/25/1226101/583479-james-magnussen-centre-and-teamates.jpg)
Title: Re: Jones Vs Rashad Recap.
Post by: suckmymuscle on April 21, 2012, 11:54:40 PM
You are an idiot.  Jones has destroyed everyone at 205. He does have flaws, but has improved in every fight. He is not at his full potential yet.

Who can beat Jones at 205?

  I love these posts that start with "you are an idiot" and then following that there is absolutely no intelligent critique at all of anything you have said.

  You want to see an idiot? Look in a mirror...
Title: Re: Jones Vs Rashad Recap.
Post by: 20inch calves on April 22, 2012, 12:54:24 AM
You are an idiot.  Jones has destroyed everyone at 205. He does have flaws, but has improved in every fight. He is not at his full potential yet.

Who can beat Jones at 205?

don't know. possibly dan henderson? i know if hendo connects with jones's questionable chin it will be lights out for him..other than that maybe the swedish guy
Title: Re: Jones Vs Rashad Recap.
Post by: 20inch calves on April 22, 2012, 12:57:17 AM
You are an idiot.  Jones has destroyed everyone at 205. He does have flaws, but has improved in every fight. He is not at his full potential yet.

Who can beat Jones at 205?

he didn't improve in my eyes. he got a decision win and played it safe most of the fight using his reach....holding hands ect. he is a great athlete no question but he is not a top FIGHTER that finishes fights.
Title: Re: Jones Vs Rashad Recap.
Post by: JasonH on April 22, 2012, 02:19:40 AM
don't know. possibly dan henderson? i know if hendo connects with jones's questionable chin it will be lights out for him..other than that maybe the swedish guy

x2

That would be a fight I'd like to see.
Title: Re: Jones Vs Rashad Recap.
Post by: 20inch calves on April 22, 2012, 02:24:03 AM
x2

That would be a fight I'd like to see.

from what i read hendo wants it also. dana has already promised  hendo  a shot  at the title. he even gets to chose to fight the winner of silva sonnen or jones. man i wish i saved that article
Title: Re: Jones Vs Rashad Recap.
Post by: Krankenstein on April 22, 2012, 09:12:08 AM
 Exactly. It's a good tactic to be 6'5 with an 84" reach and fight at a lower weight class than you own, and then carb deplete for 2 months to make 205 lbs, then step onstage with a real lean body mass 20 lbs to 30 lbs greater than your opponent with the 10" greater reach. Brilliant strategy to get easy wins.

SUCKMYMUSCLE

Now you are seriously talking out of your ass.  No one..and I mean, NO ONE "carb depletes" for 2 mos.   ::)  The only time I have seen or even heard of a fighter 'depleting' is a week MAYBE 2 out of a fight.  Just so you know, I actually treated guys like Jamie Varner, Ryan Bader, Joe Riggs, and one of Anthony Pettis' coaches....just to name a few.   NOT ONE ever mentioned about carb depleting for that long.  Now, I can accept that they clean up their diet...but not 'carb depleting'
Title: Re: Jones Vs Rashad Recap.
Post by: suckmymuscle on April 22, 2012, 10:32:38 AM
Now you are seriously talking out of your ass.  No one..and I mean, NO ONE "carb depletes" for 2 mos.  The only time I have seen or even heard of a fighter 'depleting' is a week MAYBE 2 out of a fight.  Just so you know, I actually treated guys like Jamie Varner, Ryan Bader, Joe Riggs, and one of Anthony Pettis' coaches....just to name a few.   NOT ONE ever mentioned about carb depleting for that long.  Now, I can accept that they clean up their diet...but not 'carb depleting'

  Wrong. Jon Jones has to carb deplete to make 205 lbs, because he is so big. He even calls it the "Tiger Blood Diet"(plagiarizing Charlie Sheen) where he eats nothing but raw fish and vegetables until the weight-in. He has to lose not only a lot of bodyfat but also the water stored with glycogen inside the muscles to make 205 lbs. His opponents don't need to carb deplete to make 205 lbs because they have a lot less muscle, so they can make 205 lbs despite all the glycogen and water stored inside muscle.

