# Diaz Brothers at it Again



## sk double i (Apr 13, 2007)

http://mmamania.com/2008/09/19/diaz-dust-up-at-ufc-fight-night-15-post-fight-presser/

Does anyone know anything about this? Was anyone at the press conference?

I really enjoy watching the Diaz brothers, but they just have zero respect for anyone so it's hard for me to like them as a fan. Does anyone agree or do you like their angry teen-like behavior?


----------



## Aaronyman (Mar 1, 2007)

how do these guys have any fans at all? i seriously don't get it


----------



## yorT (Apr 22, 2007)

I want to know what the question was that caused them to go crazy like that. Either way they should act like professionals.


----------



## ThaFranchise (Dec 24, 2007)

Haha I understand why people dont like them, but i think they're freakin hilarious and both are talented fighters. I think they could still become great fighters since both are still south of 25 and they already have so much talent and experience. But for those of you dont like them jus remember, "**** Casper Gomez and **** the fuckin diaz brothers." - Tony Montana.


----------



## Darkgecko (Apr 21, 2008)

http://videos.mmaweekly.com/view_player.php?id=2763

I don't think it was as bad as it sounds, at least on Nate's part. He was distracted by Nick getting in to an argument, and ended the interview early.

What the argument was about should be the real topic 




Clay's "Big Suprise" comment was funny though


----------



## Davisty69 (May 24, 2007)

Both of these guys are complete retards. Talented fighters, yes... but complete retards. 

I think their mom was chowing down on paint chips when they were in the womb.


----------



## Flak (Jul 1, 2007)

I learned a long time ago to watch them fight, and go grab a beer for thier post fight interviews. 

Easy to like them that way....blissfully ignorant of thier demeanor and attitude that way, and i can pretend they're Franklinesque in the way they conduct themselves outside the octagon


----------



## yorT (Apr 22, 2007)

This is what i found:


> After a hard fought victory over Josh Neer at Wednesday’s UFC Fight Night 15 in Omaha, Neb., Nate Diaz had reason to be spent. By his own admission, he had met a lot more resistance than expected against the Miletich-trained fighter.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Video here:
http://videos.mmaweekly.com/view_player.php?id=2763


----------



## SpoKen (Apr 28, 2007)

I'm sure there is more to the story then Nick just snapping for no reason. I'ma be a fan of theirs for life.

All the stuff they do out of the cage (ring whatever) makes for excitment in the cage (ring whatever).

WAR DIAZ BROS!!!


----------



## DJ Syko (Jan 6, 2008)

This is also an entertainment business too, all they are doing IMO is for publicity, as the saying goes "any publicity, is good publicity".


----------



## SpoKen (Apr 28, 2007)

IMO, the Diaz brothers are awesome for the biz. Who wants to watch classy guys all the time?

Sometimes you need guys to.. spice things up.


----------



## Darkgecko (Apr 21, 2008)

yorT said:


> This is what i found:
> 
> Video here:
> http://videos.mmaweekly.com/view_player.php?id=2763


I posted that same video a few posts earlier, but when it's typed out it looks even worse


----------



## IDL (Oct 19, 2006)

Nate comes across as pretty normal until his brother comes around, then he follows his lead like a trailer.

Nick is WWE material.


----------



## sk double i (Apr 13, 2007)

Spoken812 said:


> IMO, the Diaz brothers are awesome for the biz. Who wants to watch classy guys all the time?
> 
> Sometimes you need guys to.. spice things up.


True, but to a certain degree. We are still trying to prove to the masses that mma is a respectable/professional sport.

I dont mind trash talking, hyping fights, but at the end of the day, outside the octagon, have some respect. 

They do nothing positive for the sport. They are talented yes, but need to mature a bit more.


----------



## IDL (Oct 19, 2006)

sk double i said:


> but need to mature a bit more.


 ^^ Understatement of the day ^^


----------



## Scarecrow (Mar 20, 2008)

How do you think Nate feels with Nick stealing the show like this. I'm not that surprised that this happened actually, they're both somewhat unruly.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 11, 2006)

Wasn't Nick banned from UFC events before? No wonder, LOL. I think all that weed has made him overly paranoid.


----------



## enceledus (Jul 8, 2007)

I really can't stand this guy...


----------



## coldcall420 (Aug 2, 2007)

this is so retarded....so now they are saying that Nick was Mad at Nate for what happened in Hawaii and thats a reason why he had his little tirade....wasnt Nate not long ago at all thanking the UFC for letting his brother at the venue????


I think Nick was banned by the comission and Dana let him in the building but not in Nate's corner....I wanna see a talented striker fight Nate at this point........


----------



## Fedor>all (Oct 22, 2006)

They probably just didn't want to allow Nick into the press conference, seeing as he's under contract with the competition, causing him to flip out like a retard.


----------



## stitch1z (Dec 9, 2007)

coldcall420 said:


> this is so retarded....so *now they are saying that Nick was Mad at Nate for what happened in Hawaii *and thats a reason why he had his little tirade....wasnt Nate not long ago at all thanking the UFC for letting his brother at the venue????
> 
> 
> I think Nick was banned by the comission and Dana let him in the building but not in Nate's corner....I wanna see a talented striker fight Nate at this point........


Haven't heard anything about that.

Either way, Diaz Drama = Comedy.

I don't know why I love these guys so much. I really shouldn't. I suppose they remind me of friends I had when I was fifteen. lol!


----------



## coldcall420 (Aug 2, 2007)

sometimes when you curse it sounds cool and can even be appropriate...Nate just sounds like a stuttering idiot that has no education and nothing intelligent to say........


----------



## dontazo (Feb 29, 2008)

i love diaz brothers , i think nick is a ******* talent and nate 2


----------



## yellow_fever (Aug 9, 2008)

coldcall420 said:


> sometimes when you curse it sounds cool and can even be appropriate...Nate just sounds like a stuttering idiot that has no education and nothing intelligent to say........



Can we keep in mind, these 2 are really young, especially Nate... They aren't any guys that are Nate's age that can compete with him. As long as he keeps working hard and improving, he's gonna be a champ by the time he's 25 26

But seriously, most of the top lvel fighters are 30 plus with the exception of a GSP and a few who are 28-29....


----------



## coldcall420 (Aug 2, 2007)

yellow_fever said:


> Can we keep in mind, these 2 are really young, especially Nate... They aren't any guys that are Nate's age that can compete with him. As long as he keeps working hard and improving, he's gonna be a champ by the time he's 25 26
> 
> But seriously, most of the top lvel fighters are 30 plus with the exception of a GSP and a few who are 28-29....


 
what the hell does the age have to do with anything...one is 25 and the other 23...they're old enough to control their mouths......


btw...I like both of them as fighters but sometimes they go overboard...:thumb02:


----------



## dontazo (Feb 29, 2008)

i think Both of em are ******* exciting , nicks gogopalata on gomi was the shit


----------



## jeremy202 (Feb 3, 2008)

I think the diaz brothers are entertaining, both in the cage and out


----------



## bbjd7 (Apr 9, 2007)

Just a note Tyson Griffin is 24 can control his mouth and whip both their asses. Eddie Alvarez is 24 doesn't curse everyother word and would murder them.

So just because they are young and talented doesn't give them excuses to be assholes since neither of them are the best young guys in their own promotions let alone their whole divisons.


----------



## jeremy202 (Feb 3, 2008)

Shogun said:


> Wasn't Nick banned from UFC events before? No wonder, LOL. I think all that weed has made him overly paranoid.


weed doesn't have permanent effects


----------



## IDL (Oct 19, 2006)

jeremy202 said:


> weed doesn't have permanent effects


But if you're chronically on weed, they might as well be :thumb02:


----------



## jeremy202 (Feb 3, 2008)

IDL said:


> But if you're chronically on weed, they might as well be :thumb02:


Weed makes you really slow and tired, and if you smoke to much, paranoid.But it doesn't make you aggressive like alcohol, though.


----------



## ToeZup (Jan 7, 2008)

It's just the same old Diaz brothers...
Good call, now days the UFC doesn't have to put up with anything really. I hope they calm down and just do their thing because they are great fighters.


----------



## shatterproof (Jul 16, 2008)

oh noes... this is turning into another weed debate. hah.

this is fighting though, not ballet. I enjoy the Diaz bros because they have superb jitz -- there are too many guys claiming black belts, this and that. Nick has some of the most exciting jitz for my coin, and Nate is proving to be in the same league.

as for their disposition... well, when a fighter doesn't back up his talk with actions is just about the only time it bugs me. Both Nick and Nate give it 110% every time and as a fan i don't think you can ask for more. if you more interested in the elloquence of one fighter or another... maybe try debate club? 

not everyone has the charisma of GSP, Randy or A.Silva.


----------



## _RIVAL_ (Mar 7, 2008)

bbjd7 said:


> *Just a note Tyson Griffin is 24 can control his mouth and whip both their asses.* Eddie Alvarez is 24 doesn't curse everyother word and would murder them.
> 
> So just because they are young and talented doesn't give them excuses to be assholes since neither of them are the best young guys in their own promotions let alone their whole divisons.


Griffin can control his mouth, but I'm not sold on him kicking their asses. Not by far.


----------



## Damone (Oct 1, 2006)

I think Griffin would beat both brothers, to be honest. Nick has been looking meh lately, almost like he's in slow motion.

Nate's the better of the 2 brothers nowadays, but Tyson still beats him, since his striking is better as is his wrestling. I don't think Nate will sub Tyson, so it'll be Griffin smashing dude's face in with shots.

Tyson was smart to train with Couture. Made him a much better fighter.


----------



## The Dude Abides (Jul 8, 2008)

I pissed my pant when the cameras went to Diaz's corner in between rounds and there was Nick f-ing and blinding. 

Don't know what it is but i find those guys really likeable for whatever reason. Certainly characters. Nick cetrinaly has a huge chip on his shoulder about something, like he's always in a fight with "the man", but i really don't think he even knows who "the man" is. Guess the reason i like them so much is for their comedic value, even though they aren't trying to be. lol.


----------



## jeremy202 (Feb 3, 2008)

Know what I think? When nick fights, he feels like he's fighting a bully that picked on him in his school years, and that makes him fight harder.Im not joking.


----------



## Goat Man (Oct 19, 2007)

I honestly haven't seen anything Nate do to really turn me against him. Nick is a different story. He's proven to be an angry man who has little self control or regard for others. No class.


