UFC 89 Bisping vs Leben Results

[BrandonLucas]

Ah but the MMA section seems to be the only one where people feel free to criticise without actually practising the style doesn't it? People from TKD don't go on to the CMA forum telling them their stylists are rubbish, the Aikidoists don't tell the Judo players the way they fight is pants now do they but here everyone feels free to be a critic.
As for announcers on shows here where it's either on television or is videoed we have fighters commentating, that way they know what they are talking about. Lee Remedious and Ian Freeman both UFC vets are the favourite ones, they also train fighters. We don't use non fighters.
With other sports the chances are that if you are interested in them you've probably participated in then at sometime even if only at school level and there's an awful lot of armchair critics who think they can do better, we've all heard them, without actually knowing much. MMA is much better understood if you have walked the walk as it were!

In all fairness, this is the MMA forum...mixed martial arts...so by the definition of the term, we all can speak on what happens in the MMA world.

I don't fight in MMA events, and I comment all the time on how poorly someone strike or how well someone strikes. I've only wrestled a little in highschool, so I only know a small bit about grappling. I'm a striker, so that's what I know most about, and I feel right at home commenting about someone else's striking ability.

Something else to consider, everyone who watches MMA events on television is not always an MMAist. Those who view it don't have to have prior experience in fighting to enjoy watching the sport.

I know this is off topic in a way, especially since I didn't even catch the Leben/Bisping fight, but I hope everyone realizes that when you perform publicly, you are open to criticism from anyone and everyone, whether they know what they're talking about or not. It's the nature of the beast.

 

[Tez3]

In all fairness, this is the MMA forum...mixed martial arts...so by the definition of the term, we all can speak on what happens in the MMA world.

I don't fight in MMA events, and I comment all the time on how poorly someone strike or how well someone strikes. I've only wrestled a little in highschool, so I only know a small bit about grappling. I'm a striker, so that's what I know most about, and I feel right at home commenting about someone else's striking ability.

Something else to consider, everyone who watches MMA events on television is not always an MMAist. Those who view it don't have to have prior experience in fighting to enjoy watching the sport.

I know this is off topic in a way, especially since I didn't even catch the Leben/Bisping fight, but I hope everyone realizes that when you perform publicly, you are open to criticism from anyone and everyone, whether they know what they're talking about or not. It's the nature of the beast.

Fair one but it's also understood that when a mate is criticised one stands up for him! A mate is a mate before anything else. Thats fair!

 

[K831]

I don't blame you at all for sticking up for a mate. However, loyalty, or "mates for mates" as you describe it, often means we stick up for them whether they are right or wrong.

Here are a couple of things we seem to have miss communicated on;

1.) I don't think Bisping is rubbish - and I never said he was.

2.) You seem to be taking any criticism of his approach or tactics or game plan as an assertion that he isn't a good athlete, or isn't a talented fighter. That is simply not the case.

3.) You are confusing "technical" with "tactics". By his own admission at the end of the fight (I have re-watched it) his "tactics" were to stay away, and score points for a unanimous decision. While that proved to be tactically sound, and it did exactly what it was designed to do, that has no bearing on how "technical" the fight was. Technical refers to the level of technique - technique may be used to employ certain tactics, but they are not the same, and his technique is not what we are discussion, rather, we are discussing his chosen "tactic" for a fight.

To answer you personal question; I come from an MMA background in the truest sens of the term - I wrestled in high school, spent a couple years boxing, training Kenpo and FMA. My goal is street applicable, real-world SD, which I believe is very different from what is known as MMA today. Having clarified that, yes, I have competed. Wrestleing (RG) boxing and small time regional MMA. I know exactly what it is like to fight the guy you have to chase the entire time. I have stopped chasing long enough to hear the crowd boo, and to realize that SOMEONE has to step up an press that fight. You can't have a fight where both people run. Leben stepped up and pressed the fight, and lost because of it. I agree Bisping is talented, technical - but his tactics in too many of his fights are to force his apponent to come to him. That gets old, as others have noted. Again, I look at the fight of then ight, Taylor and Lytle - no loss of technique (technical) but a far more interesting tactical display.

