# Anderson Silva vs. Michael Bisping headlines London card on Fight Pass



## No_Mercy (Oct 17, 2006)

Good news for all. Looks like Luke is gonna get his wish, Vitor another title shot, and Bisping gets what he's been asking for.

Moussasi vs ?



> Merry Christmas, UFC Fight Pass subscribers.
> 
> Anderson Silva will return against Michael Bisping in the headliner of UFC Fight Night 83 on Feb. 27 in London, UFC president Dana White announced Thursday on Twitter. The card will air exclusively on the UFC Fight Pass digital subscription service.
> 
> ...


----------



## edlavis88 (Jul 12, 2009)

I'm sad. Either my favourite fighter (Bisping) loses, or Anderson gets beaten and hangs them up.*annoyed grunt*


----------



## Danm2501 (Jun 22, 2009)

OH SHIT. This fight is going to be awesome. Been wanting this fight for years.


----------



## Sportsman 2.0 (Jul 10, 2012)

This fight makes perfect sense now. I'm in.


----------



## TheNinja (Dec 10, 2008)

I predict it will be a great striking battle but then Bisping will F up and try to take Silva down. Silva will then put Mike in the clinch and KO him Rich Franklin style.


----------



## M.C (Jul 5, 2008)

Fun fight.


----------



## jonnyg4508 (Jan 30, 2010)

Doesnt get anymore pathetic than this. Perhaps the GOAT and one of the more recognizable fighters in Bisping going at it on fight pass. A shitty pay service that more than half of fans do not have which puts on shitty cards.

I wont be watching. That is sad...


----------



## LizaG (May 12, 2008)

So it's finally happening huh?.....


----------



## aerius (Nov 19, 2006)

This is either going to be one of the best KO's ever or Silva clowning him for 5 rounds.


----------



## Trix (Dec 15, 2009)

Anderson Silva has wanted this fight since 2010.

Its about time.


----------



## TheNinja (Dec 10, 2008)

jonnyg4508 said:


> Doesnt get anymore pathetic than this. Perhaps the GOAT and one of the more recognizable fighters in Bisping going at it on fight pass. A shitty pay service that more than half of fans do not have which puts on shitty cards.
> 
> I wont be watching. That is sad...


I'm disappointed as well that this is on Fight-Pass. UFC trying to get everyone's hard earned cash once again it appears.


----------



## LL (Mar 12, 2011)

Anderson Silva on Fight Pass.

First he gets KO'ed while clowning, then he breaks his leg, then he destroys his legacy and reputation and now he'll fight in the afternoon on the UFC's digital subscription service. How the mighty have fallen.

Not buying Fight Pass so I guess I'll pass on this fight.


----------



## Voiceless (Nov 8, 2010)

The Diaz fight didn't tell much as Silva was understandably rather tentative after getting KOed and then breaking his leg. Bisping is a good fight to see where Silva stands now. He can test his reflexes against a solid/good striker without the major risk of getting brutally KOed.


----------



## jonnyg4508 (Jan 30, 2010)

Voiceless said:


> The Diaz fight didn't tell much as Silva was understandably rather tentative after getting KOed and then breaking his leg. Bisping is a good fight to see where Silva stands now. He can test his reflexes against a solid/good striker without the major risk of getting brutally KOed.


People will make anything up to take away from Diaz.

Before the fight here was the norm I heard...

"Diaz is tailor made for Anderson, he doesnt move and offers no wrestling or power to scare Anderson" "Anderson KO no doubt just depends when he feels like it"

After....


"ANDERSON IS OLD AND COMING OFF A BROKE LEG! NO WONDER HE DIDNT ko DIAZ!!!!"


Cant be that Nick wasnt afraid what so ever and Anderson had no clue how to attack a guy who didnt act like an AM and run at him with his head down like most did. I mean god forbid Nick Diaz gets any credit for being a tough out.

It is hilarious and pathetic at the same time. Grasp at those straws.


----------



## Voiceless (Nov 8, 2010)

jonnyg4508 said:


> Cant be that Nick wasnt afraid what so ever and Anderson had no clue how to attack a guy who didnt act like an AM and run at him with his head down like most did. I mean god forbid Nick Diaz gets any credit for being a tough out.


For me it doesn't contradict. Even though the fight didn't tell me much about Silva's potential at the moment, it told me a lot about Diaz. He did absolutely great and surpassed my expectations big time.