----------



## HexRei (Apr 27, 2007)

I love both the Diaz brothers. Their style always cracks me up. And I don't think a little drama and contention is such a bad thing, it just highlights the fighters that are always respectful and adds a little spice to their fights.


----------



## Zarlok (Jul 8, 2008)

Cut them some slack. They are clearly mentally retarded, if you couldn't tell by hearing them utter a single sentence.


----------



## The Finisher (Mar 23, 2008)

Those two are punks. I can't wait until he and his brother gets KTFO.


----------



## cplmac (Nov 14, 2007)

N. Diaz is NOTHING if not consistant.


----------



## HexRei (Apr 27, 2007)

The Finisher said:


> Those two are punks. I can't wait until he and his brother gets KTFO.


I wouldn't hold your breath, the Diaz brothers have proven practically impossible to KO. FWIW I don't think Florian will be the one to change that


----------



## morninglightmt (Sep 7, 2008)

After seeing the video I'm not sure I see what the stir is about in regards to Nate.


----------



## _RIVAL_ (Mar 7, 2008)

Damone said:


> I think Griffin would beat both brothers, .



In what sense? On the ground, where Griffen likes to take it? The same place where Nick choked out Gomi?

Nate ends fights there also. As everyone knows.

How long has it been since Griffen has finished a fight? He'd get subbed.

Or on his feet? The same place where Nick has 10 knockouts. Including Gleison Tibau and Robbie Lawler.
Maybe Nate on the feet, but......Nates never been knocked out.

Tyson can't stop the Diaz boys. You need to find a stronger fighter than that.


----------



## bbjd7 (Apr 9, 2007)

Tyson is a great grappler neither of them would submit him he puts to much pressure on them. Neer isn't half the MMA grappler that Tyson is.

Tyson has a great TDD and Nick and Nate can't take people down. And their strikign is amazingly overrated. Nick is also the guy who got fucked up by Noons and Nate's striking isn't very good.


----------



## dontazo (Feb 29, 2008)

so ur saying that tyson griffin will beat nick diaz?


----------



## bbjd7 (Apr 9, 2007)

Yes no doubt in my mind.


----------



## _RIVAL_ (Mar 7, 2008)

bbjd7 said:


> Tyson is a great grappler neither of them would submit him he puts to much pressure on them. Neer isn't half the MMA grappler that Tyson is.
> 
> Tyson has a great TDD and Nick and Nate can't take people down. And their strikign is amazingly overrated. Nick is also the guy who got fucked up by Noons and Nate's striking isn't very good.


Noons cut Nick. He cut him. Doctor stopped the fight. So if being cut is gettin fucked up than yeah sure. And if Nick can sub Gomi, he can sub Tyson. 

Tyson on the other hand Has gone to five decisions in a row.

Who cares about Neer. I didn't even mention Neer.

You may not like the Diaz's antics. But the boys can skrap, that's all there is to it. And Tyson may give Nate a good fight, but Nick would pick him apart.





dontazo said:


> so ur saying that tyson griffin will beat nick diaz?



lol.


----------



## bbjd7 (Apr 9, 2007)

Noons beat the shit out of Diaz in the first round forget about the cut, the cut was the reason it was stopped it was like saying Torres vs Maeda was stopped only because of a cut.

Subbing Gomi is great but Griffin is a better grappler then Gomi.

Griffin goes to decisions sure but Nick Diaz has looked like crap in the majority of his last few fights.

The Diaz are crazy but they can fight I would never deny that however the Diaz brothers aren't as good as Tyson Griffin it's not even that close.


----------



## _RIVAL_ (Mar 7, 2008)

bbjd7 said:


> Noons beat the shit out of Diaz in the first round forget about the cut, the cut was the reason it was stopped it was like saying Torres vs Maeda was stopped only because of a cut.
> 
> Subbing Gomi is great but Griffin is a better grappler then Gomi.
> 
> ...



K.J. hit Nick with a few big hits and had him rocked once. But he couldn't put Nick away. He tried, but Nicks chin is solid. The doctor stopped the fight. Plain and simple. 

Tyson is not on Nicks level plain and simple. Nick wins on the standing game and on the ground. No doubt. 

Nick has looked like crap in his last few fights?

Seriously? Lets see, in his last 9 fights he has lost one. Won four by TKO, one by Submission, lost one, Won two by decision and Choked out the #2 ranked LW in the world.

I don't agree with anything you're saying.


----------



## dontazo (Feb 29, 2008)

imo tyson is no way near nick diaz u can say what ever u want but u will never convince me


----------



## _RIVAL_ (Mar 7, 2008)

dontazo said:


> imo tyson is no way near nick diaz u can say what ever u want but u will never convince me



I've got to agree with this. Tyson is not close to Nicks skill set. Nick superior in the stand up and on the ground. Tyson would get tooled.


----------



## Damone (Oct 1, 2006)

Nick Diaz looks slow as hell nowadays, and he takes way too many shots to the face. Basically, his defense sucks, as does his wrestling. Tyson has solid wrestling, and would take Diaz down and win a decision. Hell, both Diaz's.



> Seriously? Lets see, in his last 9 fights he has lost one. Won four by TKO, one by Submission, lost one, Won two by decision and Choked out the #2 ranked LW in the world.


Watch the actual fights instead of looking at Sherdog. Nick Diaz looked slow and sloppy in almost every one of those fights. He even took some good shots from Thomas freakin' Denny, who is just a step above Shannon Ritch.

Oh, and he never choked out Gomi. That fight was a NC, so it basically never happened.


----------



## Aaronyman (Mar 1, 2007)

nick's standup is not that good buddy...and both diaz's only really have great guards.....their top games aren't that impressive


----------



## _RIVAL_ (Mar 7, 2008)

Damone said:


> Nick Diaz looks slow as hell nowadays, and he takes way too many shots to the face. Basically, his defense sucks, as does his wrestling. Tyson has solid wrestling, and would take Diaz down and win a decision. Hell, both Diaz's.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Ah, he never choked out Gomi? The decision was overturned because of Marijuana. But he did choke him out. And he choked him out good.



Aaronyman said:


> nick's standup is not that good buddy...and both diaz's only really have great guards.....their top games aren't that impressive


Nicks stand up is very good.


----------



## Shoegazer (Jun 23, 2007)

Love them or hate them, you can't deny the Diaz brothers are world-class MMA fighters and formidable opponents. All this nonsense about who could beat who...meaningless. You can hate the way they act or what not, but there's no denying the skills. These boys are in every fight and capable of winning. That includes Griffin.

For what it's worth, I don't think Nate was being at all disrespectful. He's certainly never been the analytical type and he was definitely distracted during the interview. Watch the fight and afterward you'll see a very respectful Nate embracing Josh and then giving him tons of credit in Joe's interview. Also, I don't recall anyone in the TUF house ever considering Nate a jerk or having anything other than respect for him. Did the hungry-for-controversy camera crew miss something? Or is Nate maybe a pretty good guy in the eyes of his peers?

A bunch of shallow people here make fun of Nate or even defame his character for not being a "good interview" or not being a very good speaker. These are probably the same cretins who laugh at people with speech impediments. I, for one, don't care. He's exciting to watch, and I'll be cheering him on.


----------



## Aaronyman (Mar 1, 2007)

J.P. said:


> Ah, he never choked out Gomi? The decision was overturned because of Marijuana. But he did choke him out. And he choked him out good.
> 
> 
> 
> Nicks stand up is very good.


no..it isn't...he's got good to decent punches, no kicks, knee's, or elbows in his arsenal, slow hands, little power....

he's been outstruck by sherk who has a very small reach....hell even denny was landing some shots on him


----------



## _RIVAL_ (Mar 7, 2008)

Aaronyman said:


> no..it isn't...he's got good to decent punches, no kicks, knee's, or elbows in his arsenal, slow hands, little power....
> 
> he's been outstruck by sherk who has a very small reach....hell even denny was landing some shots on him



Too many KOs for no power. I don't beleive that. Good elbows, look at the Combrey fight.

Nice low kicks and good combos.


----------



## undertow503 (Nov 19, 2006)

Well it looks like KJ Noons has been ducking Nick Diaz. Noons just been stripped of the title today for "Ducking" Nick.

http://www.mmaweekly.com/absolutenm/templates/dailynews.asp?articleid=7153&zoneid=13



> LOS ANGELES (Sept. 19, 2008) – KJ Noons of San Diego has been stripped of his EliteXC lightweight title. The announcement was made Friday by EliteXC Head of Fight Operations, Jeremy Lappen.
> 
> The foremost reason EliteXC is taking this action, Lappen said, was due to Noons’ reluctance to defend against leading 160-pound contender Nick Diaz of Stockton, Calif.
> 
> ...


Scared? lol 

Anyways.. I love the Diaz bros. They talk weird and spice stuff up some. And gifted as hell. What more can you want?


----------



## Rygu (Jul 21, 2008)

I'm not a big fan of Nick but Nate's cool, id love if he worked up the ladder and fought Penn one day. BJ is obviously the better striker but it would be fun to see those two on the ground since they're both so flexible and hard to sub.

I foresee Nick as the next XC champ, regardless of who he fights. Hes really only lost to top competition (cept Noons), so id take him over whoever he fights for the vacant belt.


----------



## HexRei (Apr 27, 2007)

J.P. said:


> Noons cut Nick. He cut him. Doctor stopped the fight. So if being cut is gettin fucked up than yeah sure. And if Nick can sub Gomi, he can sub Tyson.


Randy Couture lost to Belfort via cut. Then came back, and without the benefit of a fluke cut, Belfort lost badly. I really think Noons will have a much tougher time with Nick now that his face isn't 30% scar tissue. If Noons ever gathers up the nads to fight him again.



Aaronyman said:


> no..it isn't...he's got good to decent punches, no kicks, knee's, or elbows in his arsenal, slow hands, little power....
> 
> he's been outstruck by sherk who has a very small reach....hell even denny was landing some shots on him


Diaz doesn't get outstruck, he just gets out-cut. I'll admit he eats shots but its because he has an iron chin at his weight and rarely is anyone able to rock him. And I think you're kinda inaccurate that he has no power. He throws tons of slap punches- granted- but that's because he likes to wear down and demoralize his opponent by making it clear that he can hurt them, and they can't hurt him. He knows he can take what they dish out, and he doesn't mind eating a strong punch to throw three somewhat lazy ones. And once his opponent gasses (mentally or phsyically) and lets his guard down, he pulls the power out and KO's them or takes them down and submits them. And of course he is always ready to take an opportunity that hands itself to him for a power shot KO early (ala Lawler). Sure, it doesn't always work (sometimes this leaves him behind on points, thus his decision losses) but I think your problem is more with his game plans than with his actual strength and skill.


