- 07/20/2012, 11:08PM ET
Bloggers Needed said 07/20, 11:08 PM
With the UFC HoF with 8 fighters, time to matchem up!
Pride Rules, Cage.
Pick what Time your fighter is coming from, IE Peak.
This could be in a blog, so if you don't want me using your words (with credit) then don't take/comment
Do know what you are talking about
I'm off Sunday, So if this is still going, I don't TD when I'm off work.
Tito def Royce
Randy vs Dan
Chuck vs Matt
Mark vs Ken
Chuck Liddell vs Matt Hughes
I'll go uphill again and take Matt from his second Penn fight.
Let's break down Chuck.
Solid Wrestler- Matt's one of the best MMA wrestlers to ever step in the cage.
Very good striker- he's also a SLOW striker- Matts seen the handspeed of lightweights, including Pen- Twice. Chuck's in slow motion compared to Penn.
KO power in both hands. Matt's chin isn't gone yet. Not to mention the fact Matt's recovery is LEGENDARY. Chuck might KO him, but by the time the ref is there, Matt's spinning for a leg.
JimJ77 Can't make it up said 07/21, 12:11 AM
I'll go ahead and take Chuck from his 2nd fight with Randy.
I'm not sure how Chuck loses this fight. Hughes standup is mediocre at best. And what's he going to do? Take Chuck down? Um, never.
Chuck invented sprawl and brawl. People forget he was a wrestler at Cal Poly and had the skill set to keep fights standing where he would unleash his power.
And I haven't even gotten to the size disparity yet. Chuck was a good sized 205er. Hughes fought at 170, and wasn't that big at 170.
I see this fight basically being standup because Chuck dictates it stays there, and eventually he clips Hughes, and TKO's him.
Hughes had a decent chin, but at 170 not 205. Physics says he couldn't take shots from a guy 35 lbs bigger than him, and a guy who hit like a dump truck the way Chuck did.
Hughes isn't winning the standup battle, he's not winning the wrestling battle, and he's sure as hell not subbing Chuck.
Bad matchup for Hughes. Liddell wins by TKO.
Bloggers Needed said 07/21, 01:09 AM
Whoooo Chuck was a wrestler at Cal Poly. Whooo
I know, I've read his book.
Matt is one of the best MMA wrestlers in HISTORY. MMA wrestling isn't the same as Cal Poly wrestling.
How's Mark Munoz as a wrestler? Kind of a big deal? How's Bisping? I seem to recall him stuffing Sonnen quite a few times.
Name me the guy that Matt can't take down. At the peak of his power, nobody stayed upright against Matt.
Chucks 205. He's bigger, where is his center of gravity compared to Matt? Matts going to get under him, and he's going to be able to drop him on his back. Has Chuck ever thrown a submission off his back?
Chuck even admits in his book that he burns out in fights.
And that's STANDUP
How's that tank going to last when Matt's diving for his legs and shooting doubles like a drunk at a bar? Chucks going to wear down. Matt has a HALF HOUR to go after him.
Chucks takedown defense is legendary, and deservedly so. But this isn't Tiger White going after him. Matt is country strong, and he's going to burn Chuck.
Chuck's ONLY chance is to catch Matt's chin, but he's slower, and that looping punch is getting ducked under.
JimJ77 Can't make it up said 07/21, 01:54 AM
Chuck is the best sprawl and brawl fighter in UFC history. Pure and simple Hughes is not taking him down. Guys like Couture and Ortiz had trouble taking Chuck down and Matt is going to to? You must be high.
I'm glad you read Chucks book, it has nothing to do with how this fight would go down.
Neither does Munoz, Bisping, or Sonnen's wrestling. Strange to even bring that up, again has nothing to do with this fight. You're grasping at straws.
Ooooo, Chuck admits to burning out in fights. That didn't prevent him from smashing Couture twice, Ortiz twice, Belfort, Alistair Overeem, and Randleman. Guys WAY bigger than Hughes.
You're telling me Hughes would be more successful with his wrestling than Couture, Ortiz, and Randleman? Stop with that nonsense.
Listen, here's the thing, you took the wrong fighter to argue with. It happens to the best of us. But you simply haven't proven that Hughes could beat Liddell.
You admitted that Chuck's takedown defense is legendary, and Hughes only path to victory is takedowns. Good luck with that.
Also good luck with hoping Chuck gasses against a way smaller opponent. Chuck easily TKO's Hughes. Please Dave, stop it.
Bloggers Needed said 07/21, 12:23 PM
The rationale for the mention of the book, was you never really saw Chuck blow up. Evidence, Jimmy
"You admitted that Chuck's takedown defense is legendary, and Hughes only path to victory is takedowns. Good luck with that."
Lets go to FIGHTMETRIC
First off, lets see just how good his TD Defense was
Noe Hernandez (Who?) 1 for 1 on Takedowns - think Matt Hughes is better than him.
Jeremy Horn - 3 for 7 on takedowns. Think Matt's stonger than he is on his BEST DAY
Vitor Belfort was 3 for 4 on Takedowns
Now of course you do have guys like
Paul Jones (0 for 5) Monson (1/17) Bustamante (2/20)
But that brings us to Randy, another great MMA wrestler. He went 4 for 5 in the first fight.
For some odd reason Randy did not attempt a takedown in the second fight- might have something to do with that loss
Chuck can be taken down, Randy, Vitor, Horn all were MORE than successful in doing so. If Vitor can do it- Hughes Can
You know who has a better TD% than Chuck? Matt Riddle
You have done nothing but say- Oh he's bigger and can't be taken down.
Matt has a lower Center of Gravity, and can take him down, and put him on his back
JimJ77 Can't make it up said 07/22, 10:36 AM
You want some stats? How about this one? Chuck Liddell is 8th all time in the UFC in takedown defense. He stops takedowns 83.6% of the time.
And he stops those takedowns at 205. Here is the point you're missing in this TD. Chuck is TWO weight classes above Hughes.
There's a reason why weight classes were instituted. Because it would be totally unfair for a 205 fighter to fight a 170 fighter. Now, not only are you making an unfair fight, you're trying to sell the smaller guy winning.
It's just not happening. You can tell me this guy took Chuck down or that guy took Chuck down, but thats just reaching. Chuck had amazing takedown defense which the stats back up, and he did it at 205.
Hughes had trouble taking BJ Penn down, a natural 155er and he's going to take a 205er down with GREAT takedown defense?
Hughes was simply too small to deal with Liddell. He wouldn't be able to take him down, and he would get totally blasted on the feet. On the feet, Liddell was an animal and Hughes was just not good.
On the feet its a total mismatch, in the size department its a total mismatch. Hughes isn't taking Chuck down, so how does Hughes win? Answer. He's not.
|3||JimJ77 Can't make it up||130||53||26||68.4%|
- Awful Announcing
- Free Darko
- Pro Football Talk
- The Big Lead
- Joe Posnanski
- The Sporting Blog
- Big League Stew
- Bugs and Cranks
- Every day Should Be Saturday
- Mr. Irrelevant
- With Leather
- The Sports Hernia