SUCKMYMUSCLE
Title: Re: Jones Vs Rashad Recap.
Post by: chaos on April 22, 2012, 10:52:27 AM
Hendo has the best chance to put Jones on his ass.
And I think Rashads headkick in the first round scared the toughguy right out of Jones. ;)
Title: Re: Jones Vs Rashad Recap.
Post by: The Ugly on April 22, 2012, 02:28:56 PM
Jones is boring.
Title: Re: Jones Vs Rashad Recap.
Post by: Krankenstein on April 22, 2012, 04:20:23 PM
  Wrong. Jon Jones has to carb deplete to make 205 lbs, because he is so big. He even calls it the "Tiger Blood Diet"(plagiarizing Charlie Sheen) where he eats nothing but raw fish and vegetables until the weight-in. He has to lose not only a lot of bodyfat but also the water stored with glycogen inside the muscles to make 205 lbs. His opponents don't need to carb deplete to make 205 lbs because they have a lot less muscle, so they can make 205 lbs despite all the glycogen and water stored inside muscle.

SUCKMYMUSCLE

Thats not carb depleting.  Thats low carb dieting.  I won't even get into a schooling you on the metabolic process of low carb dieting.

Oh, and its a WEIGH IN not 'weight in'. 
Title: Re: Jones Vs Rashad Recap.
Post by: suckmymuscle on April 22, 2012, 08:39:21 PM
Thats not carb depleting.  Thats low carb dieting.  I won't even get into a schooling you on the metabolic process of low carb dieting.

Oh, and its a WEIGH IN not 'weight in'.  

  What the fuck is the difference between carb depleting and going on a low carb diet, idiot? That's what happens when you go on a low carb diet: you carb deplete.

  
de∑plete
   [dih-pleet]

verb (used with object), de∑plet∑ed, de∑plet∑ing.
to decrease seriously or exhaust the abundance or supply of: The fire had depleted the game in the forest. Extravagant spending soon depleted his funds.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Origin:
1800Ė10;  < Latin dēplētus  empty (past participle of dēplēre  to empty out), equivalent to dē- de-  + plē ( re ) to fill  + -tus  past participle suffix

Related forms
de∑plet∑a∑ble, adjective

de∑ple∑tion, noun

de∑ple∑tive, de∑ple∑to∑ry  [dih-plee-tuh-ree] Show IPA, adjective

non∑de∑plet∑a∑ble, adjective

non∑de∑ple∑tion, noun


SUCKMYMUSCLE
Title: Re: Jones Vs Rashad Recap.
Post by: Krankenstein on April 22, 2012, 09:26:53 PM
 What the fuck is the difference between carb depleting and going on a low carb diet, idiot? That's what happens when you go on a low

Perhaps you should follow your own advice dipshit:

  I love these posts that start with "you are an idiot" and then following that there is absolutely no intelligent critique at all of anything you have said.
  You want to see an idiot? Look in a mirror...

Simply asking the difference between the two means you don't know the difference.  Showing the definition of 'deplete' doesn't support your statement.

Here is a tidbit for you....braniac  ::)

The human body is able to store carbohydrates for energy use in the liver and the muscles in the form of a substance known as glycogen. This carbohydrate store is basically human "starch" and is able to be quickly broken down to fuel the muscles during high intensity exercise (muscle glycogen) and to maintain blood glucose levels (liver glycogen). In the unloaded/non-carbohydrate saturated state, an untrained individual consuming an average diet (45% carbohydrate) is able to store approximately 100 grams (g) of glycogen in the liver, whereas muscle is able to store about 280g.

Remember also that muscle glycogen is committed to be used by muscle and cannot assist in maintaining blood sugar levels. Therefore should no additional carbohydrate be ingested during prolonged exercise, the task of maintaining blood glucose levels rests firmly on the liverís glycogen stores and gluconeogenesis (the manufacturing of glucose from plasma amino acids). Oxidation of blood glucose at 70-80% VO2 max is about 1.0 g/min or about 60 g/hour. Therefore it can be predicted that even with full glycogen stores, a less conditioned athleteís liver will be depleted of its carbohydrate within and hour and three quarters of continuous moderate intensity exercise. (Interestingly, the daily carbohydrate requirements of the brain and nervous system alone are enough to deplete the liver glycogen stores within 24 hours.) Once liver glycogen levels begin to drop and exercise continues the body becomes increasingly hypoglycemic (low blood sugar) mainly because blood glucose is depleted faster than it is replaced by gluconeogenesis. Professor Tim Noakes considers liver glycogen depletion and subsequent hypoglycemia to be the primary factors affecting fatigue and performance during extended duration races and especially in instances where muscle glycogen levels are low as well.