----------



## name goes here (Aug 15, 2007)

Diaz brothers are white trash from stockton - I would hate to know them or have them living on my street or something.
But I think they are very talented fighters, with a v diff style of fighting, and are some of the v few fighters who rely on skill over strength. And hearing of them doing assholish stuff, doesn't bother me at all - not sure why when Lesner and some others do piss me off.


----------



## cabby (Sep 15, 2006)

Spoken812 said:


> IMO, the Diaz brothers are awesome for the biz. Who wants to watch classy guys all the time?
> 
> Sometimes you need guys to.. spice things up.


Exactly. Who cares if they aren't your average nice guy? It's not like they are acting or anything. They both just have that I don't give a **** attitude and they don't care the situation they tell it how they feel. I love it when "The Diaz's strike again"


----------



## dontazo (Feb 29, 2008)

they are real! u know thats who they are ... and thats why i like em lol


----------



## Aaronyman (Mar 1, 2007)

i don't see them as badasses at all...i see them as a bunch of punks who probably had zero discipline as children and did whatever they wanted...

now they whine like bitches when they lose...even tho the fight wasn't even close....attack fighters outside the octagon...always cause scene's with swearing and acting reckless....

how are they good embassadors for the sport at all? how are they role models for kids? how do you have any respect for them at all at a personal level?


----------



## zarny (Mar 4, 2007)

Who knows what got Nick riled up; but it's hardly suprising.

Nick has had more than one 'disagreement' with UFC officials. He failed a drug test, served a suspension and was dropped/left the UFC. For awhile he wasn't to be at ringside for Nick's fights.

I also get the impression Nick is the type who might hold a grudge.

Incidents like this only make the Diaz brothers look like clowns; but I really don't think they care.


----------



## bbjd7 (Apr 9, 2007)

J.P. said:


> K.J. hit Nick with a few big hits and had him rocked once. But he couldn't put Nick away. He tried, but Nicks chin is solid. The doctor stopped the fight. Plain and simple.
> 
> Tyson is not on Nicks level plain and simple. Nick wins on the standing game and on the ground. No doubt.
> 
> ...


If we are gonna talk about not putting people away look at Nick. It takes the guys 2 or 3 rounds to put away garbage fighters.

Tyson is better standing, and better wrestling Diaz has a very good guard but wouldn't be able to sub Tyson.

4 tko's One was over Tibau who gassed badly in that fight. Inoue who he couldn't put away the corner had to throw in the towel for. And Cobberey and Denny who both kind suck.

He went to a split decision with Mike Aina. A fight which he really lost and Mike Aina isn't any good.

Nick has 2 good wins from 06 a submission over Neer and pounding out Tibau. Tyson has wins over Guida, Tibau, Aurelio and Taveras.

In fact Tyson was on the ground with Aurelio who is better then Diaz off his back. And guess what he didn't get submitted.


----------



## Asian Sensation (Oct 9, 2006)

its a shame both these guys are very talented fighters but conduct themselves as street thugs instead of professionals nick has been a little more inconsistent as of late but nate has A LOT of potential and should be a top contender verys soon


----------



## shatterproof (Jul 16, 2008)

Damone said:


> Nick Diaz looks slow as hell nowadays, and he takes way too many shots to the face. Basically, his defense sucks, as does his wrestling. Tyson has solid wrestling, and would take Diaz down and win a decision. Hell, both Diaz's.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Nick does throw odd strikes and look as if he's in slow mo at times... and yet, he has made it work for much of his career. I've watched every single one of his fights since he landed in the UFC... and while he remains a slow starter and an unorthadox striker, who should really be looking for the TD to punish with his super slick jits, he's still an outstanding fighter.

A hardy 'LOL' at an NC meaning he never choaked out Gomi with one of the nicest gogos ever used in pro MMA, in one of the biggest upsets of the Pride champs death-throws, and after wearing gomi to the nob... and i don't 'LOL' lightly because it's super-lame. :thumb01:

i didn't know that the athletic comission's NC rulings are powered by the Flux Capacitor. heh heh


----------



## Asian Sensation (Oct 9, 2006)

HexRei said:


> Randy Couture lost to Belfort via cut. Then came back, and without the benefit of a fluke cut, Belfort lost badly. I really think Noons will have a much tougher time with Nick now that his face isn't 30% scar tissue. If Noons ever gathers up the nads to fight him again.


I don't think it's really fair to compare those 2 fights. Belfort cut randy 49 seconds into the fight. You didn't get to see the fight progress at all where as in the Noons and Diaz fight they went for a full round and hate it or love it Noons easily won that round. He was stuffing almost all of diaz's takedowns and even when he got him down diaz couldnt do anything with it. On the feet Noons was destroying Diaz he even floored him at one point.


----------



## shatterproof (Jul 16, 2008)

Asian Sensation said:


> I don't think it's really fair to compare those 2 fights. Belfort cut randy 49 seconds into the fight. You didn't get to see the fight progress at all where as in the Noons and Diaz fight they went for a full round and hate it or love it Noons easily won that round. He was stuffing almost all of diaz's takedowns and even when he got him down diaz couldnt do anything with it. On the feet Noons was destroying Diaz he even floored him at one point.


I agree that Noons won that first round. Anyone who watched it should have seen the same. Having watched Nick through the years though I think it's also clear that while he might of overwhelmed some guys early in his career with his jits, more recently he's been the type of starter who capitalizes on keeping the pace up and wearing his opponents down for a later-round victory. He never stops and that's to his advantage -- it's guys with cardio to match his who have been able to win decisions in three rounders. Pushing 5 rounds gives him that much more of an edge.

A rematch could be a very different fight, but it's unlikely we'll find that out anytime soon with Noons continuing to refuse the fight and EXC looking to sell it's brand.


----------



## BrutalKO (Oct 5, 2006)

*Nick & Nate are great...*

...Glad to see Nate get that win against Neer. I knew it would be his toughest test to date. Neer is no pushover. Nate's Submission Defense was awesome in that fight. He's gaining a lot of ground fast each time he steps into that Octagon. Nate's got a Brown belt and Nick has a Black belt in Gracie Jiu Jitsu which is known for being the best. I've always liked watching Nick and some of his memorable performances in the UFC, (i.e. his KO of Robbie Lawler). Nate is following right behind his brother. Both brothers always make entertaining fights. Most MMA fans wanna see them fight. They talk smack and back it up too.
...I think Nate will go far. He's not at the top of the heap in the LW Division yet, but he soon will be. 
...What impresses me the most about both brothers is that they are good strikers, they don't gas, have good chins and every opponent respects their ground game understandably...lol!. Nick is a cardio machine and I see it in his brother as well. Hats off to the Diaz brothers...:thumbsup:


----------



## _JB_ (May 30, 2007)

> “In what was a baffling and undoubtedly rare moment for the media, Nate Diaz was short of salacious quotes about his latest win and opponent Josh Neer. Diaz’s time was limited in dropping four-letter bombs. Why? Because Nate had barely taken his seat in front of reporters at the post-fight press conference when his older brother Nick launched into a tirade that disrupted the interview and left the UFC staff with the unenviable task of keeping the Diaz clan from causing a scene. Good luck with that one. Nate abandoned the press conference as his brother shouted profanities at no one in particular, and together they took their rant into the hallway. Yes, the notorious potty-mouthed pair struck again. Maybe this was Nick’s way paying his family back for their feud with the Noons’ at EliteXC on Showtime in June. All about reciprocities in the Diaz household.”
> 
> Several reports indicate that Nick and Nate Diaz were involved in some type of situation after UFC Fight Night 15: “Diaz vs. Neer;” however, it’s unclear at this time what triggered the reaction. Nate apparently answered just one question at the post-fight press conference and then Nick “caused a scene” at which time the brothers up and left. Nick is an Octagon veteran who now fights under the Elite XC banner. Nate — The Ultimate Fighter (TUF) 5 winner — is a fast-rising star in the UFC 155-pound division. We’ll provide more context to this hopefully soon as more information becomes available.


There you go.


----------



## _RIVAL_ (Mar 7, 2008)

> Quote BBJD





> If we are gonna talk about not putting people away look at Nick. It takes the guys 2 or 3 rounds to put away garbage fighters.


Put away yes.



> Tyson is better standing


No he's not.



> Diaz has a very good guard but wouldn't be able to sub Tyson.


Says your speculation.



> 4 tko's One was over Tibau who gassed badly in that fight.


Yeah, Tibau was not ready for Nicks pace. I guess you can say that he did in fact gas.



> Inoue who he couldn't put away the corner had to throw in the towel for.


Punished a fighter so badly that his corner threw in the towel? That's a stud. Don't take that away.



> And Cobberey and Denny who both kind suck.


Cobberey has great standup. Diaz TKOed him. Denny, landed some shots but got punished the whole first round and knocked out in the second.



> He went to a split decision with Mike Aina. A fight which he really lost and Mike Aina isn't any good.


Seriously? Aina has a decent game. And Nick didn't lose that fight.



> Nick has 2 good wins from 06 a submission over Neer and pounding out Tibau.


Pounding out Tibau? I thought you took that away by saying that Tibau gassed. Okay sure.



> In fact Tyson was on the ground with Aurelio who is better then Diaz off his back.


Better off of his back? Not even close. Hasn't he lost 4 out of his last 6?

It looks like you just don't like Nick. He's alot better than you claim.


----------



## HexRei (Apr 27, 2007)

Asian Sensation said:


> I don't think it's really fair to compare those 2 fights. Belfort cut randy 49 seconds into the fight. You didn't get to see the fight progress at all where as in the Noons and Diaz fight they went for a full round and hate it or love it Noons easily won that round. He was stuffing almost all of diaz's takedowns and even when he got him down diaz couldnt do anything with it. On the feet Noons was destroying Diaz he even floored him at one point.