----------



## RangerClydeTheBlue (Jul 11, 2012)

Delighted with this fight, fan of both.


----------



## kantowrestler (Jun 6, 2009)

I've been waiting to see Bisping get whomped by Silva.


----------



## RangerClydeTheBlue (Jul 11, 2012)

Do you guys really not know firstrowsports exists? lmao.

You're the type of lads to say Fight Pass is bollocks because they never put good fights on it.......then complain when they do.


----------



## Sportsman 2.0 (Jul 10, 2012)

jonnyg4508 said:


> People will make anything up to take away from Diaz.
> 
> Before the fight here was the norm I heard...
> 
> ...


Hilarious and pathetic is you totally disconsidering Anderson leg break was the main reason he didn't use his vicious kicks against a guy who doesn't defend kicks at all, so he had to go ahead and win the boxing match.
And you talk about straws...


----------



## Spite (Jul 7, 2009)

I must be the only guy not looking forward to this.

I see this as a retirement match for the loser and I don't want either guy to lose, especially Bisping. Bisping will be the guy who loses, but if he wins is he in line for a title shot?


----------



## RangerClydeTheBlue (Jul 11, 2012)

Spite said:


> I must be the only guy not looking forward to this.
> 
> I see this as a retirement match for the loser and I don't want either guy to lose, especially Bisping. *Bisping will be the guy who loses, but if he wins is he in line for a title shot?*


Unquestionable imo. He deserves one crack at it.


----------



## Sportsman 2.0 (Jul 10, 2012)

Only if Rockhold isn't the Champion and Bisping continues on a solid winstreak. The way Rockhold dominated him and finished him with a single arm very recently is reason enough to prevent Bisping from getting a title shot just yet, even with a win over Anderson, IMO.


----------



## Voiceless (Nov 8, 2010)

Can you actually imagine that. Bisping is currently ranked #7 (and it'd be a hard task to give reasonable arguments as to why anyone behind him should be in front of him). A year or two ago, people were arguing that he isn't even a Top10 fighter. With Kennedy at #6, not having fought in way over a year, it makes me wonder whether the current MW division is really that much better than at Anderson Silva's reign as some people claim. I age hasn't taken too much from Silva (which we may find out in the Bisping fight), I can see him hanging with the current Top3 and if doing so reasonably getting a shot at the title again.

...he only has to make sure he gets it done without the penis pills


----------



## LL (Mar 12, 2011)

Voiceless said:


> Can you actually imagine that. Bisping is currently ranked #7 (and it'd be a hard task to give reasonable arguments as to why anyone behind him should be in front of him). A year or two ago, people were arguing that he isn't even a Top10 fighter. With Kennedy at #6, not having fought in way over a year, it makes me wonder whether the current MW division is really that much better than at Anderson Silva's reign as some people claim. I age hasn't taken too much from Silva (which we may find out in the Bisping fight), I can see him hanging with the current Top3 and if doing so reasonably getting a shot at the title again.
> 
> ...he only has to make sure he gets it done without the penis pills


Machida, Belfort, Weidman, Jacare, Rockhold, and Romero is better than Chael, Okami, Marquardt, Maia, and Bisping, much, much better.



ClydebankBlitz said:


> Do you guys really not know firstrowsports exists? lmao.
> 
> You're the type of lads to say Fight Pass is bollocks because they never put good fights on it.......then complain when they do.


Fox Sports 1 also exists, as does my 47 inch TV and soundbar, why would I wanna watch it on a laptop screen in crappy quallty when I can watch it the way it's meant to be watched? Card was originally supposed to be on FS1 anyway, just more bullshit from Zuffa.


----------



## RangerClydeTheBlue (Jul 11, 2012)

LL said:


> Fox Sports 1 also exists, as does my 47 inch TV and soundbar, why would I wanna watch it on a laptop screen in crappy quallty when I can watch it the way it's meant to be watched? Card was originally supposed to be on FS1 anyway, just more bullshit from Zuffa.


By any chance have you bought anything ever? It probably came with a HDMI cable.


----------



## LL (Mar 12, 2011)

ClydebankBlitz said:


> By any chance have you bought anything ever? It probably came with a HDMI cable.