Please step back before I have to hand your ass to you even further....
Title: Re: Jones Vs Rashad Recap.
Post by: mame09 on April 22, 2012, 09:35:36 PM
from what i saw in the fight was evans not having enough skill to get in the inside and have his way

jones used his reach and fukd up evans plain and simple.

if you want to defeat jones all you have to do is get inside and stay inside.

evans had his chances on the inside but didnt know what to do like a dope


and all this bitching about weight and reach is pointless

this is mma and in mma there is a million ways to get inside.

his reach is long yes but you can get in if you know what your doing.

weight is not an issue because if you use the excuse "he weighs more then me" you should be ashamed to call yourself a fighter

Title: Re: Jones Vs Rashad Recap.
Post by: suckmymuscle on April 22, 2012, 11:03:22 PM
Perhaps you should follow your own advice dipshit:

Simply asking the difference between the two means you don't know the difference.  Showing the definition of 'deplete' doesn't support your statement.

Here is a tidbit for you....braniac

The human body is able to store carbohydrates for energy use in the liver and the muscles in the form of a substance known as glycogen. This carbohydrate store is basically human "starch" and is able to be quickly broken down to fuel the muscles during high intensity exercise (muscle glycogen) and to maintain blood glucose levels (liver glycogen). In the unloaded/non-carbohydrate saturated state, an untrained individual consuming an average diet (45% carbohydrate) is able to store approximately 100 grams (g) of glycogen in the liver, whereas muscle is able to store about 280g.

Remember also that muscle glycogen is committed to be used by muscle and cannot assist in maintaining blood sugar levels. Therefore should no additional carbohydrate be ingested during prolonged exercise, the task of maintaining blood glucose levels rests firmly on the liverís glycogen stores and gluconeogenesis (the manufacturing of glucose from plasma amino acids). Oxidation of blood glucose at 70-80% VO2 max is about 1.0 g/min or about 60 g/hour. Therefore it can be predicted that even with full glycogen stores, a less conditioned athleteís liver will be depleted of its carbohydrate within and hour and three quarters of continuous moderate intensity exercise. (Interestingly, the daily carbohydrate requirements of the brain and nervous system alone are enough to deplete the liver glycogen stores within 24 hours.) Once liver glycogen levels begin to drop and exercise continues the body becomes increasingly hypoglycemic (low blood sugar) mainly because blood glucose is depleted faster than it is replaced by gluconeogenesis. Professor Tim Noakes considers liver glycogen depletion and subsequent hypoglycemia to be the primary factors affecting fatigue and performance during extended duration races and especially in instances where muscle glycogen levels are low as well.


Please step back before I have to hand your ass to you even further....

  Ugh...and how does this exactly disprove that carb depletion is analogous for low a carb diet since a low carb diet, by definition, causes carb depletion, idiot?

  You are only owning yourself, moron. What you posted in no way disproves what I am saying. I am actually embarassed for you.

SUCKMYMUSCLE
Title: Re: Jones Vs Rashad Recap.
Post by: 20inch calves on April 22, 2012, 11:14:16 PM
Hendo has the best chance to put Jones on his ass.
And I think Rashads headkick in the first round scared the toughguy right out of Jones. ;)

i noticed that kick also. i was thinking wow that rocked him and it didn;t even seem flush. now if hendo hits solid its lights out for jones.
like its been said jones chin has never been tested..i have a suspicion that its weak
Title: Re: Jones Vs Rashad Recap.
Post by: Krankenstein on April 23, 2012, 05:32:35 AM
 Ugh...and how does this exactly disprove that carb depletion is analogous for low a carb diet since a low carb diet, by definition, causes carb depletion, idiot?

  You are only owning yourself, moron. What you posted in no way disproves what I am saying. I am actually embarassed for you.

SUCKMYMUSCLE

Geezus you are retarded...let me be very clear and slow.  Just because a low carb diet causes depletion, does not mean that your body will continue to deplete carbs while on a "low carb diet".  You will never, EVER, get 100% depleted from carbohydrates.  What I posted (if you actually had the mental capacity to understand) is that in a very short period of time, the normal trained individual will be in a "depleted" state once carbs are removed.  It doesn't take TWO MONTHS to do so. 

If you persist in continuing, please prove how a body will continue to 'deplete' carbs after say, 72hrs when consuming only meat and vegetables?  Show the proof that all muscle glycogen as well as liver glycogen can be "depleted".  Once you enter what is typically considered a "depleted" state....you maintain that state.  Thats it.  Your body will maintain minimums.

Please shut your pie hole on this.....owning you again, just like the Reagan assassination attempt.  Which, you have NEVER admitted you were wrong on....because you know damn well you fucked up.