Although you make a good point about the fact that RC v VB didn't go nearly as long, I hesitate to say that Noons was destroying Diaz. Diaz usually eats a lot punches, he has one of the best chins at his weight and usually gets hit a lot even in fights he wins because he knows that he's not going to get KO'ed, and often his opponent will gas or get demoralized before Diaz is in any real danger. Noons was hitting him a lot and caused a mean cut, but I don't think he ever had Nick hurt. And Nick's recent surgery should (and so far, seems to) have reduced his face's tendency to cut as soon as it's touched.

In a rematch, I see Nick subbing Noons in the 4th or 5th.


----------



## sprawlbrawl (Apr 28, 2008)

Aaronyman said:


> how do these guys have any fans at all? i seriously don't get it


because there good


----------



## Damone (Oct 1, 2006)

> A hardy 'LOL' at an NC meaning he never choaked out Gomi with one of the nicest gogos ever used in pro MMA, in one of the biggest upsets of the Pride champs death-throws, and after wearing gomi to the nob... and i don't 'LOL' lightly because it's super-lame.


It wasn't an upset, because it wasn't a win. The fight, basically, never happened, as far as records go. Diaz never choked out Gomi.


----------



## GMW (Nov 15, 2006)

Damone said:


> It wasn't an upset, because it wasn't a win. The fight, basically, never happened, as far as records go. Diaz never choked out Gomi.


In terms of records, sure, it didn't occur. But it the event did happen so it is applicable when discussing what someone is capable of, consistency, etc.


----------



## jeremy202 (Feb 3, 2008)

Shoegazer said:


> Love them or hate them, you can't deny the Diaz brothers are world-class MMA fighters and formidable opponents. All this nonsense about who could beat who...meaningless. You can hate the way they act or what not, but there's no denying the skills. These boys are in every fight and capable of winning. That includes Griffin.
> 
> For what it's worth, I don't think Nate was being at all disrespectful. He's certainly never been the analytical type and he was definitely distracted during the interview. Watch the fight and afterward you'll see a very respectful Nate embracing Josh and then giving him tons of credit in Joe's interview. Also, I don't recall anyone in the TUF house ever considering Nate a jerk or having anything other than respect for him. Did the hungry-for-controversy camera crew miss something? Or is Nate maybe a pretty good guy in the eyes of his peers?
> 
> A bunch of shallow people here make fun of Nate or even defame his character for not being a "good interview" or not being a very good speaker. These are probably the same cretins who laugh at people with speech impediments. I, for one, don't care. He's exciting to watch, and I'll be cheering him on.


I agree and repped+

Those that try to put him down for the way he speaks are shallow idiots


----------



## dontazo (Feb 29, 2008)

Damone said:


> It wasn't an upset, because it wasn't a win. The fight, basically, never happened, as far as records go. Diaz never choked out Gomi.


thats bs i dont care what athletic comission says the fact is nick diaz choked out gomi ... and he will **** up tyson 2


----------



## Damone (Oct 1, 2006)

GMW said:


> In terms of records, sure, it didn't occur. But it the event did happen so it is applicable when discussing what someone is capable of, consistency, etc.


The event happened, yes, but a high as a kite, numbed up Nick Diaz went to a NC with Gomi. 



> thats bs i dont care what athletic comission says the fact is nick diaz choked out gomi ... and he will **** up tyson 2


It's not a fact because Diaz did not choke Gomi out. The fight you were watching and the pictures you saw were of a fight between a high Nick Diaz and Gomi, and that fight happened to be a No Contest, which means Diaz never choked Gomi out.


----------



## jeremy202 (Feb 3, 2008)

Damone said:


> The event happened, yes, but a high as a kite, numbed up Nick Diaz went to a NC with Gomi.
> 
> 
> 
> It's not a fact because Diaz did not choke Gomi out. The fight you were watching and the pictures you saw were of a fight between a high Nick Diaz and Gomi, and that fight happened to be a No Contest, which means Diaz never choked Gomi out.



LOL you dont even know how marijuana works.It doesnt make you numb like alcohol does, and secondly if he smoked the day before it would still be in his system.Thirdly, weed would actually be a disadvantage during a fight, as it makes you slower and less responsive.The fact that diaz beat gomi with marijuana in his system is even more of a testament to how good he is


----------



## GMW (Nov 15, 2006)

jeremy202 said:


> LOL you dont even know how marijuana works.It doesnt make you numb like alcohol does, and secondly if he smoked the day before it would still be in his system.Thirdly, weed would actually be a disadvantage during a fight, as it makes you slower and less responsive.The fact that diaz beat gomi with marijuana in his system is even more of a testament to how good he is


Let's not turn this into a thread about what affect Marijuana has on a fighter. Keep it about Diaz.


----------



## Red Baron (Jul 17, 2008)

when i smoke weed i turn superhuman, everything i touch no longer matters, no records for it nothing, if i beat someone up stoned it didn't actually happen


why?




because i forgot


----------



## HexRei (Apr 27, 2007)

Damone said:


> The event happened, yes, but a high as a kite, numbed up Nick Diaz went to a NC with Gomi.
> 
> 
> 
> It's not a fact because Diaz did not choke Gomi out. The fight you were watching and the pictures you saw were of a fight between a high Nick Diaz and Gomi, and that fight happened to be a No Contest, which means Diaz never choked Gomi out.


Are you joking?


----------



## coldcall420 (Aug 2, 2007)

weed makes you slow?????:confused02:


----------



## jeremy202 (Feb 3, 2008)

coldcall420 said:


> weed makes you slow?????:confused02:


yeah, it does.I'm betting you never smoked before?


----------



## coldcall420 (Aug 2, 2007)

jeremy202 said:


> yeah, it does.I'm betting you never smoked before?


 
actually I've never inhaled...seriously my highschool baseball team went all the way to 2nd at Nationals and we all smoked before the game...Every game.......if we didnt....we lost???:dunno:


----------



## sjbboy38 (Jan 8, 2007)

these guys are fighters and entertainers...im down with that...hating them just makes them more famous


----------



## sjbboy38 (Jan 8, 2007)

coldcall420 said:


> actually I've never inhaled...seriously my highschool baseball team went all the way to 2nd at Nationals and we all smoked before the game...Every game.......if we didnt....we lost???:dunno:


u dont have to inhale...try eating a bud brownie...yum!!!


----------



## jeremy202 (Feb 3, 2008)

sjbboy38 said:


> u dont have to inhale...try eating a bud brownie...yum!!!


I never had weed brownies or weed cookies but I heard they taste like the regular cookies and brownies.I also heard they take awhile to take effect and that it doesn't produce a head change like smoking does, and that the effect it does produce is way less than smoking.Smoking is the best


----------



## HexRei (Apr 27, 2007)

jeremy202 said:


> I never had weed brownies or weed cookies but I heard they taste like the regular cookies and brownies.I also heard they take awhile to take effect and that it doesn't produce a head change like smoking does, and that the effect it does produce is way less than smoking.Smoking is the best


That's basically correct, although the effect is not necessarily "way less", I've had some extremely strong highs with eating. It does take a lot longer to come on, especially if you have food in your stomach already, and the flavor isn't the same... its grosser imho. And it is is more expensive because you need more to cook than to smoke. But for a lot of folks I think the tradeoff of no lung damage (or extra tooth decay and discoloration, bad breath, etc) is worth the slightly less immediate effects and added expense.


----------



## Flak (Jul 1, 2007)

Cmon Damone, you're playing semantics here mate.

Yes, Diaz choked him out. No it doesn't offically count in the books.

But Diaz still put his shin under Gomi's neck and made him tap.


----------



## bbjd7 (Apr 9, 2007)

J.P. said:


> Put away yes.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Sure he puts away bad fighters Tyson has great fights with top notch guys.

It is a matter of opinion and Diaz has good stand up but he has almost no power at all and he gets hit a lot.

And yours says he won't

Tibau has a gas tank issue it's why he lost to Stevenson to but if you want to give credit to Diaz's pace fine whatever.

It was a good performance but he didn't put him away I thought that was what mattered.

Cobbrey doesn't have great stand up and Denny sucks.

Aina is an ok fighter at best and he IMO won that fight.

He pounded out a gassed Tibau it's wat happened it was a good win still because Tibau is a stud when he isn't gassing.
Aurelio is a better BJJ guy then Diaz it's not even close now Marcus has fought tougher guys in his last 6 fights then Diaz has.

And no I like Nick I think the guy is fun to watch and is a very good fighter but he's not as good as Griffin.

And honestly he's going to get destroyed in his next fight by Alvarez who will outbox him easily.


----------



## jeremy202 (Feb 3, 2008)

Remember nicks fight with that stiff chinese karate-bot(i think his name was oishi maybe? I dont know)? He TKOed him.Someone should get the video, its on youtube.Its really entertaining


----------



## _RIVAL_ (Mar 7, 2008)

> bbjd7





> Sure he puts away bad fighters Tyson has great fights with top notch guys.


Robbie Lawler, Drew Fickett, Takanori Gomi, Gleison Tibau, Chris Lytle...........You're right, they suck.



> It is a matter of opinion and Diaz has good stand up but he has almost no power at all and he gets hit a lot


Diaz isn't afraid to get hit. He has no power? Okay........Diaz has 10 (T)KOs, Griffen has 5 (T)KOs. Maybe your boy Griffen has no power.



> Tibau has a gas tank issue it's why he lost to Stevenson to but if you want to give credit to Diaz's pace fine whatever.


Are you kidding me? Stephenson put Tibau in a beautiful choke in a fight Tibau was winning. 

You are almost beleivable in your discrediting attempts.



> It was a good performance but he didn't put him away I thought that was what mattered.


Man, when your own camp submits for you, you got heart, but you're done.

That is why the towel is a valid practice.



> Cobbrey doesn't have great stand up and Denny sucks.


Cobbrey has a really good standup. You're taking from Diaz with your empty claims.

Denny really does suck.



> Aina is an ok fighter at best and he IMO won that fight.


Diaz won easily.



> He pounded out a gassed Tibau it's wat happened it was a good win still because Tibau is a stud when he isn't gassing.


Nick out fought Tibau. Tibau couldn't hang with Diaz's pace and Nick TKOed his ass.

Really bbjd, I'm thinking you got more insight than this.



> Aurelio is a better BJJ guy then Diaz it's not even close now Marcus has fought tougher guys in his last 6 fights then Diaz has.