 

[Tez3]

We were talking about this in the club the other day, the point everyone wanted to make is that it's Mixed Martial Arts ( thats not just KB and wrestling, it includes karate, aikido, TKD, Judo etc) and you use what ever you have to to win. I'm not confusing techniques with tactics, if you read I said it was tactical and an MMA fighter has to use tactics. The crowds here don't boo when these tactics are used they know its part of the game, I think perhaps our crowds expect different things in an MMA fight to yours. I've never heard a fighter booed for his tactics just things like low blows, hits to back of heads etc. Oh and maybe coming from France lol.
Talking to fighters here and reading the UK forums nobody seems to understand why the American forums and comments are so negative about the fight, thats not just because Bisping won.

some quotes from British fighters, a promoter and a fight coach/manager

"Mike fought the perfect fight against Leben, (do people actually think he'd fight any different way?),

"A perfect cerebal / intelligent performance."

"If guys likeLeben etc are so much better then why can't they stop him? As for never finishing fights, what about his fights with Jason Day, charles McCarthy, Sinosic, Shafer etc?"


"He's stopped 5 of 8 in his UFC fights, not to mention his overall (T)KO rate - and they're all banging on that he's boring / doesn't look for the finish etc.

It really is pathetic."


"people complained about the standard of so called mma boxing for years, you get a guy that uses good footwork and counters and now everybody hates it
out of Bispings style and Leben plodding forward like a zombie i know which i prefer watching"


"The thing is, dude, these are the people who think that Samuel Peters is a good boxer despite his lack of movement, strategy or overall skill. A good boxer/good boxing is a guy who throws haymakers and KOs people"


"When Randy beat Silvia did they say he was a *****?"

 

[K831]

you use what ever you have to to win.

I agree with this, for the most part. It is obvious in a real life situation. However, there are constraints placed on "sport" fighting and competition that disallow this notion in practice. Further more, we have seen talented fighters get shorted on fights in the major associations because the fight didn't have the crowd appeal or the fighter didn't have a strong enough draw. If fans as a whole think Bisping's "runaway tactics" are boring, and he loses appeal, he will get less and less fights. So while "anything to win" may work in the short term, it may not be in his best interest long term...

I'm not confusing techniques with tactics, if you read I said it was tactical and an MMA fighter has to use tactics.

I know what you wrote, but it seems the argument is incongruent. Doesn't matter though. If we argee to talk about tactics and not technique, than you may well be right; It is probably fair to say that over here in the USA, we prefer tactics that lead to agressive matches, with both fighters showing a lot of "heart" and pressing forward. It is the "technique" then, that keeps it from becoming a brawl (I understand the term brwal to mean that fighters lack skill or technique.)

The crowds here don't boo when these tactics are used they know its part of the game,

Sure, because Bisping has been fortunate enough to fight guys that will chase him. What happens when both fighters stand on opossite sides of the ring waiting? You will hear booing.

I think perhaps our crowds expect different things in an MMA fight to yours.

Cleary, I expect to see a fight.

Oh and maybe coming from France lol.

Hahah agreed!

"If guys likeLeben etc are so much better then why can't they stop him?

Because he ran away! Honestly, its not that I think Leben is better, but usually when you refer to a fighter who can't be "stopped" I think of fighters who are running guys over. They are putting guys away. I don't think of fighters who are "surviving" and looking for unanimous decisions by explointing the other guys willingess to try and make it a fight.

"people complained about the standard of so called mma boxing for years, you get a guy that uses good footwork and counters and now everybody hates it

Again, I would mention the Taylor and Lytle fight. Footwork? Technique? Tactics? yep.... did either spend the entire fight running? Nope.

 

[Tez3]

I think you look for boxing more in your fights whereas we go for TKD, MT and karate. You seem to want the blood and guts type of fighting which we call brawling instead of the martial arts fighting we have.
The thing is Bisping isn't considered boring here! He will continue to be offered fights here and in Europe if the UFC decide they don't want him. We had him fight on our show for his pro debut long before he was chosen to go on TUF, he was getting fight offers aplenty after that. TUF just put him in the Americans eyes.

British martial arts style fighting
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=QiV2CU5Gb6Y

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=9fOzhj2cdZ0

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=_aTMpZ-BLUE&feature=related

and this one, Jess Liaudin was in the last UFC with Bisping, the ref too Grant Waterman was officiating on the same show.
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=gmKbnQ9YLPU&feature=related

We don't have the equivelant of this
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=ng-WznfWqV8&feature=related
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=oJX87j4agd4&feature=related

 

[Tez3]

For the ladies perhaps lol, Jess is an absolutely charming and sexy Frenchman as well as being a very technical ( and tactical) fighter. he does have a fan club! He's fought on our shows a couple of times which was a real pleasure ( smirk smirk). I have some nice photos of him!!