Yes I have in fact I spent 800 dollars to watch TV in high Def with quality sound, and no it didnt, my laptop is 3/4 years old and I've barely used it since I bought my new tablet. I have HDMI cables, I would just prefer to watch on an actual TV on a channel I already have that the card was supposed to air on to begin with instead of giving Zuffa even more money to watch one fight on a crappy UK card.


----------



## UKMMAGURU (Nov 15, 2009)

LL said:


> Yes I have in fact I spent 800 dollars to watch TV in high Def with quality sound, and no it didnt, my laptop is 3/4 years old and I've barely used it since I bought my new tablet. I have HDMI cables, I would just prefer to watch on an actual TV on a channel I already have that the card was supposed to air on to begin with instead of giving Zuffa even more money to watch one fight on a crappy UK card.


Spent over 1000 pounds on my latest tv (over 1700 dollars) and watch via apple tv streamed from my ipad, when you manage to dig yourself out of poverty you can try this too.


----------



## RangerClydeTheBlue (Jul 11, 2012)

LL said:


> Yes I have in fact I spent 800 dollars to watch TV in high Def with quality sound, and no it didnt, my laptop is 3/4 years old and I've barely used it since I bought my new tablet. I have HDMI cables, I would just prefer to watch on an actual TV on a channel I already have that the card was supposed to air on to begin with instead of giving Zuffa even more money to watch one fight on a crappy UK card.


I'd prefer the woman behind the counter at the local shop with the big tits to suck me off but I can't really complain when she just gives me the correct change.

The card is crappy? Hooray...you don't even have to see it. It's not even on your TV. Win / win for you right? It's crappy, why would you want to see it?

Sounds like it could be a nice card for me. Sure, I'm delighted that UFC is back on UK TV for free and I don't need to deal with streaming, but still, when I need to watch Bellator I don't bitch and complain that I need to jump onto firstrowsports to see it.


----------



## Voiceless (Nov 8, 2010)

LL said:


> Machida, Belfort, Weidman, Jacare, Rockhold, and Romero is better than Chael, Okami, Marquardt, Maia, and Bisping, much, much better.


I know, he's one of your favorite fighters, but Machida hasn't looked that good since he lost his title, Belfort was also part of Silva's reign and doesn't look as sharp today anymore since he is off the roids. Romero is a freak athlete, but his technique doesn't really convince me yet. Bisping is now ranked even higher than in the late days of Silva's reign.

So you have the champ, Weidman and Souza who have reasonably picked up some of the evolution of MMA in the recent years.


----------



## LL (Mar 12, 2011)

gazh said:


> Spent over 1000 pounds on my latest tv (over 1700 dollars) and watch via apple tv streamed from my ipad, when you manage to dig yourself out of poverty you can try this too.


You're missing the point bud.

It's not a money issue, it's a Zuffa issue, they took a card that was supposed to be on free TV and now put it on their Fight Pass program, the UFC has lost me as a loyal customer in the last two years due to Dana and the way they run their business, and truth be told it killed a lot of my passion for MMA and unless one of my favorites is fighting on the card I will not buy it and support Zuffa. I refuse to support Zuffa.

I would be all for watching this for free on FS1 like I was originally going to, it's not a good card but it is an interesting main event, now? Zuffa is trying to scheme it's fan base even more charing money for something we were gonna get for no charge . Why we sit here and support this company baffles me.


----------



## RangerClydeTheBlue (Jul 11, 2012)

Call me silly but I don't let Dana White get in the way of the mixed martial arts. What you're doing is refusing to watch Man United because of Sepp Blatter. Dana isn't inside the cage when hands are flying, why does he matter? Just don't watch the pressers and you can essentially always avoid him.

What the UFC did is they promoted it from a "crappy card" with a massive Silva/Bisping fight so they put it on Fight Pass. The UFC in Europe cards ironically sometimes are thrown off of BT Sports in the UK for god knows what reason. Sometimes I get them on PickTV, some small time channel without the prelims, but sometimes they just aren't there (Rose Vs PVZ for example).

I could cry and say I quit watching the UFC, or I can spent 5 minutes plugging in my HDMI and googling firstrowsports and enjoy some high quality mixed martial arts.