Marcus is not getting the job done. Making excuses is becoming a habit for your case.



> And no I like Nick I think the guy is fun to watch and is a very good fighter but he's not as good as Griffin.


You like Nick Diaz? Yet you've discredited all of his victories? Yeah, sure man.




> And honestly he's going to get destroyed in his next fight by Alvarez who will outbox him easily


You're picking Nick Diaz to lose a fight? This is quite a surprise.

It will be exciting, that is for sure.


----------



## name goes here (Aug 15, 2007)

Though I believe for the right person marujuna might give them an edge in fighting - as it shows up on tests I can't imagine either Diaz's career is built on marujuna. I don't think anyone has figured out how to pass the marujuana test


----------



## bigaza (Feb 10, 2007)

im still a fan, both the diaz brothers kick ass imo


----------



## Jundon! (Sep 10, 2008)

Ever since TUF 5 I've always liked Nate Diaz more than his brother Nick.


----------



## coldcall420 (Aug 2, 2007)

J.P. said:


> Robbie Lawler, Drew Fickett, Takanori Gomi, Gleison Tibau, Chris Lytle...........You're right, they suck.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 

Diaz throw a lot of "feeler punches" there aint much on them but its to throw his opponent and measure his own punches.......

Tibau...was kicking the shit out of stevenson i vbookied stevenson to win that fight and was scared the whole way through and was like Who is tibau? I agree with J.P. on that...


----------



## bbjd7 (Apr 9, 2007)

J.P. said:


> Robbie Lawler, Drew Fickett, Takanori Gomi, Gleison Tibau, Chris Lytle...........You're right, they suck.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Lately since we are talking about his last few fights he hasn't been finishing a lot of good fighters. He finished Gomi, and Tibau and like it or not The Gomi win doesn't count since the NSAC overturned it.

Great strategy which is why he lost to Noons, He doesn't have Power lately. TKO doesn't = Power. Diaz gets TKO's mostly by pounding out crap fighters lately.

Stevenson got a great choke but a lot of it had to do with a gassed Tibau taking a crappy shot.

It is an impressive performance but it also shows that he couldn't put him down power wise.

Cobbrey doesn't have very good stand up I'm not sure what you are talking about.

That's why it was a Split Decision?

It was a good win but a lot of it had to do with Tibau's crap gas tank.

Marcus is a better BJJ fighter then Diaz that's not even questionable to someone who knows about their backgrounds.

I do I actually was upset when they overturned his victory but the guy isn't as good as you are making him sound.

Diaz isn't even close to as good as Eddie Alvarez if you think he is you are crazy.


----------



## HexRei (Apr 27, 2007)

bbjd7 said:


> Lately since we are talking about his last few fights he hasn't been finishing a lot of good fighters. He finished Gomi, and Tibau and like it or not The Gomi win doesn't count since the NSAC overturned it.


You're nuts if you let the NSAC decide who did what. Regardless of what the official record says (and if you ask me, all this does is show that record isn't as important as performance, the NSAC can't corrupt your performance), Diaz had the skills to beat Gomi that day and he did. The NSAC does not have a time machine, they just have an eraser, and everyone else remembers what actually happened.


----------



## bbjd7 (Apr 9, 2007)

Yes but from what we have been told from te NSAC doctors Diaz was so high he couldn't feel anything and yes I've smoked weed before a lot actually and from my expierence that doesn't make a ton of sense but the NSAC determined that he was so high that it affected the fight.


----------



## dontazo (Feb 29, 2008)

wow i am surprised bbjd7 u let nsac decided the outcome ? the fact is Nick diaz beat a living shit out of gomi 
nice post j.p.


----------



## _RIVAL_ (Mar 7, 2008)

bbjd7 said:


> Yes but from what we have been told from te NSAC doctors Diaz was so high he couldn't feel anything and yes I've smoked weed before a lot actually and from my expierence that doesn't make a ton of sense but the NSAC determined that he was so high that it affected the fight.


THC= Performance enhancing drug? "So high that he couldn't feel anything"? On weed?

Yeah, sure. Man weed stays in your system for a long time. I doubt any weed helped him win a fight.


----------



## bbjd7 (Apr 9, 2007)

Look I'm not a doctor neither are you guys (I assume if I'm wrong let me know).

If the NSAC has doctors who think he was at an advantage in the fight then I think to just ignore that is dumb.

They could've just suspended him and fined him but they thought he was at an advantage.

He tested at a 175 when a positive test is 15 I mean thats crazy.


----------



## _RIVAL_ (Mar 7, 2008)

bbjd7 said:


> Look I'm not a doctor neither are you guys (I assume if I'm wrong let me know).
> 
> If the NSAC has doctors who think he was at an advantage in the fight then I think to just ignore that is dumb.
> 
> They could've just suspended him and fined him but they thought he was at an advantage.


Of course you're not a doctor. If you were you wouldn't have so many posts. You'd be a bit busier I imagine.

The thing is, alot of people smoke weed. I don't personally. But I did when I was younger. And some of the guys on this forum still do.

And what's funny is I bet none of them will say that it would even remotley enhance fight performance. So f*ck NSAC.

Taking his victory away from him because he had THC in his system is at their discretion. Fine, so be it.

But for you to take that away from a man, where do you get that from bbjd7? Diaz went and choked out possibly one of the greatest LWs ever. 

"But he had THC in his system" Sure, I guess. Grab on to whatever gives you haven.


----------



## shatterproof (Jul 16, 2008)

Damone said:


> It wasn't an upset, because it wasn't a win. The fight, basically, never happened, as far as records go. Diaz never choked out Gomi.


the fight 'basically' never happened? I think you are confusing a 'no contest' ruling with (begin booming epic voice) *a hole in the very fabric of the universe*. haha


if an AC ruling holds such sway over your very being, your memory, your mind, and your entire conception of space and time... that's cool. funny, but cool


----------



## bbjd7 (Apr 9, 2007)

J.P. said:


> Of course you're not a doctor. If you were you wouldn't have so many posts. You'd be a bit busier I imagine.
> 
> The thing is, alot of people smoke weed. I don't personally. But I did when I was younger. And some of the guys on this forum still do.
> 
> ...


I didn't take his win away he did by smoking weed and the NSAC did by turning it into a no contest.


----------



## Stapler (Nov 18, 2006)

bbjd7 said:


> Tyson is a great grappler neither of them would submit him he puts to much pressure on them. Neer isn't half the MMA grappler that Tyson is.
> 
> Tyson has a great TDD and Nick and Nate can't take people down. And their strikign is amazingly overrated. Nick is also the guy who got fucked up by Noons and *Nate's striking isn't very good*.


I'd actually say Nate has better striking than Nick these days and I don't really know why alot of people think Nate has poor standup. I think he has solid boxing and I've never really seen him look bad when a fights standing. He usually gets the better of his opponents in that area in my opinion due to his long reach.

Nate also seems to have the better takedowns. His throws looked pretty impressive against Neer which surprised me because Neer was actually the physically stronger guy.

I'm not saying he'd beat Griffin. I'm just saying Nates better than people give him credit for. In fact, THESE DAYS I'd say Nate is a better fighter than Nick. Nick just hasn't really impressed me lately since his win over Gomi got taken away.

Wins over Pellegrino and Neer > wins over Muhsin Corbbrey and Thomas Denny.

This is coming from a guy who is fans of both fighters. It's just not about what you've done. It's about what you've done lately in this sport.


----------



## HexRei (Apr 27, 2007)

bbjd7 said:


> I didn't take his win away he did by smoking weed and the NSAC did by turning it into a no contest.


semantics. the NSAC cant change history, they can only change the record. for the purposes of determining skill that fight should be considered a win for diaz.


----------



## bbjd7 (Apr 9, 2007)

HexRei the doctors claim that it had an effect on the fight how can you be sure it didn't.


----------



## _RIVAL_ (Mar 7, 2008)

bbjd7 said:


> I didn't take his win away he did by smoking weed and the NSAC did by turning it into a no contest.



You try to erase an incident by Nuthugging an overturned victory.

NSAC overturned a decision. They didn't overturn the choke.


----------



## bbjd7 (Apr 9, 2007)

Nick_V03 said:


> I'd actually say Nate has better striking than Nick these days and I don't really know why alot of people think Nate has poor standup. I think he has solid boxing and I've never really seen him look bad when a fights standing. He usually gets the better of his opponents in that area in my opinion due to his long reach.
> 
> Nate also seems to have the better takedowns. His throws looked pretty impressive against Neer which surprised me because Neer was actually the physically stronger guy.
> 
> ...


I think Nate is better then Nick as well. His guard is better and while I disagree that his stand up is better I don't think either guys is very good.

His takedowns weren't bad against Neer I agree.

And Yea I think Nate has done a lot more lately then Nick has no doubt about it.

I'm not sure what you mean J.P. But the fact that the fight got overturned obviously means the NSAC thought something fishy was going on.


----------



## dontazo (Feb 29, 2008)

J.P. said:


> You try to erase an incident by Nuthugging an overturned victory.
> 
> NSAC overturned a decision. They didn't overturn the choke.


Rep man! and that gogoplata was epic


----------



## _RIVAL_ (Mar 7, 2008)

bbjd7 said:


> HexRei the doctors claim that it had an effect on the fight how can you be sure it didn't.


Because weed is not a performance enhancing drug.


----------



## GMW (Nov 15, 2006)

It can be though.
Weeds used over morphine in some instances for pain killing, usually for deadend nerves or spinal injuries but enough, and it would be a normal pain killer.

And given the amount in his system it can be assumed he was still feeling the effects, beneficial or not.


----------



## HexRei (Apr 27, 2007)

bbjd7 said:


> HexRei the doctors claim that it had an effect on the fight how can you be sure it didn't.


Because marijuana doesn't work like that. I've lost count of the number of times i've boxed and rolled stoned, trust me, it doesn't hurt any less when you get hit or tossed. 

Doctors are capable of bias, you know.


----------



## dontazo (Feb 29, 2008)

u guys honestly think that nick smoked weed so he would feel less paaiN? WTF are u guys nuts?


----------



## _RIVAL_ (Mar 7, 2008)

GMW said:


> It can be though.
> Weeds used over morphine in some instances for pain killing, usually for deadend nerves or spinal injuries but enough, and it would be a normal pain killer.


Weed used over morphine for pain killing? I can't feel ya on that GMW.