 

[K831]

I think you look for boxing more in your fights whereas we go for TKD, MT and karate.

I fail to see any logic in that statement, or how you could arrive at that conclusion, so I guess we will have to agree to disagree there.

You seem to want the blood and guts type of fighting which we call brawling instead of the martial arts fighting we have.

Not sure how much different that looks than MMA from any other country, but ok.

However, I do not understand how you can make that argument, refer to Bisping as a fighter who represents British tactics and style, and then post that highlight real of Marios Zaromskis. That does more to invalidate your argument than anything. Watch that highlight real, then watch Bisping vs Leben again. Didn't see a lot of running or looking for a unanimous decision out of Mario... thats exactly what we saw out of Bispiing.

Your choice of fights to represent American MMA, or even to draw a comparison, made me laugh, I am assuming you weren't being serious.

Still though, you haven't answered; how do British fans feel when both fighters choose to run, and stand on the other side of the ring? Or is it just Bisping who can get away with that?

 

[Tez3]

I fail to see any logic in that statement, or how you could arrive at that conclusion, so I guess we will have to agree to disagree there.



Not sure how much different that looks than MMA from any other country, but ok.

However, I do not understand how you can make that argument, refer to Bisping as a fighter who represents British tactics and style, and then post that highlight real of Marios Zaromskis. That does more to invalidate your argument than anything. Watch that highlight real, then watch Bisping vs Leben again. Didn't see a lot of running or looking for a unanimous decision out of Mario... thats exactly what we saw out of Bispiing.

Your choice of fights to represent American MMA, or even to draw a comparison, made me laugh, I am assuming you weren't being serious.

Still though, you haven't answered; how do British fans feel when both fighters choose to run, and stand on the other side of the ring? Or is it just Bisping who can get away with that?

The videos were posted more to show what British crowds are like more than anything else, they understand what's going on. You stated crowds will boo when the action isn't fast enough them and will get bored, my point is that the crowds here are knowledgable enough to be able to follow a fight all the way through.
My argument is that you don't like Bisping and find reasons not to like the way he fights tactically. I've never seen two fighters 'run away' lol, one of the rules in MMA as you know is you will be penalised for passivity. Bisping isn't passive he fights tactically, each fight will be fought differently, his team will have worked out tactics and have him fight according to the strengths and weaknesses of his opponent, physical chess not bar brawling. We don't see it the way you do and more and more it just sounds like sour grapes. We've watched him long before the pro fights, TUF and UFC, you are judging him on one fight with Leben which you didn't like but as someone said... Bisping won, Leben didn't.
here's an early fight of Mikes.
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=c58SOsChiyw&feature=related

 

[Tez3]

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=ZfHyM5vUQnU&NR=1

This one has Ian Freeman as MC and Leigh Remedious commentating, both have fought on UFC.
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=8_ln0UKYJb8&feature=related

 

[K831]

This is getting altogether too circular for me. It’s hard to discuss with you when your argument/point/agenda changes. You’re incongruent, bur at least you consistently incongruent.


The issue began with this statement;

I was disappointed after the fight to hear Bisping say you wanted to take it to the judges and get a unanimous decision. I like it when fighters FIGHT and try to win the fight. I don't like it when fighters do only enough to get the judges nod and not fully commit to ending it.

Your immediate reply;

Knowing Mikey I doubt he'd just go for a points win, for one thing it's too precarious to rely on just doing enough. He certainly looks as if he'd had a tough fight.

Then you go on to say;

I think one of the problems is that possibly British MMA fans and American MMA fan seem to differ in what they want to see. Over here Bisping's tactical fighting is much appreciated and is the normal way of fighting whereas possibly because the UFC is what most American fans see as MMA they want the more sort of brawling fight

That has been / was your argument from the begining. That is the argument that I, and others had contention with.

1.) Bisping’s display of runaway and try and win a unanimous decision is one tactic or approach to a fight – pretty common for Bisping, and he did say that is exactly what his plan was.
2.) Your generalization that because of few of us on the forum are prone to getting tired of a fighter whose “tactic” is most often to run must mean that we as fans don’t understand MMA, don’t understand tactical/technical fighting and only have the attention span for a “brawl” is ridiculous. It is both a red herring and ad hominem fallacy.

You then begin to change your reasoning and your argument; First, the issue is that Americans don’t like/ understand tactics, then its

How many times have TMA people said oh the way to win a fight is not to fight? Bisping is a TMA fighter at his core so what did you expect? A brawler or someone who uses his brains?