----------



## jonnyg4508 (Jan 30, 2010)

LL said:


> You're missing the point bud.
> 
> It's not a money issue, it's a Zuffa issue, they took a card that was supposed to be on free TV and now put it on their Fight Pass program, the UFC has lost me as a loyal customer in the last two years due to Dana and the way they run their business, and truth be told it killed a lot of my passion for MMA and unless one of my favorites is fighting on the card I will not buy it and support Zuffa. I refuse to support Zuffa.
> 
> I would be all for watching this for free on FS1 like I was originally going to, it's not a good card but it is an interesting main event, now? Zuffa is trying to scheme it's fan base even more charing money for something we were gonna get for no charge . Why we sit here and support this company baffles me.


When did you become a good poster? 

UFC seems to be upsetting FOX. I doubt FOX re ups their deal. Seems like a sad attempt at trying to save their sad little internet subscription. Sheep will go out and buy it just to watch 40 year old over the hill Anderson though. So maybe it will work for them.


----------



## RangerClydeTheBlue (Jul 11, 2012)

jonnyg4508 said:


> When did you become a good poster?
> 
> UFC seems to be upsetting FOX. I doubt FOX re ups their deal. Seems like a sad attempt at trying to save their sad little internet subscription. Sheep will go out and buy it just to watch 40 year old over the hill Anderson though. So maybe it will work for them.


Consumers = Sheep lmao.

You guys need to find something more important to vent your anger on. Become vegans or something. If you don't want to get Fight Pass, don't get it. I don't have it. There's plenty of ways to see fights without an internet subscription. If you don't want to see "40 year old over the hill Anderson" on a "crappy UK card", you have been affording the spectacular ability to not watch it? You guys cry about having too many cards anyways, yay, you get to skip one. Pop the shampers and rejoyce, you get to not watch MMA. :thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup:


----------



## jonnyg4508 (Jan 30, 2010)

ClydebankBlitz said:


> Consumers = Sheep lmao.
> 
> You guys need to find something more important to vent your anger on. Become vegans or something. If you don't want to get Fight Pass, don't get it. I don't have it. There's plenty of ways to see fights without an internet subscription. If you don't want to see "40 year old over the hill Anderson" on a "crappy UK card", you have been affording the spectacular ability to not watch it? You guys cry about having too many cards anyways, yay, you get to skip one. Pop the shampers and rejoyce, you get to not watch MMA. :thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup:


You are a broken record. You waste all your time crying about posters supposedly "crying". I didn't even quote you. We get it...We have heard you. You don't have to spend day after day sticking up for the UFC posting 30 times the same thing in one thread. Again, we have heard you. Go get laid or try to at least.


----------



## MK. (Dec 16, 2012)

On one hand i want Bisping to win & maybe somehow get a crack at a title. On the other i want Silva to win so he can go out like a champ.

Its such a shame his legacy got tarnished like this, he was such an amazing fighter.


----------



## RangerClydeTheBlue (Jul 11, 2012)

Anderson Silva Vs Michael Bisping is a cracking fight. I'm pretty sure me and the rest of the MMA fans are happy here.


----------



## kantowrestler (Jun 6, 2009)

Yeah to watch Bisping get his jaw broken lol


----------



## kc1983 (May 27, 2007)

Spite said:


> I must be the only guy not looking forward to this.
> 
> I see this as a retirement match for the loser and I don't want either guy to lose, especially Bisping. Bisping will be the guy who loses, but if he wins is he in line for a title shot?


If Bisping wins and he wins impressively then you cannot deny him a spot in line for the title. Yoel Romero and Vitor are ahead of him though.


----------



## Spite (Jul 7, 2009)

kc1983 said:


> If Bisping wins and he wins impressively then you cannot deny him a spot in line for the title. Yoel Romero and Vitor are ahead of him though.


I would give him the shot, if he pulls off the upset.

Romero is a cheating bastard at the best of times and the shit he and his team pulled during the Kennedy fight is one of the craziest things I've seen in MMA.

As for Belfort, I don't see how a win against a pensioner entitles him to another crack at the title, guy has already had 3 failed attempts in the past 4/5 years, and most of his fights over that period where brought to you courtesy of high testosterone.

I know I'm speaking as a fan, but it would be nice to see Mike finally get that title shot. Besides theres a bit of a question mark over the Rockhold fight for me. Going into the fight Bisping had damage to tissue above his eye, and Rockhold opened it up with an accidental headbutt, from there Bisping could not see as the blood was in his eye - prior to that Bisping was winning the round. I'm not saying Bisping would have won the fight, but it was all downhill for Bisping from that point.


