[Dwil125]

damn I'm an idiot and took curran ML

At least you didn't take a decision prop too

[fitguy67]

if you were on strauss and GTDistance (instead of the o2.5 you knew u should have taken instead...but were too greedy for a few more cents...another one in the never-ending stream of "from now on, I'll_______" lessons)...

a nightmare last minute...choke's on and the seconds ticking down...

ah, sports betting as a relaxing hobby

[Grabaka]

At least you didn't take a decision prop too

I feel your pain bro, i had it too

[BIGDAY]

Curran was easy money.

[MD]

Thanks for the image, Grab. I was just about to post this:

"Just got Curran-Straus scorecards. Caldwell: Even to 5th. Hinkel: 3-1 Straus. Torriero: 3-1 Curran"

[Bumdeal]

Crazy scorecard. Curran was going to win anyway if he ended the round trying for that choke. That's crazy.

[Crassus]

Holy shit round 1 to Straus? What the penetrate?

[MD]

Crazy scorecard. Curran was going to win anyway if he ended the round trying for that choke. That's crazy.

Why? R1 was clearly Curran, R2 was clearly Straus, R5 would have been clearly Curran. The other two, I thought that R3 was a coinflip and R4 was pretty clearly Curran's for more effective striking, Straus's strikes were mostly landing on Curran's arms and Curran was landing a lot more cleanly. Lots disagreeing with me, though, so who knows. I'm not at all surprised by the scorecards, I figured they'd look something like that.

[Bumdeal]

Why? R1 was clearly Curran, R2 was clearly Straus, R5 would have been clearly Curran. The other two, I thought that R3 was a coinflip and R4 was pretty clearly Curran's for more effective striking, Straus's strikes were mostly landing on Curran's arms and Curran was landing a lot more cleanly. Lots disagreeing with me, though, so who knows. I'm not at all surprised by the scorecards, I figured they'd look something like that.

I'd have to rewatch it, which I will, but it seemed to me in rd 3,4 that Straus was more active, I think he had takedowns as well. I know I was rooting hard for Curran and feeling like I definitely lost.

[Skel]

Despite the hail-mary finish, I thought Pat looked really off; he seems to still be struggling with his depression. I'm glad he won but he's gonna have his hands full with Pitbull and Frodo.

[Crassus]

Anyone want to know why we can school books on MMA?

Legitimate MMA journalists who apparently spend their lives watching and grading this sport (I love MMA but I have way bigger priorities overall) have this: http://www.sherdog.com/news/rankings...Rankings-64121 Nik fuckin Lentz, Poirer, KZ and Elkins over Straus, Pitbull AND Curran. It's crazy, how can one honestly write that and try and say they are someone whose opinion on MMA is valid.

[MD]

Anyone want to know why we can school books on MMA?

Legitimate MMA journalists who apparently spend their lives watching and grading this sport (I love MMA but I have way bigger priorities overall) have this: http://www.sherdog.com/news/rankings...Rankings-64121 Nik fuckin Lentz, Poirer, KZ and Elkins over Straus, Pitbull AND Curran. It's crazy, how can one honestly write that and try and say they are someone whose opinion on MMA is valid.

I think:

1. Jose Aldo
2. Chad Mendes
3. Ricardo Lamas
4. Patricio Freire
5. Cub Swanson
6. Pat Curran
7. Frankie Edgar
8. Jeremy Stephens
9. Dustin Poirier
10. Chan Sung Jung

Probably a few picks that people will disagree with. I have Poirier ranked above Jung based on his recent strength of performances and Jung's relative inactivity, and I think Jason and Elkins are two exceptional wins for Stephens, and he looked excellent in both fights. I was willing to write the Jason win off as "he has power, it can happen", but he looked so good against Elkins, he's changed completely since dropping to 145. I hope I don't have to explain Pitbull's placement.

[Crassus]

I think:

1. Jose Aldo
2. Chad Mendes
3. Ricardo Lamas
4. Patricio Freire
5. Cub Swanson
6. Pat Curran
7. Frankie Edgar
8. Jeremy Stephens
9. Dustin Poirier
10. Chan Sung Jung

Probably a few picks that people will disagree with. I have Poirier ranked above Jung based on his recent strength of performances and Jung's relative inactivity, and I think Jason and Elkins are two exceptional wins for Stephens, and he looked excellent in both fights. I was willing to write the Jason win off as "he has power, it can happen", but he looked so good against Elkins, he's changed completely since dropping to 145. I hope I don't have to explain Pitbull's placement.

I'm torn on how rankings should work, whether it be based on capping or some formula of accomplishment. Take Lamas for example, the dude is talented and you can see the flashes of greatness in him. At the same time, his biggest wins are Cub Swanson two and a half years ago before he went on his tear, Erik Koch who has been proven to be pretty overrated at FW and Hatsu Hioki. So he definitely deserved the Aldo fight but now that's he's lost it, I dunno if it's really fair to keep him so high comparing his resume overall to some of the other contenders. If you cap his skills relative though I could understand a high ranking. I dunno, all I know is it's a joke to rate Nik Lentz over Pat Curran or Pitbull.

[Beelzebubzy]

Just saw the fight.
I had Straus straight up hedged with curran inside. Looks like I got lucky.