Sport And TMA....Again

[ballen0351]

Ballen I hate to disagree with your quote, but there is a video that CLEARLY shows some striker in UFC4 getting taken down and his only defense was to repeatedly punch the other guys Jewels.

It was allowed.

I think you were refereeing to UFC 1 and ya it was illegal in that but subsequently Changed.

That looked painfull.

By the way I only saw 1 groin shot the rest were hips and legs. What happened next?

 

[TFP]

You keep clinging to this UFC nonsense like it means anything its still a sport nobody was trying to hurt anyone they were trying to win a game. It means nothing beyond that. Its not and end all be all. Plus they were banned UFC1 rules included

You just simply do not know he facts. I don't know how else to put it to you nicely. Biting was 100% allowed in the early UFC's. Infact it was used vs Royce in the eay UFC's and didn't work.

lol, and the fighters in the early UFC's were trying to hurt one another, it wasn't thought of as a "sport" back then. It was a simple one-vs-one combat situation. People were looking to take out there opponent, period.

 

[TFP]

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/...ules-from-no-holds-barred-to-highly-regulated


And though the fights were advertised as having no rules, that wasn't entirely true. At the inaugural UFC event, there were three rules: no biting, eye gouging or groin strikes.*

Ironically, these were the same rules employed for the ancient Greek sport of Pankration, a precursor to modern mixed martial arts.*

Those were suggests rules with no disqualification if they were used. So no, those weren't rules.

 

[ballen0351]

You just simply do not know he facts. I don't know how else to put it to you nicely. Biting was 100% allowed in the early UFC's. Infact it was used vs Royce in the eay UFC's and didn't work.

lol, and the fighters in the early UFC's were trying to hurt one another, it wasn't thought of as a "sport" back then. It was a simple one-vs-one combat situation. People were looking to take out there opponent, period.

OK bleacher report is wrong you are right I guess because Bleacher report (you know the professional sports reporters). Say biting was illegal. Lol I will trust them over you no offense but I know nothing about you so I'll go with the vetted sports reporters


And no they were not looking to hurt anyone. If they were then BJJ sucks since people kept coming back for more lol

 

[TFP]

And only 8 people fought in the first UFC hardly a great sample of martial arts what's the point?

My point is simple. The excuse of " they took away so and so's arts main weapons" as an excuse as to why the striking arts didn't do well is really not an excuse at all.

oh and thee was more than 1 UFC .......

 

[ballen0351]

Those were suggests rules with no disqualification if they were used. So no, those weren't rules.

Ok I'll believe the reporters you believe what ever you want lol.

 

[ballen0351]

My point is simple. The excuse of " they took away so and so's arts main weapons" as an excuse as to why the striking arts didn't do well is really not an excuse at all.

Not giving an excuse just saying it means nothing 8 people is hardly a sample size to prove anything

 

[TFP]

OK bleacher report is wrong you are right I guess because Bleacher report (you know the professional sports reporters). Say biting was illegal. Lol I will trust them over you no offense but I know nothing about you so I'll go with the vetted sports reporters

No worries, you don't know me from Joe Schmo. But here is a quote that you may find interesting. I will link the article so just because it's actually a really great read! All bickering aside, it's a great insight into what was the early UFC's.

While the fencing company realized the more pragmatic Octagon schematic, fighters debated how best to survive in the ring with virtually no restriction. Gouging, groin strikes and biting were prohibited, but infractions would only result in a fine, not a disqualification.


Royce Gracie: That’s one of the things I brought up to my brothers, “What if the guy cheats? There’s no punishment.” If the guy bites, and I cannot continue, he wins.

Gordeau: No rules are no rules.

Gordeau: I sign the paper and I go. The rest stayed there to explain what is allowed and what is not allowed. Real Americans, they talk a lot. But if you have no rules, you are finished explaining in two seconds.

http://www.realfightermag.com/article.php?ArticleID=5096

 

[TFP]

Ok I'll believe the reporters you believe what ever you want lol.

See above post.....opcorn:

 

[TFP]

Not giving an excuse just saying it means nothing 8 people is hardly a sample size to prove anything

Those are two seperate are things, first it was stated that the "rules" mean it's only half an art. Then when that was debunked it's well there were only 8 guys to which I responded there were many more UFC's and other NHB fights, so more than 8.

 

[ballen0351]

Those are two speed are things, first it was stated that the "rules" mean it's only half an art. Then when that was debunked it's well there were only 8 guys to which I responded there were many more UFC's and other NHB fights, so more than 8.

And again there are Rules so its not debunked and yes 8 is hardly a sample size. And of all the other fights they ALL have rules and BJJ didn't win them all so again pointless.

 

[Kframe]

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/...ules-from-no-holds-barred-to-highly-regulated


And though the fights were advertised as having no rules, that wasn't entirely true. At the inaugural UFC event, there were three rules: no biting, eye gouging or groin strikes.*

Ironically, these were the same rules employed for the ancient Greek sport of Pankration, a precursor to modern mixed martial arts.*





Your not disagreeing with me your disagreeing with every article I've read on the internet maybe the internet is wrong

Yet you ignore the video were it is clearly UFC 4? How in hell can you do that?

 

[ballen0351]

Yet you ignore the video were it is clearly UFC 4? How in hell can you do that?

I didnt ignore it I responded to it look at my post above

And your ignoring the rules just because a ref missed a call

 

[Kframe]

IDK what video you were watching, but I saw a lot of groin shots there. So did everyone who commented on it on a recent sherdog forum..

 

[TFP]

And again there are Rules so its not debunked and yes 8 is hardly a sample size. And of all the other fights they ALL have rules and BJJ didn't win them all so again pointless.

:s38: keep hiding in the dark, the light (truth) is scary.

Honestly don't know what else to say, I only answer your questions with facts and have you ignore them for so long.

 

[ballen0351]

IDK what video you were watching, but I saw a lot of groin shots there. So did everyone who commented on it on a recent sherdog forum..

Dude first two shots were upper hip third shot hit the mat when the guy lifted his leg his leg his the 4th shot was hidden by the leg and then the last shot was def in the groin. Then the clip stopped. What happened next? Was he DQed? Did he loose? Did he win?

And sherdog forum really that's your proof? LOL

 

[ballen0351]

:s38: keep hiding in the dark, the light (truth) is scary.

Honestly don't know what else to say, I only answer your questions with facts and have you ignore them for so long.

Keep arguing with the real reporters not me. I didn't make the rules they did.

 

[TFP]

And your ignoring the rules just because a ref missed a call

:erg:

 

[ballen0351]

:erg:

Most informative post your done all day lol

 

[TFP]

Dude first two shots were upper hip third shot hit the mat when the guy lifted his leg his leg his the 4th shot was hidden by the leg and then the last shot was def in the groin. Then the clip stopped. What happened next? Was he DQed? Did he loose? Did he win?

And sherdog forum really that's your proof? LOL

Hackney won on the ground via choke.:ultracool