----------



## kc1983 (May 27, 2007)

Spite said:


> I would give him the shot, if he pulls off the upset.
> 
> Romero is a cheating bastard at the best of times and the shit he and his team pulled during the Kennedy fight is one of the craziest things I've seen in MMA.
> 
> ...


I completely agree about Vitor too...he is probably the last guy that I would want to see get a title shot. He's had so many in the last few years and has always come up short. Him beating old Hendo is not impressive either...however, looking at it from a UFC business standpoint it is a fight they could market. There is history there between Luke/Belfort, and Luke also expressed a lot of interest in it. He also has a win over Bisping (albeit while he was on TRT) so that will put Bisping behind Vitor in many people's eyes.

Romero is a cheating SOB, but the UFC brass will not let that play into the decision of him getting a shot...unfortunately. 

Strictly from a marketing perspective Bisping VS Rockhold is a great title fight. I'd like to see that fight over Romero any day...also, Romero sounds like a deaf retard when he tries speaking English. He's not going to appeal to a large fanbase or bring in big numbers. 

The more I talk about it the more I want to see Bisping get the next title. IF he can smash Anderson...which I hope he can do because Anderson is a cheating SOB too.


----------



## VolcomX311 (Aug 18, 2009)

jonnyg4508 said:


> When did you become a good poster?
> 
> UFC seems to be upsetting FOX. I doubt FOX re ups their deal. Seems like a sad attempt at trying to save their sad little internet subscription. Sheep will go out and buy it just to watch 40 year old over the hill Anderson though. So maybe it will work for them.


FOX shouldn't re-up their deal. UFC breaks all their important stories and interviews on ESPN.


----------



## Joabbuac (Jan 31, 2009)

ClydebankBlitz said:


> Anderson Silva Vs Michael Bisping is a cracking fight. I'm pretty sure me and the rest of the MMA fans are happy here.


It will be worse than Diaz-Silva... Bisping the outfighter against Silva the counter puncher.

Nothing interesting about this fight...


----------



## kantowrestler (Jun 6, 2009)

Other then the fact that Bisping is going to get his rear end handed to him in the worst way possible? He's going to be lucky if this lasts past the first round. Bisping is going to try and swing for the fences and Silva will send him back to Christmas!


----------



## RangerClydeTheBlue (Jul 11, 2012)

Joabbuac said:


> It will be worse than Diaz-Silva... Bisping the outfighter against Silva the counter puncher.
> 
> Nothing interesting about this fight...


I like tactical fights as well.


----------



## Andrus (Oct 18, 2011)

I kinda like that card. Bisping vs Anderson and Mousasi vs Leites


----------



## mmaswe82 (Feb 22, 2010)

What makes me so sad about this fight is that I'm not even sure that Silva will win anymore  once upon a time I'd give the edge to Silva even if he could only use his right hand.


----------



## RangerClydeTheBlue (Jul 11, 2012)

mmaswe82 said:


> What makes me so sad about this fight is that I'm not even sure that Silva will win anymore  once upon a time I'd give the edge to Silva even if he could only use his right hand.


In Anderson's last 3 fights, what have you saw that made like look like he's really declined so massively?

Out of both fights, I think literally the only time we saw ANYTHING negative from Anderson physically that we hadn't seen before is when Weidman dropped him in the second fight. 

Outside of that, Anderson stayed on the outside and tried to bait Weidman in to counter him in the first fight. Common Anderson strategy when fighting. 

In the second fight, Anderson tried to go back to his roots with the thai clinch and got dropped hard. He then came out in the second with a style similar to the first fight in staying outside.

Then in the Diaz fight, Anderson tried to leave all of the flash and natural finishing ability behind and focus on just winning the fight. He tried his absolute hardest to not go in for the kill or do anything flashy.

I just don't think Anderson Silva looks like he's missed a step what so ever in his other fights. He was just trying different things.


----------



## mmaswe82 (Feb 22, 2010)

ClydebankBlitz said:


> In Anderson's last 3 fights, what have you saw that made like look like he's really declined so massively?
> 
> Out of both fights, I think literally the only time we saw ANYTHING negative from Anderson physically that we hadn't seen before is when Weidman dropped him in the second fight.
> 
> ...