 
Title: Re: Jones Vs Rashad Recap.
Post by: gracie bjj on April 23, 2012, 06:58:30 AM
i was hoping for a more exciting fight from jones and evans but sometimes these things happen, i thought wonderboy vs the immortal was one of the best fights ive seen in awhile
Title: Re: Jones Vs Rashad Recap.
Post by: suckmymuscle on April 23, 2012, 01:13:46 PM
Geezus you are retarded...let me be very clear and slow.  Just because a low carb diet causes depletion, does not mean that your body will continue to deplete carbs while on a "low carb diet".  You will never, EVER, get 100% depleted from carbohydrates.  What I posted (if you actually had the mental capacity to understand) is that in a very short period of time, the normal trained individual will be in a "depleted" state once carbs are removed.  It doesn't take TWO MONTHS to do so.  

If you persist in continuing, please prove how a body will continue to 'deplete' carbs after say, 72hrs when consuming only meat and vegetables?  Show the proof that all muscle glycogen as well as liver glycogen can be "depleted".  Once you enter what is typically considered a "depleted" state....you maintain that state.  Thats it.  Your body will maintain minimums.

Please shut your pie hole on this.....owning you again, just like the Reagan assassination attempt.  Which, you have NEVER admitted you were wrong on....because you know damn well you fucked up.

  What you are doing is called damage control, and we both know it. Basically, trying to spin the argument with semantics to save face.

  Stop eating carbs or dramatically decreasing their intake causes depletion of the glycogen stores in muscles(glycogen is also stored in muscles, did you know that?), which causes your weight to drop dramatically without you needing to lose muscle to achieve that drop in weight, as glycogen is stored in muscles with three molecules of water for each molecule of glycogen. This was my point from the start.

  I never claimed that a zero or low carb diet causes complete depletion of carbohydrates from the body. Stop lying. I said a zero or low carbohydrate diet causes your body to deplete carbohydrates stores, which is factual. The amount of glycogen stored in the liver is very small compared to the amount stored in the muscles.

  Brutal self-ownage, moron. You are getting owned epically. I suggest you apologize to me, admit you are wrong, and I will leave it at that.

  You want to see a retard? Stare in a mirror...

SUCKMYMUSCLE

  
Title: Re: Jones Vs Rashad Recap.
Post by: titusisback on April 23, 2012, 01:47:04 PM
Not this shit again... suckmypenis whining about weight classes...  :-\
Title: Re: Jones Vs Rashad Recap.
Post by: A Professional on April 23, 2012, 03:08:31 PM
Yeah well, he's right. Weight classes are created to limit inherent physical advantages as factors in a fight, so that we can see a battle of skill.
The problem is height is every bit the advantage weight is, but the rule makers aren't smart enough to recognize that.
Do you honestly think Jon Jones would enjoy the success he has if he was 5'10-6'1 like most of the guys he fights? He's a bully--not a fighter.
Title: Re: Jones Vs Rashad Recap.
Post by: mame09 on April 23, 2012, 06:01:15 PM
why do you people care about weight classes.

fuk me its a fight
Title: Re: Jones Vs Rashad Recap.
Post by: Geo on April 23, 2012, 07:28:48 PM

Do you honestly think Jon Jones would enjoy the success he has if he was 5'10-6'1 like most of the guys he fights? He's a bully--not a fighter.

absolutely...

he'd actually probably be quicker if he was shorter...

a shorter slightly stalkier version of jones @ 205 would probably be even more dominant..
Title: Re: Jones Vs Rashad Recap.
Post by: SomeKindofMonster on April 23, 2012, 08:55:42 PM
 Exactly. It's a good tactic to be 6'5 with an 84" reach and fight at a lower weight class than you own, and then carb deplete for 2 months to make 205 lbs, then step onstage with a real lean body mass 20 lbs to 30 lbs greater than your opponent with the 10" greater reach. Brilliant strategy to get easy wins.

SUCKMYMUSCLE

Overeem did the same thing as Jones and it hurt his cardio to drop so much weight.
Phil Davis is built much like Jones and Rashad beat him in January.
Tyson beat much taller and heavier opponents.
Jones probably sucks 10 pds. of water to make weight and fights at 215.
Remember Rashad won TUF at 220 so he probably does the same thing.
Rashad being shorter and fighting a much taller man at the same weight
should be stronger and use that to his advantage.
The plain truth is that Jones is a better fighter but anyone can be beat
on any day. Jones is better than Hendo but that doesn't mean Hendo won't
catch him and knock him out. A big hole I've noticed in Rashad's fighting is
submissions. Jones has it all - Knockout's, subs, great kicks, elbows
and an unorthodox, unpredictable style.
Title: Re: Jones Vs Rashad Recap.
Post by: Krankenstein on April 23, 2012, 09:07:13 PM
 What you are doing is called damage control, and we both know it. Basically, trying to spin the argument with semantics to save face.