----------



## bbjd7 (Apr 9, 2007)

I think that he broke the rules and that if a doctor feels it affected the fight then there is no reason to complain.


----------



## GMW (Nov 15, 2006)

J.P. said:


> Weed used over morphine for pain killing? I can't feel ya on that GMW.


It's situational but it's an established pain killer, and it's not more powerful than morphine but if someone is resistant to morphine or has specific ailments that are resistant to morphine [spinal injuries] weed is used. I'm not sure if it numbed Diaz, but I wouldn't argue with the doctors if they said it did.



dontazo said:


> u guys honestly think that nick smoked weed so he would feel less paaiN? WTF are u guys nuts?


His intentions are irrelevant.


----------



## _RIVAL_ (Mar 7, 2008)

GMW said:


> I'm not sure if it numbed Diaz, but I wouldn't argue with the doctors if they said it did.



I do find it hilairious that weed is now a numbing factor. I've never in my life heard this before this thread.

Instead of people saing "lets go get high" They're gonna say "lets go get numb". You heard it hear first on MMAForum.


----------



## bbjd7 (Apr 9, 2007)

No one is saying he did it on purpose but that doesn't mean it didn't affect the fight.


----------



## MLS (Jul 18, 2007)

GMW, are you talking about when they use weed and morphine together? I have heard of that but I have never heard of weed being used over morphine.

As for weed being a painkiller, some studies show it is or could be. One study was done on HIV patients that have chronic foot pain and like 70% responded to the weed.

My personal opinion is that it really depends on you. Some people may feel it works as a painkiller some may not. Which is why I disagree with the NSAC because there is no real way to know if Nick was helped by the weed.


----------



## dontazo (Feb 29, 2008)

i still think its stupid to think that he used "Weed" to feel less pain


----------



## GMW (Nov 15, 2006)

MLS said:


> GMW, are you talking about when they use weed and morphine together? I have heard of that but I have never heard of weed being used over morphine.
> As for weed being a painkiller, some studies show it is or could be. One study was done on HIV patients that have chronic foot pain and like 70% responded to the weed.
> 
> My personal opinion is that it really depends on you. Some people may feel it works as a painkiller some may not. Which is why I disagree with the NSAC because there is no real way to know if Nick was helped by the weed.


In some cases weed is used in place of morphine completely. Weed is already a pain killer and relaxant for cancer patients, or other chronic pain victims as you noted. But morphine doesn't affect people with deadened nerves in the spine, this is where marijuana can be used over it, and it may start being a well used pain killer. 




dontazo said:


> i still think its stupid to think that he used "Weed" to feel less pain


So do I, i think he probably did it to get high.



J.P. said:


> I do find it hilairious that weed is now a numbing factor. I've never in my life heard this before this thread.
> 
> Instead of people saing "lets go get high" They're gonna say "lets go get numb". You heard it hear first on MMAForum.


I don't think he used weed to get numb, it just may of been an unexpected side affect. I'm not arguing if it affected the fight, I don't know if it did because pain rarely seems to be an issue for the fighters, but it's hard to argue it at least may of numbed him.


----------



## dontazo (Feb 29, 2008)

i never smoked american weed but when u smoke georgian weed u cant ******* move , u get completely numb


----------



## jeremy202 (Feb 3, 2008)

dontazo said:


> i never smoked american weed but when u smoke georgian weed u cant ******* move , u get completely numb


Whoa man I want some of that shit! I smoke weed called cat's piss.I know this guy that has some grandaddy purple, which is also good.That georgian weed must be really good


----------



## HexRei (Apr 27, 2007)

bbjd7 said:


> I think that he broke the rules and that if a doctor feels it affected the fight then there is no reason to complain.


that's hilarious considering the recent anthony johnson ruling (the strikes were illegal, they obviously affected the fight, the NSAC didn't give a shit) and the fact that the NSAC doesn't even normally reverse STEROID wins (ala barnett) much less drugs of abuse (how many dozens of fighters have tested positive for pot, coke, meth, etc over the years?). they screwed diaz over because they don't like his attitude.

the problem is that the NSAC is basically an ungoverned body free to be as inconsistent and vindictive as they please. Who's going to punish them for these terrible decisions, the governor? ya right.


----------



## bbjd7 (Apr 9, 2007)

#1 The Anothony Johnson case while I disagree with it makes sense if you consider that if they overturn it then almost any fighter who gets hit with an illegal strike in a fight could then appeal and while Anothony deserves a win you can't set the precident.

#2 The Barnett situation was before the NSAC had the power to overturn fights.

#3 to think Diaz attitude had anything to do with this is dumb. Look at your 2 examples. Barnett's a prick kept his win, Johnson is a nice guy kept his loss. It has to do with precident and the way the doctor judges it.

The doctor thinks it gave Nick an unfair advantage so he lost the fight. When you break the rules you take the risk of being put in this situation.


----------



## HexRei (Apr 27, 2007)

bbjd7 said:


> #1 The Anothony Johnson case while I disagree with it makes sense if you consider that if they overturn it then almost any fighter who gets hit with an illegal strike in a fight could then appeal and while Anothony deserves a win you can't set the precident.[/b]


Any fighter who gets hit with an illegal strike already CAN appeal.



> *#2 The Barnett situation was before the NSAC had the power to overturn fights.*


Ok. Why didn't they overturn it once they had the power? All overturnings take place AFTER the fight. There's no limit on how LONG after.



> *#3 to think Diaz attitude had anything to do with this is dumb. Look at your 2 examples. Barnett's a prick kept his win, Johnson is a nice guy kept his loss. It has to do with precident and the way the doctor judges it.*


Its kinda hard to call it a "precedent" when they've never overturned any other fighter's fight before or after for marijuana (and there have been plenty of positive tests), but sure let's call it that. Assuming they ever inflict it on anyone else.



> The doctor thinks it gave Nick an unfair advantage so he lost the fight. When you break the rules you take the risk of being put in this situation.


No, the NSAC doesn't like Nick so they gave him a harsher punishment than ANY fighter has EVER recieved for pot in the UFC. Totally ridiculous. They're loose cannons with no oversight imho, and this is the result.


----------



## GMW (Nov 15, 2006)

I'll think about it more, but I wouldn't be surprised if the NSAC doesn't even know what the fighters are like. There an athletic commision, why the hell would they care what people are like?


----------



## brownpimp88 (Jun 22, 2006)

I kind of liked Diaz after he Gogo'd Gomi, but this/these bastards are so annoying. I don't know what it is about these retards that people find so "entertaining". There fights are entertaining, but I always hear people say that they themselves are entertaining people. Perhaps it is the wiggerism that there fans can relate too.

Most Diaz Bro fans I know are skinny white kids who wear t-shirts that are too long and try to talk like they are from Compton. Or they are geeky kids that like them for the same reason they'd like a John Cena or anyone of that nature.


----------



## jeremy202 (Feb 3, 2008)

brownpimp88 said:


> I kind of liked Diaz after he Gogo'd Gomi, but this/these bastards are so annoying. I don't know what it is about these retards that people find so "entertaining". There fights are entertaining, but I always hear people say that they themselves are entertaining people. Perhaps it is the wiggerism that there fans can relate too.
> 
> Most Diaz Bro fans I know are skinny white kids who wear t-shirts that are too long and try to talk like they are from Compton. Or they are geeky kids that like them for the same reason they'd like a John Cena or anyone of that nature.


Im not a ****** and I like the diaz brothers, so that kind of logic fails


----------



## GMW (Nov 15, 2006)

jeremy202 said:


> Im not a ****** and I like the diaz brothers, so that kind of logic fails


Word on the street is you represent everyone in the group "most people". Confirm?


----------



## jeremy202 (Feb 3, 2008)

Its just plain ignorant to say everyone who likes the diaz brothers are *******


----------



## brownpimp88 (Jun 22, 2006)

jeremy202 said:


> Im not a ****** and I like the diaz brothers, so that kind of logic fails


Good for you buuuuddy. :thumbsup: 

May I ask though, what is it about the Diaz brothers that you like? Be honest now.


----------



## Stapler (Nov 18, 2006)

bbjd7 said:


> #1 The Anothony Johnson case while I disagree with it makes sense if you consider that if they overturn it then almost any fighter who gets hit with an illegal strike in a fight could then appeal and while Anothony deserves a win you can't set the precident.
> 
> #2 The Barnett situation was before the NSAC had the power to overturn fights.
> 
> ...


Well, if the Barnett example cannot be used.. What about Royce Gracie after he beat Kazushi Sakuraba? His win didn't get overturned. What about Thiago Alves? I know he didn't take steroids but I'd say his bust was worse than some guy failing for weed. His win didn't get overturned either.

I know, all rules should be applied the same so something being worse shouldn't matter but it still doesn't take away the fact that Diaz was treated unfairly. What makes Royce Gracie and Thiago Alves so special?

I never really cared for Gomi anyways. It seems like he gets sheltered. Even if it is unintentional sheltering, he has been sheltered none the less.


----------



## brownpimp88 (Jun 22, 2006)

jeremy202 said:


> Its just plain ignorant to say everyone who likes the diaz brothers are *******


Key word is most. Most. 

They say that protest and denial is the response to confrontation.


----------



## HexRei (Apr 27, 2007)

GMW said:


> I'll think about it more, but I wouldn't be surprised if the NSAC doesn't even know what the fighters are like. There an athletic commision, why the hell would they care what people are like?


The commissions often have contact with the fighters because they have to clear each fighter individually. Any questions or concerns during that process will necessitate more contact. Diaz has also been involved in a surprising number of incidents outside the ring, such as fighting with Joe Riggs in the hospital, and throwing a shoe at Diego Sanchez and then accusing him of using an illegal lubricant. I'm confident that all of these things were noted and likely investiaged by the NSAC. And plus the kid has fought in Nevada like a dozen times, and in Cali another dozen or so (and commissions do talk to and keep tabs on each other) so I'm sure they are familiar with him. And frankly I'll be the first to admit he rubs a lot of people the wrong way so he probably wasn't exactly polite with them.


