UFC 86: Rampage Vs Forrest

[Cammo101]

Spree, why is it that you always seem to be on the side of the Pride guys over the UFC guys? I find it kind of ironic that you are the only person in here that finds this decision terrible. If the fight were reversed would you think forest got a raw deal? I scored the fight even but Forest was the aggressor and the better fighter on the ground. Rampage landed the bigger shots, but they did not hurt Forest so they were not more of a scoring punch than the ones Forest land.

Forest was better on the ground, was the aggressor, had Rampage more visibly hurt than Rampage ever had him, and landed more strikes. Rampage has no one but himself to blame for not being active and relying on having to knock Forest out to win. If you are a power puncher landing much less trikes, you better not allow the fight to go to the judges.

[Blame Rasho]

And as for your "link please", i guess you just started watching combat sports? If you are gonna adopt a judging system, you take it all. Not just part. And it's a known fact that that is how the 10 point must system works.

What are you talking about?

You said this correct....

in order to take the championship, you have to win in convincing fashion.

Where does it say that you need to beat the champ convincingly? What rule is there in place where that is said. So the only way for the other competitor can win is if he KOs the champ? Please... that is why he said link please...

We all know what the 10 point must system is and why it is used. You got to deal with decisions that judges makes to determine the winner.

The fact that you are giving special credit for blood makes really question your rationale.

[SpReEfOrAlL]

Spree, why is it that you always seem to be on the side of the Pride guys over the UFC guys? I find it kind of ironic that you are the only person in here that finds this decision terrible. If the fight were reversed would you think forest got a raw deal? I scored the fight even but Forest was the aggressor and the better fighter on the ground. Rampage landed the bigger shots, but they did not hurt Forest so they were not more of a scoring punch than the ones Forest land.

Forest was better on the ground, was the aggressor, had Rampage more visibly hurt than Rampage ever had him, and landed more strikes. Rampage has no one but himself to blame for not being active and relying on having to knock Forest out to win. If you are a power puncher landing much less trikes, you better not allow the fight to go to the judges.

The only "pride guys" i enjoy are Rampage and Wandy, for obvious reasons. Neither are my favorite fighters. Ive watched that fight a couple times now, and i still see it the same way. Rampage didnt throw as much, but landed just as much. And did more damage. Even with the 2nd round, where Forrest did nothing but control. Little to no damage was done. I'm not as biased as you claim. I think Rampage more than has a case for this being a win. A draw at the very least. I'm not the only one that feels this way, even if im one of the few on here. I don't see how its a UD for Forrest. Pretty much sums it up for me. You guys claim he didn't do enough to keep his title. I don't think Forrest did anywhere near enough to take it. So yes, just like i believe the Bisping - Hamill decision was given to Bisping because the UFC wanted him to win, i think this was given to Forrest due to that fact that they stand to make much more money off of it. Same reason Chuck will get a title shot before Quinton, because a Liddell - Griffin fight is worth more money than a Jackson - Griffin rematch. You can call me stupid for thinking this, but it's how I see it.

But to your initial claim, im not biased towards Pride fighters. Just because i dislike Randy and Chuck doesn't mean I don't like UFC fighters.

[ansoncarter]

wondering...

WTF was with shaking fez's hand on the way to the octagon all about anyways? since it was all intentional and scripted and all that

is rampage a little too interested in celebrity? dying to hang out with fez and his celeb hooker/actress friends? get on the b-list and have more dumb obvnoxious trash hooker girls hanging around?

weird. Kind of lost respect for him seeing that, even though it might just be nothing

seemed really 'needy'

[cowboyronnie]

"He whooped my ass" - Quinton Rampage Jackson, July 5th 2008.

"I don't see how the judges gave him that fight." - Quinton "Rampage" Jackson, after viewing the fight tape.

Rampage out struck him. Period. Apparently people enjoy watching Forrest throw tons of strikes, landing less than Rampage and landing with a lot less power. If anyone actually thinks that should have been a UD for Forrest then they lost their damn minds. Thats the biggest slap of all. A triangle attempt and leg kicks warrant a win? Look what he did to the guys face. UFC rules alone say its a draw at the very least. The judges got it wrong. Thats what being a golden boy will get you.