  Stop eating carbs or dramatically decreasing their intake causes depletion of the glycogen stores in muscles(glycogen is also stored in muscles, did you know that?), which causes your weight to drop dramatically without you needing to lose muscle to achieve that drop in weight, as glycogen is stored in muscles with three molecules of water for each molecule of glycogen. This was my point from the start.

  I never claimed that a zero or low carb diet causes complete depletion of carbohydrates from the body. Stop lying. I said a zero or low carbohydrate diet causes your body to deplete carbohydrates stores, which is factual. The amount of glycogen stored in the liver is very small compared to the amount stored in the muscles.

  Brutal self-ownage, moron. You are getting owned epically. I suggest you apologize to me, admit you are wrong, and I will leave it at that.

  You want to see a retard? Stare in a mirror...

SUCKMYMUSCLE

  

No retard you said that he was carb depleting for two months.  Once you reach a certain point you are depleted.  Your body will not rid itself of anymore.  You are the one being owned.  The only thing I will apologize for is not continually fucking with you over the Reagan thing, but this will come back time, after time, after time.

 Exactly. It's a good tactic to be 6'5 with an 84" reach and fight at a lower weight class than you own, and then carb deplete for 2 months to make 205 lbs, then step onstage with a real lean body mass 20 lbs to 30 lbs greater than your opponent with the 10" greater reach. Brilliant strategy to get easy wins.

SUCKMYMUSCLE

Show me ANYONE who says you carb deplete for two months.  Seriously...back your statement up with facts....not semantics.  If not, STFU....
Title: Re: Jones Vs Rashad Recap.
Post by: suckmymuscle on April 23, 2012, 10:46:47 PM
No retard you said that he was carb depleting for two months.  Once you reach a certain point you are depleted.  Your body will not rid itself of anymore.  You are the one being owned.  The only thing I will apologize for is not continually fucking with you over the Reagan thing, but this will come back time, after time, after time.

Show me ANYONE who says you carb deplete for two months.  Seriously...back your statement up with facts....not semantics.  If not, STFU....

  What difference does it make if it is two months or two days, idiot? The bottom line is that Jon Jones goes on a zero carb diet to make 205 lbs because he needs to lose all the water inside his muscles to weight that little, whilst his opponents don't need to lose all that water to make 205 lbs because they have less lean muscle mass than Jon Jones.

  And I never claimed that a zero carb diet causes a complete depletion of body glycogen. Show me where, moron? I said that a low or zero carb diet causes carb(glycogen) depletion from body stores, which is true, since the body cannot synthesize glycogen in any significant amounts from either protein or fats. Gluconeogenesis, as the name implies, is the production of glucose from glucogenic amino acids and fats, moron. Most of the glucose produced via gluconeogenesis from amino acids during a low carb diet is consumed by the brain and very little is stored as glycogen as the liver's capacity to create glucose via gluconeogensis is limited.

  The bottom line is that you are less intelligent than me and are desperate to prove that you are as smart or smarter than me. Too bad for you, because you are not, and the fact that you stalk me across the boards only shows that you are insecure and that I own your mind. ;)

  Holy shit, you keep getting owned by me over and over again. It is entertaining to watch you try so hard only to fall flat on your face over and over again. ;D

SUCKMYMUSCLE
Title: Re: Jones Vs Rashad Recap.
Post by: A Professional on April 23, 2012, 11:32:11 PM
absolutely...

he'd actually probably be quicker if he was shorter...

a shorter slightly stalkier version of jones @ 205 would probably be even more dominant..

Haha Rediculous.

He wins every fight by playing paddy cake to make sure he's keeping the distance advantage.
Opponents have to chase him and get inside, and as soon as they do he hits them.
It's no different than Semmy Schilt, or Valuev. Funny how the tallest guys happen to end up champions.
Has nothing to do with height advantage  ::) ::) ::)

Title: Re: UFC 145 - Jones Vs Rashad Recap
Post by: A Professional on April 23, 2012, 11:36:22 PM
Some tall guys can lose to short guys (Mike Tyson), but that doesn't take away the fact that height/reach is a huge advantage.
This is just obvious. It's funny that people go to extreme examples, but the exception just proves the rule: on average tall guys will beat shorter guys.