----------



## bbjd7 (Apr 9, 2007)

Nick_V03 said:


> Well, if the Barnett example cannot be used.. What about Royce Gracie after he beat Kazushi Sakuraba? His win didn't get overturned. What about Thiago Alves? I know he didn't take steroids but I'd say his bust was worse than some guy failing for weed. His win didn't get overturned either.
> 
> I know, all rules should be applied the same so something being worse shouldn't matter but it still doesn't take away the fact that Diaz was treated unfairly. What makes Royce Gracie and Thiago Alves so special?
> 
> I never really cared for Gomi anyways. It seems like he gets sheltered. Even if it is unintentional sheltering, he has been sheltered none the less.


Royce fought in Cali they don't have the power to overturn fights.

Alves took a diuretic it had no impact on the fight just him making weight.



HexRei said:


> Any fighter who gets hit with an illegal strike already CAN appeal.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Yes but once you overturn one fight you set a precident it's a slippery slope.

I honestly don't know why they haven't overturned it but it would most likely have to do with the fact they already handed down a punishment and I'm not sure if they can hand down a second one without another offense.

Once they got the power to overturn fights then it is set you test positive at a high enough level they will overturn your fight.

Or maybe Nick tested positive at such a high level they decided to overturn it and it has nothing to do with his personality.

Honestly all this could've been avoided if Nick didn't break the rules.


----------



## cabby (Sep 15, 2006)

I like the Diaz bros for their skillz. Nick is the shit. Seriously, try and stop that guy. Really excited about the surgery he had done to prevent cuts. And the way Nate's Jitz skills shine is pretty amazing. 

I'm such a ******


----------



## Stapler (Nov 18, 2006)

bbjd7 said:


> Royce fought in Cali they don't have the power to overturn fights.
> 
> *Alves took a diuretic it had no impact on the fight just him making weight.*
> 
> ...


Yes, allowed him to make weight in a weight class that he wasn't legally allowed in, and I mean at the time because if he hadn't taken the diuretic, he wouldn't have made weight, and you can't say he would have because if he could have at the time, why even take that? The fight should have been void for that reason.

For the record, I don't think Nicks attitude had to do with it either. I just think it was a bad call in general. Bad calls happen all the time, though. It seems like they were making an example out of him and that resulted in the unfairness.


----------



## HexRei (Apr 27, 2007)

bbjd7 said:


> Alves took a diuretic it had no impact on the fight just him making weight.


 I don't see how you can argue that a diuretic doesn't affect the fight but marijuana does. Certainly a diuretic isn't a performance enhancer, but it does help you make weight when you might not without it. Pot does the OPPOSITE.




> Honestly all this could've been avoided if Nick didn't break the rules.


 Or if the NSAC was consistent and reasonable...


----------



## bbjd7 (Apr 9, 2007)

Yes but when it comes to not making weight usually the punishment would just be that they are fined which he was. Now the difference is a diuretic isn't a performance enhancer it wouldn't change the fight it just changed whether the fight happened. NSAC determined that the amount of weed in Diaz's system was a performance enhancer.

Give me recent examples of fighters who have tested positive for weed in Nevada at the levels Diaz was at and I'll agree Hex rei.


----------



## Stapler (Nov 18, 2006)

It's sort of unfair to.. Was it Tony DeSouza? I don't remember who he fought. Anyways, you might as well have a middleweight rig the scales so he can make 170 and toss around smaller guys, haha.

Would he have even made the 171 pound limit? You didn't even get Tony giving the okay to meet him at a catch weight. I would have taken away the win from Alves myself.

I think Diaz should have just gotten a fine and got suspended naturally. Although that sort of thing happens. It's not like he has followed up that well anyways.


----------



## shatterproof (Jul 16, 2008)

brownpimp88 said:


> Good for you buuuuddy. :thumbsup:
> 
> May I ask though, what is it about the Diaz brothers that you like? Be honest now.


how about the superb jits skills and the fact that niether has ever taken the easy way out of a fight? sorry, but it's not the lack of elloquence that impresses me when it comes to the Diaz brothers. ;P 

i, for one, watch and participate in fighting for the fighting and generally couldn't give two shits about drama. :thumb02:


----------



## bbjd7 (Apr 9, 2007)

Nick_V03 said:


> It's sort of unfair to.. Was it Tony DeSouza? I don't remember who he fought. Anyways, you might as well have a middleweight rig the scales so he can make 170 and toss around smaller guys, haha.
> 
> Would he have even made the 171 pound limit? You didn't even get Tony giving the okay to meet him at a catch weight. I would have taken away the win from Alves myself.
> 
> I think Diaz should have just gotten a fine and got suspended naturally. Although that sort of thing happens. It's not like he has followed up that well anyways.


Personally I agree but I think since he did make 170 Tony isn't considered at a disadvantage. I mean Tony still fought a guy who had to weigh in at 170.

Diuretics are banned for the fighter who is taking thems safety.


----------



## shatterproof (Jul 16, 2008)

Seems like every Diaz thread turns into a debate about the supposed impact(s) of using weed, on a fighter, by a whole lot of people who don't even smoke bud chronically and thus poses the singular points of reference formed under the bleechers in high school, if even. 

Probably 2/3rds of my gym get faded before rolling... many of us can tell you that it does give you that singular focus which aids in the jits game -- as any stoner video gamer can atest to even, but as far as weed treating acute and localized pain or being a 'performance enhancer'. pft. those of you with that opinion are simply out to lunch and utterly uninitiated on the subject. If that's how you think it works... try burning one down on your way into a tattoo appointment and let us all know how that worked out for you. hah


----------



## GMW (Nov 15, 2006)

shatterproof said:


> Seems like every Diaz thread turns into a debate about the supposed impact(s) of using weed, on a fighter, by a whole lot of people who don't even smoke bud chronically and thus poses the singular points of reference formed under the bleechers in high school, if even.


Because having smoked myself really makes me more of an authority on its affects. I haven't had a majority of the diseases I know about, and I doubt most pathologists have experienced death first hand. You don't need to actually do something to speak on it.

First hand experience seems to hurt people, as they use their experience to speak for all occurrences. 



shatterproof said:


> Probably 2/3rds of my gym get faded before rolling... many of us can tell you that it does give you that singular focus which aids in the jits game -- as any stoner video gamer can atest to even, but as far as weed treating acute and localized pain or being a 'performance enhancer'. pft. those of you with that opinion are simply out to lunch and utterly uninitiated on the subject. If that's how you think it works... try burning one down on your way into a tattoo appointment and let us all know how that worked out for you. hah


Try reading an actual case study (a case tstudy, not something published by nbc or any other broadcasting site), but I'm sure your gym covers the affect of weed on the average person in addition to those with chronic diseases.


----------



## HexRei (Apr 27, 2007)

bbjd7 said:


> Give me recent examples of fighters who have tested positive for weed in Nevada at the levels Diaz was at and I'll agree Hex rei.


Show me study that demonstrates that weed magically begins making you not feel punches when you reach a certain level and I'll agree.

The commission didn't cite one, and I can't find a darn thing using NexisLexis either (which carries at least abstracts of nearly every published academic research paper out there). Almost like the NSAC just decided it should be that way, and it was.


----------



## shatterproof (Jul 16, 2008)

GMW said:


> Because having smoked myself really makes me more of an authority on its affects. I haven't had a majority of the diseases I know about, and I doubt most pathologists have experienced death first hand. You don't need to actually do something to speak on it.
> 
> First hand experience seems to hurt people, as they use their experience to speak for all occurrences.
> 
> ...


regarding the 'try reading' comment... i have read in excess of (probably) 4 dozen qualified and accredited reviews of the impacts of the chronic use of marijuana, including a cover to cover review of the Canadian Senate Report on the topic -- widely considered the most comprehensive and non-political study on the topic ever done. Not really sure what any particular 'case study' would have to do with the subject unless you are refering to some obscure case study where a partisipant claimed otherwise?

i don't really see your point, though. That one who has first hand knowledge on a subject as simple and intrinsic to the human condition as pain:no-pain is less informed than one who does not? haha, i think we'll have to agree to disagree there.


----------



## bbjd7 (Apr 9, 2007)

Well here's the thing the NSAC has doctors who say that at the levels Diaz tested he was at an advantage you have nothing at all backing your opinion except the fact you think the NSAC is biased.


----------



## HexRei (Apr 27, 2007)

bbjd7 said:


> Well here's the thing the NSAC has doctors who say that at the levels Diaz tested he was at an advantage you have nothing at all backing your opinion except the fact you think the NSAC is biased.


And they have no proof either, so I guess neither do you. Like I said, they are basically an ungoverned body. No one is really overseeing them to be sure they have no bias, so why shouldn't I examine their actions critically?


----------



## brownpimp88 (Jun 22, 2006)

shatterproof said:


> how about the superb jits skills and the fact that niether has ever taken the easy way out of a fight? sorry, but it's not the lack of elloquence that impresses me when it comes to the Diaz brothers. ;P
> 
> i, for one, watch and participate in fighting for the fighting and generally couldn't give two shits about drama. :thumb02:


I too respect and admire that of the Diaz brothers, but sadly the *majority* of MMA fans don't like them for that reason. Sure, that is what they will say when confronted about it, but deep down they got a boner for the "rebels". Atleast, that is what my Pysch textbook/common sense says.


----------



## hebaj (Jun 25, 2008)

The argument of the Diaz's brothers behaviour stopping the sport of MMA entering the "mainstream" category, is seriously flawed.

The Diaz's are angels compared to a lot of pro baketballers, footballers, baseballers or boxers.


----------



## brownpimp88 (Jun 22, 2006)

I haven't been following the NSAC debate going on in this thread that much, but I will say this:

There is definite bias in the NSAC and all athletic commishes. Isn't Marc Ratner the friggin' president of the commish? And isn't he the friggin' Vice Prez of the UFC? Conflict of interest? 

The NSAC has made some bad calls in the past and have done some shady stuff, but I agree with what BBJD is saying too. I mean, technically, they have doctors and such to help them make their decisions. So, theoretically, in an unbiased world, they'd be able to make the best judgements, better then a fan on forums can make. But, in actuality, there are a lot of politics and stuff going on back there, it is really hard to determine what is going on. This is obviously without any proof or anything and keep in mind I don't like the Diaz brothers, but I do feel that the NSAC did rob the poor guy. From simply a judgement stand point, it was a stupid call. But going back to what BBJD was saying before about setting precident, I think the NSAC fucked themselves over, because now they are going to overturn everything involving PEDs(I guess the sticky is a PED now).