I think that in the first fight with against Chris he look slow & had bad timing (for Anderson Silva) same goes for the Diaz fight, he doesn't look fast and athletic anymore. his technique is still there but he just doesn't have the body to pull of anything spectacular anymore. He's still a good fighter but the decline IMO is huge. He is now a non-gifted normal but ofc very technical fighter...basically making him....Michael Bisping. The second Chris fight didn't tell us much since Silva lost by a freak accident but it didn't really show us the old Silva either. Combine this physical decline with the ghosts in his head, making him not want to kick or get Ko'ed & I see this fight as 50/50.


----------



## RangerClydeTheBlue (Jul 11, 2012)

mmaswe82 said:


> I think that in the first fight with against Chris he look slow & had bad timing (for Anderson Silva) same goes for the Diaz fight, he doesn't look fast and athletic anymore. his technique is still there but he just doesn't have the body to pull of anything spectacular anymore. He's still a good fighter but the decline IMO is huge. He is now a non-gifted normal but ofc very technical fighter...basically making him....Michael Bisping. The second Chris fight didn't tell us much since Silva lost by a freak accident but it didn't really show us the old Silva either. Combine this physical decline with the ghosts in his head, making him not want to kick or get Ko'ed & I see this fight as 50/50.


I just reckon those were down to what the strategies were in the fights. Nick Diaz was just standing in the centre of the cage not coming forward. Chris Weidman was trying to not be the aggressor and land smaller things to make sure he is taking the rounds until he could get Anderson to overcommit or get bored and make a mistake.

I didn't really see where his speed or anything was off. He still landed his punches when he threw on Nick and the force of them was still ridiculously evident.

He lost by freak accident in the second but to be fair, he was seconds away from being KOed in that first round. Him going down like that was the most shocking thing for me in both fights.

Imo I see it a bit like Manny Pacquiao. When he Oscar De La Hoya, Ricky Hatton and Miguel Cotto back to back, he was facing his perfect opponents. These were guys trying to walk him down and coming straight into shots all night long. Spectacular performances. Then he faced Mosley who ran away all fight, JMM who was on the back foot and counter punching, Tim Bradley who as doing the same and then JMM again where he was KOed (people don't give credit to how good Pacman was in that fight though). Suddenly, Pacquiao had "lost it". He was old and no good. Next thing you know he's fighting Rios, a come forward in fighter again, and he battered him. He fought a more aggressive and swinging for the fences Tim Bradley and battered him. He fought a much lower ranked Chris Algeiri who was waaaaay too low level so when he tried to run away he failed miserably. Pacquiao looks like he "had it" again, just because the circumstances with opponents change. An example I tend to give of this as well is Holly Holm, when she faced people on the back foot she looked disappointing.

If you stick Anderson in there with a guy like Vitor, I'm going to fear for his chin a little bit but I think physically, unless anything has changed since the Diaz fight, Anderson will look exactly like he always has. Bisping on the other hand is more difficult and if Anderson wants to look impressive and get a finish, it's yet another fight he has to try some new and different things which might not look as good.


----------



## Joabbuac (Jan 31, 2009)

ClydebankBlitz said:


> I like tactical fights as well.


I don't think you understand the word... I love tactical battles, where each fighter is trying to work out the other. Fight also do not have to be boring, to be tactical. Gustafson-Jones/DC were pretty damn tactical :laugh:

This fight won't be a tactical showcase, it will be two fighters fighting how they always do and the fight being terrible. Neither fighter has shown the ability to fight tactically... neither fighter can force the other too make a mistake. All Anderson can do when people don't play into his coutnerpunching style is taunt... he showed this against Maia, Leites, Cote and Weidman.


----------



## mmaswe82 (Feb 22, 2010)

ClydebankBlitz said:


> I just reckon those were down to what the strategies were in the fights. Nick Diaz was just standing in the centre of the cage not coming forward. Chris Weidman was trying to not be the aggressor and land smaller things to make sure he is taking the rounds until he could get Anderson to overcommit or get bored and make a mistake.
> 
> I didn't really see where his speed or anything was off. He still landed his punches when he threw on Nick and the force of them was still ridiculously evident.
> 
> ...


I hope that you are right and I am wrong. But that first KO by Chris just looked like something prime AS would never have happen. When he's trying to dodge the punches he just looks stiff and slow, kinda awkward even, not the flowing beautiful specimen we have seen before. Maybe the Diaz fight was just him being careful but to me it looked like he just didn't have the timing that he used to. But like I said, I hope that you are right.