I wish they had an open weight/absolute championship at the end of the season like they did in PRIDE,
and forced the cheaters like Jones to compete with the heavies during the regular season.
Title: Re: UFC 145 - Jones Vs Rashad Recap
Post by: Geo on April 24, 2012, 12:20:19 AM

and forced the cheaters like Jones to compete with the heavies during the regular season.


they should probably make everyone fight 162 times a year too and then it would be like baseball...
Title: Re: UFC 145 - Jones Vs Rashad Recap
Post by: suckmymuscle on April 24, 2012, 12:47:39 AM
Some tall guys can lose to short guys (Mike Tyson), but that doesn't take away the fact that height/reach is a huge advantage.
This is just obvious. It's funny that people go to extreme examples, but the exception just proves the rule: on average tall guys will beat shorter guys.

I wish they had an open weight/absolute championship at the end of the season like they did in PRIDE,
and forced the cheaters like Jones to compete with the heavies during the regular season.


  This is a great post, and you are 100% correct for agreeing with me.

  Contrary to what most people think, the very greatest fighters/warriors of the human species are not guys with thick torsos and huge muscles, but tall, lean, lanky guys with long limbs.

  Reach is the most important thing in fighting, and that is usually determined by height because bodyparts tend to be propportional. Seldom does a 5'5 guy have arms and legs as long as 6'5 guys..

  There is a reason why the human species got taller over thousands of years: because tall men killed short men in battle more often than the other way around and got to pass on their genes. This is also the reason why women show a preference for tall men and like lean muscles but not huge muscles.

  Big muscles give you strength which gives you power, but it slows you down by adding weight and decreasing your cardio by increasing your Oxygen needs. Tall men with ectomorphic bodybuilds have the best of both worlds, as being tall allows them to carry more muscle than a short guy without losing speed as their longer legs allows for quicker locomotion with the same cardio as the surface of their lungs is larger.

  Being tall but with a mesomorphic bodybuild gives you the reach advantage, but it does not give you a speed advantage. It is the guys who are tall and with lean torsos that have the greatest advantage. The two most dominant fighters right now, Anderson Silva and Jon Jones, are both tall, lanky with lean torsos.

  I recall this fight I once saw in a mall, between a short/average height guy(around 5'8 ) who was a huge bodybuilder at around 220 lbs, and this tall, thin, lanky 6'4 guy who probably weighted only about 180 lbs. I don't remember what they fought over, but it was probably related to one of the guys' girlfriend. Anyway, the short stocky guy rushed towards the lanky guy and couldn't even get close to him. The lanky guy would jab his face from feets away and hit him in the head twice with kicks. It was not only the fact that the short, stocky guy couldn't even get close to the lanky guy, but also a matter of speed: the lanky guy runned circles around the stocky guy, and would hit him several times and the stocky guy couldn't hit him at all. He had more muscle, but it served him for nothing.

  The best possible combination for a fighter is to be tall and ectomorphic. For a powerlifter, short and mesomorphic. People with a mix of both characteristics tend to average on both of them. From what I recall from high school, the boys who beat the shit out of the others were not the thick torsoed ones, but the tall boys with lean skeletal frames.

  Picking fights with tall, lanky guys without weapons: bad idea, unless you are a masoquist.

SUCKMYMUSCLE
Title: Re: Jones Vs Rashad Recap.
Post by: Krankenstein on April 24, 2012, 04:59:45 AM
  What difference does it make if it is two months or two days, idiot? The bottom line is that Jon Jones goes on a zero carb diet to make 205 lbs because he needs to lose all the water inside his muscles to weight that little, whilst his opponents don't need to lose all that water to make 205 lbs because they have less lean muscle mass than Jon Jones.

  And I never claimed that a zero carb diet causes a complete depletion of body glycogen. Show me where, moron? I said that a low or zero carb diet causes carb(glycogen) depletion from body stores, which is true, since the body cannot synthesize glycogen in any significant amounts from either protein or fats. Gluconeogenesis, as the name implies, is the production of glucose from glucogenic amino acids and fats, moron. Most of the glucose produced via gluconeogenesis from amino acids during a low carb diet is consumed by the brain and very little is stored as glycogen as the liver's capacity to create glucose via gluconeogensis is limited.