Forrest has Irish skin and ridiculous amounts of scar tissue.

And as for your "link please", i guess you just started watching combat sports? If you are gonna adopt a judging system, you take it all. Not just part. And it's a known fact that that is how the 10 point must system works.

lol i a n00b

[cowboyronnie]

So does Rampage - the one-time defending champion - get one round free? Which one? Is it the overall look of the fight? How is that scored? The more times he defends, the more gratuities?

What's the exact ruling regarding scoring in favor of the champ, Spree?

[SpReEfOrAlL]

So does Rampage - the one-time defending champion - get one round free? Which one? Is it the overall look of the fight? How is that scored? The more times he defends, the more gratuities?

What's the exact ruling regarding scoring in favor of the champ, Spree?

You sir are an idiot, you can attempt to belittle me all you want to make your argument. It's not something i just made up. And you know it isn't. You can choose to act like you never heard of this to bolster your argument, but both judges and fighters have said the same.


BTW, why is your name cowboyronnie again? Was there some rematch I didn't hear about?


Meh. Anyways, you can choose to think i just made this up. You can choose to decide that this was an exception to something that has been fairly well known. I could careless.

[Blame Rasho]

So does Rampage - the one-time defending champion - get one round free? Which one? Is it the overall look of the fight? How is that scored? The more times he defends, the more gratuities?

What's the exact ruling regarding scoring in favor of the champ, Spree?

You sir are an idiot, you can attempt to belittle me all you want to make your argument. It's not something i just made up. And you know it isn't. You can choose to act like you never heard of this to bolster your argument, but both judges and fighters have said the same.


BTW, why is your name cowboyronnie again? Was there some rematch I didn't hear about?


Meh. Anyways, you can choose to think i just made this up. You can choose to decide that this was an exception to something that has been fairly well known. I could careless.

You don't need to insult people, in fact it only reflects badly on you.

Three different times we have asked for your rationale and yet to provide an educated answer...

You are the one that has no arguement in case you have not noticed...

[SpReEfOrAlL]

Look I know there is no written rule to it. It's just how the 10 point system has been judged for a long time. If a champion in boxing or MMA is to lose their belt they must be beaten. There cannot be any doubt as to whether they lost. Rounds that are so close that they are extremely hard to determine go to the champion more times than not. It's how it always has been done. It's like tie goes to the runner or w.e that thing is in baseball. There should be no argument on to who won this fight, especially if the challenger won the fight. But there is, some people may not agree with that, but their is wide spread disagreement on the decision of this fight. I personally don't agree with this view, but that doesn't mean it should be changed as the judges see fit. Forrest did not do enough to take this championship from Rampage. He did not decisively beat Jackson, and razor thin win should not make you champion. It's more than just my opinion or point of view, its the way combat sports have been scored on the 10 point must for years. It IS my point of view that it should not change from fight to fight, or change if it benefits a company financially. And thats what happened.

[Cammo101]

While I certainly think an argument can be made for Rampage winning the fight or at the very least the cards being closer, where you lose me is your claim that this fight was fixed by the UFC. You are crying fix when the vast majority of people who saw the fight scored it for Forest. Close decisions can always be argued and this is no different, but to cry fix in a fight where 60-70% of people think the right guy won is just being bitter.

If you let the fight go to the cards then you have to take the decision. Ask Forest that, as I'm sure he still remembers his bad decision loss to Tito. Was that rigged too to set up a Tito vs. Chuck superfight?

I have never heard any talk of rigged fights in the Dana White UFC era, which is more than we can say for Pride, Dream, or EliteXC. UFC has far too much integrity and far too much to lose to ever rig a fight.

