M
member 3289
Guest
He said RDA has better jitz than Nate. This was my reaction to such a ridiculous statementwhy did you use this awesome gif in relation to a quote that has nothing to do with it??
He said RDA has better jitz than Nate. This was my reaction to such a ridiculous statementwhy did you use this awesome gif in relation to a quote that has nothing to do with it??
Same guy who did this to Lauzon and Cerrone. RDA ate a heap of these kicks for breakfast, son. Look at Cerrone praying to Mecca and shit.Same guy that got beat by Guida and Alvarez. Am I supposed to be impressed?
How about looking at everything involving that, I noticed on another post that you just cherry-picked one thing and ran with it..dont get me wrong, nate did catch mcgregor on the chin and from there mcgregor was confused and his energy sapped immediately...and then finished.
but conor has better striking, by a long shot. he didn't win the fight, but his stand up game is way ahead of diaz's.
hahaha, " I don't want to make excuses" but......![]()
However, despite the loss, McGregor is confident that he would have beaten lightweight champ Rafael dos Anjos had the original main event remained intact.
"If the fight was what it was supposed to be, I would have come out victorious," McGregor told ESPN's Todd Grisham. "It is what it is."
According to McGregor, had he hit a fighter like featherweight Frankie Edgar or the lightweight champ, they would have crumbled as his previous opponents did.
"They fall, 100 percent. Nate is a completely different fighter."
LINK: McGregor: If the fight was against dos Anjos, I would have 'come out victorious'
yeah I had a gripe with "(Conor's) stand up game is way ahead of diaz's" too...(...) Was Conor ahead in the standup in round 1 and the start of round 2? I'd say so, yes.
Can you claim from that that his standup is better by a long shot? No.
RDA's jaw is literally titaniumFor sure man. If RDA could eat those kicks from Pettis, he can eat a few shots from Conor - Not too many though, because we've seen what happened to everyone but Diaz when they take too many shots, but it will take a bit for RDA to bend, imo
conor has better striking, by a long shot. if the fight was 1 round, conor would win every single time.How about looking at everything involving that, I noticed on another post that you just cherry-picked one thing and ran with it..
Nate started slow, he said so himself, he needed time. He had no camp, no sparing, no preparation. He just about 'woke up' and Conor was already done.
Was Conor ahead in the standup in round 1 and the start of round 2? I'd say so, yes.
Can you claim from that that his standup is better by a long shot? No.
Because we do not really know. Conor wilting as fast as he did robbed us from knowing that better. We don't have much to go on at all.
Just look at both fighters and the circumstances, will ya?
If I had to make a judgement now, I'd say offensively Conor has the better arsenal and more push. Also is more creative. But defensively and going by fundamentals.. Diaz all the way. What did win here?
Cmac has more weapons on the feet than Nate, true. However the fights aren't one round, and having durability is very important for a striker.conor has better striking, by a long shot. if the fight was 1 round, conor would win every single time.
yes his striking is better. no way to say otherwise. that being said, being a better striker doesn't mean you win every time. other circumstances come into play.
you can be the best striker in the world and have a weak chin. u can get knocked out every time but it doesn't take away from your striking ability.
Lol. So you are going to pull the glass cannon-card?conor has better striking, by a long shot. if the fight was 1 round, conor would win every single time.
So striking really is only offence for you?that being said, being a better striker doesn't mean you win every time. other circumstances come into play.
you can be the best striker in the world and have a weak chin. u can get knocked out every time but it doesn't take away from your striking ability.
The fundamentals he showed here were crap. Technically the better boxer was Nate. What Conor did was trusting in his reflexes and timing in both offence and defence, and throw the left overhand or uppercut trying to force the KO, often overextending (bad) and being open.yes his striking is better. no way to say otherwise.
RDA would have whooped him even worse than Nate did.![]()
However, despite the loss, McGregor is confident that he would have beaten lightweight champ Rafael dos Anjos had the original main event remained intact.
"If the fight was what it was supposed to be, I would have come out victorious," McGregor told ESPN's Todd Grisham. "It is what it is."
According to McGregor, had he hit a fighter like featherweight Frankie Edgar or the lightweight champ, they would have crumbled as his previous opponents did.
"They fall, 100 percent. Nate is a completely different fighter."
LINK: McGregor: If the fight was against dos Anjos, I would have 'come out victorious'
that's why pro fighters don't train striking defense. they just punch bricks and kick banana trees to the death and if they lose they say "I would've won if I didn't get KOed".conor has better striking, by a long shot. if the fight was 1 round, conor would win every single time.
yes his striking is better. no way to say otherwise. that being said, being a better striker doesn't mean you win every time. other circumstances come into play.
you can be the best striker in the world and have a weak chin. u can get knocked out every time but it doesn't take away from your striking ability.
if Conor had better striking "by a long shot" you would be able to just say that, period. without the stupid "if" theory;conor has better striking, by a long shot. if the fight was 1 round, conor would win every single time.
his skills are better. that being said, having more skills doesn't mean you're the better striker;yes his striking is better. no way to say otherwise. that being said, being a better striker doesn't mean you win every time.
striking is not about throwing everything with perfect technique. it is about using a bag of tricks to land strikes on someone. if you get knocked out every time you suck at striking.you can be the best striker in the world and have a weak chin. u can get knocked out every time but it doesn't take away from your striking ability.
RDA would eat Conor and finish him in the 1st.For sure man. If RDA could eat those kicks from Pettis, he can eat a few shots from Conor - Not too many though, because we've seen what happened to everyone but Diaz when they take too many shots, but it will take a bit for RDA to bend, imo
That's my thoughts on McGregor, almost verbatim. I think he's had an awesome run, but I feel it was due more to circumstances, like beating Mendes on short notice and the fluke ending to the Aldo fight, and being unknown, which helped him be overlooked by almost all of his opponents, than to his actual skill set.Agreed. I think at FW, he feels like he can eat one to give one, because most guys down there can't hold up to his left hand. And he's been right. The FW's have proven that they can't take that left hand. But he just fought a 155er that took several of them. Nate's not a natural WW. People seem to forget that. He's got a great chin and a ton of heart, but he's a LW. And he just laid out the blue print to beat McGregor. I am big fan of McGregor...how he fights, how he promotes himself, how great he is w/ the fans, etc. All of it. But I truly dont think he will beat Aldo again. I think he will lose to Edgar. I think Max Holloway would give him all he wants if they fought again. And I definitely can't see him beating RDA, Khabib, Ferguson, etc....unless he makes some drastic improvements in his ground game.
Just my opinion.
striking is not about throwing everything with perfect technique. it is about using a bag of tricks to land strikes on someone. if you get knocked out every time you suck at striking.
Yes....but let's be fair about 2 things:Never gonna be the same for Conor, now. Every one knows he has a breaking point (compare to Jones, who hasn't ever shown one, for contrast) now, and that it's not even that much deeper than the average top 20 fighter. He's courageous (takes risks on brashly) but is not that tough, and now everyone has seen it and knows it.
More importantly, he knows they know.