So it’s a TMA issue, but you admit Bisping would rather not fight and win by that strategy, which is of course, using his brains. Confusing…

The argument changes again;

My argument is that you don't like Bisping and find reasons not to like the way he fights tactically.

So now tactics are ancillary, and the issue is my personal feelings on Bisping?

Lets look at your comments on the subject;

I wouldn't say I like Bisping, we have as the Americans like to say 'issues' lol!

-Vs-

... it's also understood that when a mate is criticised one stands up for him! A mate is a mate before anything else. Thats fair!

Huh?

Then it’s back to the ad hominem;

Do you fight MMA? is your opinion based on getting into the ring/cage yourself and fighting or do you just watch?

Then you post links with these statements;

British martial arts style fighting

We don't have the equivelant of this

Then change again with this statement;

The videos were posted more to show what British crowds are like more than anything else,

Oh, ok…

So listen bro, I get that you feel the need to stick up for Bisping – wrong or right, countrymen and all.

 

[Tez3]

Ok, you don't like my arguments, you don't like the way Bisping fights, fine, it doesn't matter, it's only a game BUT DON'T CALL ME BRO!

 

[K831]

Ok, you don't like my arguments, you don't like the way Bisping fights, fine, it doesn't matter, it's only a game BUT DON'T CALL ME BRO!

easy dude.

 

[Tez3]

I'm not dude either. Would you call your mother or grandmother bro or dude? if not please don't call me that either, I find it rude.

 

[K831]

I'm not dude either. Would you call your mother or grandmother bro or dude? if not please don't call me that either, I find it rude.

You want me to call you momma? Weird.

All the years I lived in Scotland the colloquialism was "alright Pal" or "alright Jimmy" and when someone took something far too seriously it was "on yer bike"...

 

[Tez3]

People here, not even in Glasgow, do not go around calling women bro or dude, in fact we rarely call men that, it would be taken the wrong way. For Brits to go round calling each other 'bro' or 'dud' is affectation and very comical. Like wannabe 'gangstas'......and you'd get slapped.
In Glasgow as you should know I'd be called 'hen' not pal or jimmy.

 

[K831]

People here, not even in Glasgow, do not go around calling women bro or dude, in fact we rarely call men that, it would be taken the wrong way. For Brits to go round calling each other 'bro' or 'dud' is affectation and very comical. Like wannabe 'gangstas'......and you'd get slapped.
In Glasgow as you should know I'd be called 'hen' not pal or jimmy.

That assumes several things; first, I would have to know you're female (I don't put much time into considering the sex of someone I am having a discussion with - although it would have helped with the incongruous reasoning. ) Second, it would depend on your age. I wouldn't refer to you has hen if you were younger... might be just as rude. Now if your Glaswegian - that helps me get my footing - in Glasgow if someone called me "pal" I might be watching for the infamous "kiss" that may follow the word, especially if used when asking a question in close proximity. Not as much a term of endearment as it is in the rest of the country. I had to change a lot of colloquialisms when I moved from Glasgow to Inverness, where I might have called you "jenny". (Of course again, in some areas, it would depend on how much tea you drink).

Other info that wold help us communicate; Rangers or Celtics?
http://everything2.com/

 

[K831]

Let me rephrase; Leads or Man u? Arsenal maybe?

 

[Tez3]

That assumes several things; first, I would have to know you're female (I don't put much time into considering the sex of someone I am having a discussion with - although it would have helped with the incongruous reasoning. ) Second, it would depend on your age. I wouldn't refer to you has hen if you were younger... might be just as rude. Now if your Glaswegian - that helps me get my footing - in Glasgow if someone called me "pal" I might be watching for the infamous "kiss" that may follow the word, especially if used when asking a question in close proximity. Not as much a term of endearment as it is in the rest of the country. I had to change a lot of colloquialisms when I moved from Glasgow to Inverness, where I might have called you "jenny". (Of course again, in some areas, it would depend on how much tea you drink).

Other info that wold help us communicate; Rangers or Celtics?

Neither! but of course asking that is a very loaded question that is religious and political!! Beside can't stand football, I'm a rugby fan. am also English who went to school and uni in Aberdeen, joined the RAF and now work for the MOD. Also, I'm hugely older than you lol!

 

[K831]

. Also, I'm hugely older than you lol!

Then hen it is!

And yes, it was a loaded question, lol.