  The bottom line is that you are less intelligent than me and are desperate to prove that you are as smart or smarter than me. Too bad for you, because you are not, and the fact that you stalk me across the boards only shows that you are insecure and that I own your mind. ;)

  Holy shit, you keep getting owned by me over and over again. It is entertaining to watch you try so hard only to fall flat on your face over and over again. ;D

SUCKMYMUSCLE

Wow...talk about back pedaling.  I am not desperate, I have just show that you like to suddenly switch the way you say things in order to appear you're not wrong. 

What difference does it make?  Tons "idiot".  You fail to comprehend the simple concept (of which I have stated over and over) that in a normal person, there is a minimum amount of glycogen that body will maintain/attempt to maintain.  It will not go down past that point.  When you reach that point, you are in a DEPLETED STATE.  You aren't carb depleting anymore.  Get it?  I could use a bigger font if more helpful to you.  You never said anything to the effect that the body will sythesize it to "significant amounts" you stupid blowhard.  Don't think for one second that typing the word "gluconeogenisis" is going to suddenly make you out to be this super intelligent person (of which many have exposed you not to be).  If you want to get all nit picky, the body doesn't synthesize glucose for ALL amino acids, some are ketogenic and some glucogenic.  Want me to list them? 

Either you believe that someone can "deplete" for two months or you used th wrong terminology.  Which is it?  I am giving you an easy way out here.  I believe its the former as you continue to dance around the simple fact that once you reach your minimum....YOU CAN'T DEPLETE ANY FURTHER.  Just admit it....you fucked up. 

But you wont and all you will do is throw extraneous information out there to show your ineptitude.  You have yet to own me....

Krank 2 (Reagan Assasination/Lung Perforation, "Carb Depleting" for 2 months)
SMM 0

Enjoy sucking....you are very good at it.  :)
Title: Re: Jones Vs Rashad Recap.
Post by: suckmymuscle on April 24, 2012, 05:33:34 AM
Wow...talk about back pedaling.  I am not desperate, I have just show that you like to suddenly switch the way you say things in order to appear you're not wrong. 

What difference does it make?  Tons "idiot".  You fail to comprehend the simple concept (of which I have stated over and over) that in a normal person, there is a minimum amount of glycogen that body will maintain/attempt to maintain.  It will not go down past that point.  When you reach that point, you are in a DEPLETED STATE.  You aren't carb depleting anymore.  Get it?  I could use a bigger font if more helpful to you.  You never said anything to the effect that the body will sythesize it to "significant amounts" you stupid blowhard.  Don't think for one second that typing the word "gluconeogenisis" is going to suddenly make you out to be this super intelligent person (of which many have exposed you not to be).  If you want to get all nit picky, the body doesn't synthesize glucose for ALL amino acids, some are ketogenic and some glucogenic.  Want me to list them? 

Either you believe that someone can "deplete" for two months or you used th wrong terminology.  Which is it?  I am giving you an easy way out here.  I believe its the former as you continue to dance around the simple fact that once you reach your minimum....YOU CAN'T DEPLETE ANY FURTHER.  Just admit it....you fucked up. 

But you wont and all you will do is throw extraneous information out there to show your ineptitude.  You have yet to own me....

Krank 2 (Reagan Assasination/Lung Perforation, "Carb Depleting" for 2 months)
SMM 0

Enjoy sucking....you are very good at it.  :)

  You have just regurgitated the garbage that I have addressed and dismissed. I won't be wasting any more time with your stupidity.

  Krankenstein: you are laughable, dude.

  Yeah, "2"...more along the lines of that being your mental age.

  Take care.

SUCKMYMUSCLE
Title: Re: Jones Vs Rashad Recap.
Post by: Krankenstein on April 25, 2012, 04:42:45 AM
  You have just regurgitated the garbage that I have addressed and dismissed. I won't be wasting any more time with your stupidity.

  Krankenstein: you are laughable, dude.

  Yeah, "2"...more along the lines of that being your mental age.

  Take care.

SUCKMYMUSCLE

Showed you where your comment of "hes carb depleting for 2 mos" is utter stupidity.  Again, you either used wrong terminology, or you truly believed you can "deplete" for 2 mos.  Either way, you are wrong and all you did was dance around that.  Never truly addressing it.  Shit kid, you should be a politician.