----------



## RangerClydeTheBlue (Jul 11, 2012)

Joabbuac said:


> I don't think you understand the word... I love tactical battles, where each fighter is trying to work out the other. Fight also do not have to be boring, to be tactical. Gustafson-Jones/DC were pretty damn tactical :laugh:
> 
> This fight won't be a tactical showcase, it will be two fighters fighting how they always do and the fight being terrible. Neither fighter has shown the ability to fight tactically... neither fighter can force the other too make a mistake. All Anderson can do when people don't play into his coutnerpunching style is taunt... he showed this against Maia, Leites, Cote and Weidman.


You know yourself that we use the word tactical to describe slow paced fights. Just like we use the word athletic to describe black fighters.

I wouldn't have minded hearing you say Anderson can't fight tactically 3 years ago though  I think Bisping CONSTANTLY fights tactically. Without it, what are his skills exactly?


----------



## RangerClydeTheBlue (Jul 11, 2012)

mmaswe82 said:


> I hope that you are right and I am wrong. But that first KO by Chris just looked like something prime AS would never have happen. When he's trying to dodge the punches he just looks stiff and slow, kinda awkward even, not the flowing beautiful specimen we have seen before. Maybe the Diaz fight was just him being careful but to me it looked like he just didn't have the timing that he used to. But like I said, I hope that you are right.


I actually thought his dodging of the punches looked as incredible as ever until the final punch. He just let himself stand straight because he evolved into "Am I even capable of losing?" Anderson Silva. So instead of being in stance, he stood straight and dodged like everything Weidman had. If Weidman threw a right instead of a left, he'd have likely felt mortified to have just missed like a 5 punch combo so badly.

This is all my pre-now stuff though. It's been a year. He's an old lad. Fk knows how he'll pop up.


----------



## Joabbuac (Jan 31, 2009)

ClydebankBlitz said:


> I think Bisping CONSTANTLY fights tactically. Without it, what are his skills exactly?


Does Bisping fight tactically? I feel he just sticks to a skillset and uses it against any type of fighter he comes up against, for good or ill. It just happens to be that his style of fighting is out pointing people, forcing them to miss and outworking them as they tire. 

I feel a fighter who is tactical changes his approach based on the opponent. tactical fighters can be aggressive, come forward fighters as much as outfighters. Rafael dos Anjos for example... is tactical in his approach, even as he comes forward aggressively, making sure to jump on a slow starter like Cerrone, or keeping Pettis against the cage with nowhere to go. Yet, when he fights someone like Diaz, he holds back and picks him apart with leg kicks.


----------



## RangerClydeTheBlue (Jul 11, 2012)

Joabbuac said:


> Does Bisping fight tactically? I feel he just sticks to a skillset and uses it against any type of fighter he comes up against, for good or ill. It just happens to be that his style of fighting is out pointing people, forcing them to miss and outworking them as they tire.
> 
> I feel a fighter who is tactical changes his approach based on the opponent. tactical fighters can be aggressive, come forward fighters as much as outfighters. Rafael dos Anjos for example... is tactical in his approach, even as he comes forward aggressively, making sure to jump on a slow starter like Cerrone, or keeping Pettis against the cage with nowhere to go. Yet, when he fights someone like Diaz, he holds back and picks him apart with leg kicks.


I'd consider your way as tactical too but I also consider two people standing there looking for the exact moment to land their strike, patience, trying to utilize your movement and feints etc. to try and make them open up. Bisping and Anderson aren't just in there throwing punches. For every one thing we see, there are 50 things behind it.


----------



## arkanoydz (Mar 15, 2010)

Just a little while back [before Anderson's losses to Weidman], I'd have never deemed Bisping a 'worthy' opponent for the Spider... amazing how fast declines go.

I wonder how much confidence Silva's losses to Weidman gave other MW contenders like Rockhold, or even Machida and Jacare'. And of course, to fighters like Bisping.


----------



## Trix (Dec 15, 2009)

If Bisping loses and retires he might still have a bright future playing James Bond in future 007 films.

Anderson Silva needs this win to avoid becoming a full time viagra spokesperson.


----------



## jonnyg4508 (Jan 30, 2010)

Anderson is -335

Bisping +255

For what its worth...


----------



## Spite (Jul 7, 2009)

Looks like Bisping has started the war of words.