[Cammo101]

Look I know there is no written rule to it. It's just how the 10 point system has been judged for a long time. If a champion in boxing or MMA is to lose their belt they must be beaten. There cannot be any doubt as to whether they lost. Rounds that are so close that they are extremely hard to determine go to the champion more times than not. It's how it always has been done. It's like tie goes to the runner or w.e that thing is in baseball. There should be no argument on to who won this fight, especially if the challenger won the fight. But there is, some people may not agree with that, but their is wide spread disagreement on the decision of this fight. I personally don't agree with this view, but that doesn't mean it should be changed as the judges see fit. Forrest did not do enough to take this championship from Rampage. He did not decisively beat Jackson, and razor thin win should not make you champion. It's more than just my opinion or point of view, its the way combat sports have been scored on the 10 point must for years. It IS my point of view that it should not change from fight to fight, or change if it benefits a company financially. And thats what happened.

No, it's the way that boxing has been scored for years and it sucks. Winners are winners and to give a crap decision for a champ just because he is the champ is one of the many reasons boxing is a dying sport. Fights should not be influenced by who the fighters are, that is just the inverse of your "rigged for Forest theory".

[cowboyronnie]

I don't know why close fights are supposed to be split decisions either. (Please Use More Appropriate Word). A UD in a close fight is a sign of a lack of fairness...how?

...think that through.

[Chach]

Since when did striking become all about heavy punches? Forrest was throwing weaker, more rapid punches because he was being aggressive, part of the 10 point must system. He also had a few punches that straightened up Rampage's neck and made him take a step back. Not vicious punches, not damaging punches, but enough to score points and put some hurtin on Rampage's jaw. And where exactly do those leg kicks fall under? I would assume, but maybe I'm a n00b, but they fall under striking. In that case, Forrest gave Rampage a few good shots in the first and some really damaging shots in the second and fifth.

It's all about effort dude. Everyone on the planet knows that Rampage can knock out a moose with one punch and can slam your back into two. But not only did Forrest go toe to toe with Rampage and trade with him but also put a submission attempt that had the potential for a highlight reel. Rampage had one really damaging strike and that was the first round punch and Forrest had one damaging strike in that second round knee kick. After that, it was fairly even if not a slight advantage for Rampage because, as you said, he threw them more accurately and were blocked less often. But this isn't **** boxing, there are whole other aspects to MMA other than striking. Rampage did absolutely nothing on his back, not even a hip escape or really try controlling Forrest's wrists. When Rampage got into Forrest's guard, he didn't do much ground and pound but open up an old cut and then had Forrest attempt a submission as well as let Forrest up before the round was over. Aside from Rampage having a slight edge in striking; in every other aspect of the fight Rampage was outclassed by Forrest. At BEST, you can make a legit case for a draw and that is because of the 10-8 suffered in the second round. Rampage failed to attack on the ground and show the necessary aggression to take rounds 1, 3, 4, and 5 to overcome that 10-8 so your pissing and moaning about how he was robbed seems like sour grapes. mahalo
~Chach~

[Headliner]

MMAWeekly.com obtained the fight bonuses, which were $60,000 each, for Fight of the Night, Submission of the Night and Knockout of the Night.

Not much of a surprise for the winners of Fight of the Night as Forrest Griffin defeated Quinton “Rampage” Jackson to become the new UFC light heavyweight champion, placing himself atop the 205-pound weight class. Griffin gutted out a tough first round only to come back and attack Jackson at every turn en route to a unanimous decision win.

Submission of the Night went to Cole Miller, who struggled at points with opponent Jorge Gurgel, but kept working for a finish and ended up catching the Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu specialist in a triangle choke. The American Top Team youngster picked up an impressive win over Gurgel and the bonus for his top rated submission.

The knockout of the night seemed like a no brainer as former “Ultimate Fighter” season 2 cast member Melvin Guillard returned to the UFC in triumphant fashion finishing European fighter Dennis Siver with punches in the first round of their match-up.

Guillard caught Siver with the opening exchange of the fight and while his opponent tried to recover, the “Young Assassin” kept coming and finished him off in under one minute.

UFC 86 Fight of the Night: Quinton Jackson vs. Forrest Griffin
UFC 86 Knockout of the Night: Melvin Guillard
UFC 86 Submission of the Night: Cole Miller

[sh00n]

Anyways, can't wait till next month. Awesome card!