Mental age?  HA HA....thats the best you got?  Son, it definitely would be best served for you to walk away.  Don't embarrass yourself any further.  Next time, stick to something you actually know.
Title: Re: UFC 145 - Jones Vs Rashad Recap
Post by: King Shizzo on April 25, 2012, 02:54:36 PM
The key to beating Jones would be to bum rush him as soon as the bell sounds.  Get in his face, and try to take his head off.  That is the only chance.
Title: Re: UFC 145 - Jones Vs Rashad Recap
Post by: A Professional on April 25, 2012, 02:56:27 PM
 This is a great post, and you are 100% correct for agreeing with me.

  Contrary to what most people think, the very greatest fighters/warriors of the human species are not guys with thick torsos and huge muscles, but tall, lean, lanky guys with long limbs.

  Reach is the most important thing in fighting, and that is usually determined by height because bodyparts tend to be propportional. Seldom does a 5'5 guy have arms and legs as long as 6'5 guys..

  There is a reason why the human species got taller over thousands of years: because tall men killed short men in battle more often than the other way around and got to pass on their genes. This is also the reason why women show a preference for tall men and like lean muscles but not huge muscles.

  Big muscles give you strength which gives you power, but it slows you down by adding weight and decreasing your cardio by increasing your Oxygen needs. Tall men with ectomorphic bodybuilds have the best of both worlds, as being tall allows them to carry more muscle than a short guy without losing speed as their longer legs allows for quicker locomotion with the same cardio as the surface of their lungs is larger.

  Being tall but with a mesomorphic bodybuild gives you the reach advantage, but it does not give you a speed advantage. It is the guys who are tall and with lean torsos that have the greatest advantage. The two most dominant fighters right now, Anderson Silva and Jon Jones, are both tall, lanky with lean torsos.

  I recall this fight I once saw in a mall, between a short/average height guy(around 5'8 ) who was a huge bodybuilder at around 220 lbs, and this tall, thin, lanky 6'4 guy who probably weighted only about 180 lbs. I don't remember what they fought over, but it was probably related to one of the guys' girlfriend. Anyway, the short stocky guy rushed towards the lanky guy and couldn't even get close to him. The lanky guy would jab his face from feets away and hit him in the head twice with kicks. It was not only the fact that the short, stocky guy couldn't even get close to the lanky guy, but also a matter of speed: the lanky guy runned circles around the stocky guy, and would hit him several times and the stocky guy couldn't hit him at all. He had more muscle, but it served him for nothing.

  The best possible combination for a fighter is to be tall and ectomorphic. For a powerlifter, short and mesomorphic. People with a mix of both characteristics tend to average on both of them. From what I recall from high school, the boys who beat the shit out of the others were not the thick torsoed ones, but the tall boys with lean skeletal frames.

  Picking fights with tall, lanky guys without weapons: bad idea, unless you are a masoquist.

SUCKMYMUSCLE

Yes, I concur.
Tall men are genetically superior and women crave our superior genetics (semen) over short guys with "invisible lat syndrome".
Title: Re: UFC 145 - Jones Vs Rashad Recap
Post by: oldtimer1 on May 03, 2012, 06:39:49 AM
I don't get it. Some of you guys don't respect his wins because he's tall and he cuts weight to make the weight class?  It's like saying someone is in the NFL just because he's tall, fast, powerful and strong. It's not fair to shorter, slower, and weaker opponents.  ::)
Title: Re: UFC 145 - Jones Vs Rashad Recap
Post by: A Professional on May 03, 2012, 08:47:47 PM
I don't get it. Some of you guys don't respect his wins because he's tall and he cuts weight to make the weight class?  It's like saying someone is in the NFL just because he's tall, fast, powerful and strong. It's not fair to shorter, slower, and weaker opponents.  ::)

No, that's totally, utterly different.
Players are assigned positions based on a combination of weight, height, and ability.

The reason weight classes are introduced to fighting sports is because usually (all things being somewhat equal), the heavier guy wins.
So the idea is to have fights that let the skill determine the outcome, rather than inherent advantages like weight.
The problem is the lack of consistency. If you determine that weight is an inherent advantage, and create weight classes to lessen it as a factor,
then you should also restrict fighters by height (Really Dana should just force fuckheads like Jones to move up in weight class). The current rules are basically admitting weight is an advantage that should be limited, while ignoring height/reach--which is every bit the advantage weight is!!

There should either be consistency, or they should just eliminate weight classes altogether and have an 'absolute' division--like UFC 1.
Title: Re: UFC 145 - Jones Vs Rashad Recap
Post by: Geo on May 03, 2012, 09:36:34 PM

Players are assigned positions based on a combination of weight, height, and ability.