And heres a nice Promo


----------



## Voiceless (Nov 8, 2010)

Spite said:


> Looks like Bisping has started the war of words.


That's not really war of words. Bisping has always been outspoken against PEDs and he has all the right to mention Silva's penis pills.


----------



## kantowrestler (Jun 6, 2009)

I'm still questionable on how a sexual enhancement drug could be the culprit. First of all why does he need to be using those to dig his wife anyways? Secondly, why would a sex drug need to have stuff like that?


----------



## Sportsman 2.0 (Jul 10, 2012)

kantowrestler said:


> *I'm still questionable on how a sexual enhancement drug could be the culprit.* First of all why does he need to be using those to dig his wife anyways? Secondly, why would a sex drug need to have stuff like that?


You are kidding, right? Penis pills had nothing to do with that, that's the only thing is 100% sure.


----------



## kantowrestler (Jun 6, 2009)

Exactly that was always a cop out ass excuse from someone who doesn't want to admit he cheated. Not to mention he has no real evidence to prove his claim.


----------



## Sportsman 2.0 (Jul 10, 2012)

kantowrestler said:


> Exactly that was always a cop out ass excuse from someone who doesn't want to admit he cheated. Not to mention he has no real evidence to prove his claim.


That shows how ashamed he is to admit he used steroids. He opted for a far more embarrassing explanation over admiting he just took the damn steroids to rebuild his snapped leg just under one year.


----------



## LizaG (May 12, 2008)

I would rather say "I took steroids to quickly heal this debilitating injury" than "I took kinky-ass sex pills because the spring has gone from my bungee".

How can you think one sounds better than the other Anderson?


----------



## M.C (Jul 5, 2008)

Who knows how long Anderson has been cheating. He even said it himself "when guys are caught using, it is never their first time". Anderson, I agree with your opinion on the subject. :thumbsup:

His career is nothing but one big * in my opinion.


----------



## VolcomX311 (Aug 18, 2009)

It would explain his freakish one hit counter KO power.


----------



## Cookie66 (Feb 9, 2012)

Why is Spider fighting on non-PPV? Doesn't UFC put all the popular competitors on PPV?
Anyone know how much Spider's purse will be?


----------



## kantowrestler (Jun 6, 2009)

At minimum probably in the neighborhood of six digits. And yes this is a surprising move on the part of the UFC's brass to be sure when it comes to match making. Supposedly he was going to fight in February at UFC 196 in Brazil.


----------



## Anteries (Oct 22, 2010)

CupCake said:


> I would rather say "I took steroids to quickly heal this debilitating injury" than "I took kinky-ass sex pills because the spring has gone from my bungee".
> 
> How can you think one sounds better than the other Anderson?


Is excuse does remind me of Homer Simpson, when he's being interviewed by the police. "I went to the shops to buy pornography, yes, I was buying pornography at the time of the incident…"(spoken in an unconvincing robot voice)
:thumb02:


----------



## Joabbuac (Jan 31, 2009)

CupCake said:


> I would rather say "I took steroids to quickly heal this debilitating injury" than "I took kinky-ass sex pills because the spring has gone from my bungee".
> 
> How can you think one sounds better than the other Anderson?


Yep, he had the easiest excuse you could hope for, an excuse i feel many people could forgive him for.


----------



## kantowrestler (Jun 6, 2009)

Honestly I'm overlooking the sex pill excuse and automatically assuming he took the roids because of his leg. Everyone knows why he took them. He's basically lying to everyone else and himself if he believes that.


----------



## edlavis88 (Jul 12, 2009)

Agree with everyone here. Any doctor in the world would recommend steroid use to recover from a bad bone break, if Anderson had just said he needed it for that most would have had sympathy for his position. The weird route he has gone makes you question his entire career when it's very likely his steroid use was a one time thing.

I'm not 100% sold on him being a steroid abuser at the moment, his body never showed signs of it, and he never had a fight style that steroids would really improve other than being able to take a shot to the chin slightly better, but if he comes in to this fight and Bisping absolutely destroys him you have to wonder.


----------



## kantowrestler (Jun 6, 2009)

I seriously doubt that Silva is going to get destroyed by Bisping in this fight. Silva has head movement that cannot easily be duplicated in combat sports in general. The only other fighter I can think of with movement like that was Mohammed Ali.


----------