----------



## brownpimp88 (Jun 22, 2006)

hebaj said:


> The argument of the Diaz's brothers behaviour stopping the sport of MMA entering the "mainstream" category, is seriously flawed.
> 
> The Diaz's are angels compared to a lot of pro baketballers, footballers, baseballers or boxers.


No one's saying that. I mean after all, if that was the case, the Diaz brothers aren't relevant enough to make such an impact. Maybe if GSP or Chuck ran around like a 10 year old kid on meds doing stupid "antics" then perhaps, but TBH, I don't really care for the whole "mainstream" thing. Their actions just make them seem stupid and dislike-able IMO.


----------



## shatterproof (Jul 16, 2008)

brownpimp88 said:


> I too respect and admire that of the Diaz brothers, but sadly the *majority* of MMA fans don't like them for that reason. Sure, that is what they will say when confronted about it, but deep down they got a boner for the "rebels". Atleast, that is what my Pysch textbook/common sense says.


Yeah, this is a sentiment i can certainly appreciate. At least, better so than the 'most of them must be *******' thought process. hehe. Long before i ever heard him utter a word in his particular flavor of speech, i saw him slap a bone jarring armbar on Jeremy Jackson and ever since i have been a hardcore fan.


----------



## GMW (Nov 15, 2006)

shatterproof said:


> regarding the 'try reading' comment... i have read in excess of (probably) 4 dozen qualified and accredited reviews of the impacts of the chronic use of marijuana, including a cover to cover review of the Canadian Senate Report on the topic -- widely considered the most comprehensive and non-political study on the topic ever done. Not really sure what any particular 'case study' would have to do with the subject unless you are refering to some obscure case study where a partisipant claimed otherwise?


Mind linking it? Not calling you a liar but I like to read those types of studies, and it also would of been more effective to just say you'd read studies over your personal experience.



shatterproof said:


> i don't really see your point, though. That one who has first hand knowledge on a subject as simple and intrinsic to the human condition as pain:no-pain is less informed than one who does not? haha, i think we'll have to agree to disagree there.


Pain is so subjective, and yourself is such a small statistic, personal experience really does mean nothing.


----------



## wukkadb (Jan 1, 2007)

bbjd7 said:


> Well here's the thing the NSAC has doctors who say that at the levels Diaz tested he was at an advantage you have nothing at all backing your opinion except the fact you think the NSAC is biased.


Oh come on, it's pretty obvious to everyone that the amount of thc in Diaz' body didn't help him in any way. The reason he had such a high amount is because he's a fat stoner and blazes every day probably! If people think he smoked a bunch of weed b4 the fight then they are stupid, simple as that.


----------



## brownpimp88 (Jun 22, 2006)

shatterproof said:


> Yeah, this is a sentiment i can certainly appreciate. At least, better so than the 'most of them must be *******' thought process. hehe. Long before i ever heard him utter a word in his particular flavor of speech, i saw him slap a bone jarring armbar on Jeremy Jackson and ever since i have been a hardcore fan.


I can respect that, but I still stand by my narrow-minded approach that the majority are just *******/****** lovers. It's sad and hard to admit, but it is the truth.


----------



## bbjd7 (Apr 9, 2007)

wukkadb said:


> Oh come on, it's pretty obvious to everyone that the amount of thc in Diaz' body didn't help him in any way. The reason he had such a high amount is because he's a fat stoner and blazes every day probably! If people think he smoked a bunch of weed b4 the fight then they are stupid, simple as that.


I don't personally think he smoked before the fight but the fact that the NSAC reversed the decision and the fact his levels where more then 10x over a positive test means to me that the fight is defiantly a questionable one.

BTW I would also like to add that the star Lacrosse Goalie at my school the kid is all state level tweeks b4 everygame because he says it helps him take shots off his body.


----------



## brownpimp88 (Jun 22, 2006)

wukkadb said:


> Oh come on, it's pretty obvious to everyone that the amount of thc in Diaz' body didn't help him in any way. The reason he had such a high amount is because he's a fat stoner and blazes every day probably! If people think he smoked a bunch of weed b4 the fight then they are stupid, simple as that.


While this true it doesn't really hold merit. We live in a society where you must obey the laws. Logic and reason aren't as important as simply following what has been set out. From a realistic standpoint, you are obviously correct. But others will say that as a fighter Diaz shouldn't be doing something illegal by law and commission rules. Especially on a regular basis. In fact, that may give them more reason to ban/overturn the decision. And he can't say he didn't know the rules, as Mary-J is friggin' illegal.


----------



## wukkadb (Jan 1, 2007)

brownpimp88 said:


> While this true it doesn't really hold merit. We live in a society where you must obey the laws. Logic and reason aren't as important as simply following what has been set out. From a realistic standpoint, you are obviously correct. But others will say that as a fighter Diaz shouldn't be doing something illegal by law and commission rules. Especially on a regular basis. In fact, that may give them more reason to ban/overturn the decision. And he can't say he didn't know the rules, as Mary-J is friggin' illegal.


Well when did I ever say or even argue that marijuana should be legal? Or should be allowed? Diaz is an idiot b/c he knows they test for weed, so it's his fault entirely. The problem I have is the fact that they are trying to act as if the amount of THC in his body had some sort of positive effect on his performance. That is bullshit. Weed is illegal and banned, so he got fined and got his fight overturned; leave it at that.



> I don't personally think he smoked before the fight but the fact that the NSAC reversed the decision and the fact his levels where more then 10x over a positive test means to me that the fight is defiantly a questionable one.


10x over a positive test? Wtf does that mean? Isn't ANY trace of THC illegal?


----------



## HexRei (Apr 27, 2007)

brownpimp88 said:


> While this true it doesn't really hold merit. We live in a society where you must obey the laws. Logic and reason aren't as important as simply following what has been set out. From a realistic standpoint, you are obviously correct. But others will say that as a fighter Diaz shouldn't be doing something illegal by law and commission rules. Especially on a regular basis. In fact, that may give them more reason to ban/overturn the decision.


No, because the NSAC is not law enforcement. They have no jurisdiction whatsoever to enforce the law. As an Athletic Commission they have the mandate to test and sanction a fighter for the use of specific substances but that has nothing to do with their legal or illegal status, and the sanctions they have the right to enforce are not legal sanctions like a court sentence. Notice that no fighter has ever been prosecuted or even investigated as the result of a positive test? Hell, they can't even legally force you to pay their fines, all they can do is refuse to clear you to fight until you pay.



> And he can't say he didn't know the rules, as Mary-J is friggin' illegal.


Marijuana is legal for a lot of people in a lot of places now, including Cali where he lives. And I don't recall him ever saying he didn't know it was against the rules, but its wrong that he received such a wildly disproportionate sentence.


----------



## brownpimp88 (Jun 22, 2006)

wukkadb said:


> Well when did I ever say or even argue that marijuana should be legal? Or should be allowed? Diaz is an idiot b/c he knows they test for weed, so it's his fault entirely. The problem I have is the fact that they are trying to act as if the amount of THC in his body had some sort of positive effect on his performance. That is bullshit. Weed is illegal and banned, so he got fined and got his fight overturned; leave it at that.
> 
> 
> 
> 10x over a positive test? Wtf does that mean? Isn't ANY trace of THC illegal?


Woah, what? When did I ever say that you said that marijuana should be legal?  I am simply saying why the decision got overturned. 

Aside from all the he-say she-say, I don't think Diaz had any sort of performance enhancement from the weed. But I do see why the bastard got the fight over turned.

On a side note, I don't think anyone mentioned how sick that fight was. I was out of my seat for the entire fight. If only Diaz could pack some power behind his punches, he'd have KTFO'd Gomi. The Gogo was sick, but I wanted to see Gomi get Lawler'd.


----------



## shatterproof (Jul 16, 2008)

GMW said:


> Mind linking it? Not calling you a liar but I like to read those types of studies, and it also would of been more effective to just say you'd read studies over your personal experience.
> 
> 
> Pain is so subjective, and yourself is such a small statistic, personal experience really does mean nothing.


as for advertising what i read to begin every conversation; thanks for the advice, but no thanks. 

http://www.medicalmarihuana.ca/pdfiles/senatesummary.pdf
enjoy that, she's a page turner, hah... and as i have told many before you: hopefully you let the very first page of the actual report sink in, leaving your preconceived opinions at the door... it is a sociopolitical review which includes anecdotal and measured scientific review as they relate to the liberty, health and safety of the general public.

as for being a small statistic... since 85% of the people i know smoke the same amount of bud as i (a tally i will place around 90 people, which exceeds the number of people in most of studies on the topic)... i speak with all the authority necessary to make the claims i have. it is clear you are not open to a change of opinion based on first hand knowledge so i won't bother pointing out that those dozens echo the very same conclusions, just as many others have in this thread (oops, i guess i just did  ). Rather i will reiterate my very first point which is that there are a lot of people with strong opinions on the matter and next to no experience to back it up. Furthermore, i doubt that you can show me one single accredited case study which points to smoking bud to treat the pain of a broken bone so i guess that leaves us where we started -- diverging in opinion. One formed of exhaustive personal research (hah) and one formed of... well, a particular case study which i'm unfamiliar with and still waiting on the link to 

i'm not here to tell you that you have not earned the right to have an opinion, but to once again point out that there are plenty of people with strong opinions on the topic with zero experience. Your contention is that experience isn't everything and that's cool man... but since experience and first-hand observation is the foundation of our being, the foundation of science, the foundation of our dispositions and of opinions... once again, i will have to digress in disagreement secure in the knowledge that _i know what the **** i'm sayin'_. :thumb02:

cheers, man. heh heh


----------



## bbjd7 (Apr 9, 2007)

wukkadb said:


> 10x over a positive test? Wtf does that mean? Isn't ANY trace of THC illegal?


A positive test is a 15. The punish fighters at 50. Diaz tested at 175.


----------



## shatterproof (Jul 16, 2008)

if you opinionated jackasses will excuse me for the evening, i'm going to go pour myself a 12-year blended rum, turn on some Simpsons and burn one down with my girl. to each their own.

easy


----------



## HexRei (Apr 27, 2007)

Guess I'll bow out too, I gotta go get a piece of shatter's girl before she bunkers down with him for the night. Just kiddin man


----------



## wukkadb (Jan 1, 2007)

bbjd7 said:


> A positive test is a 15. The punish fighters at 50. Diaz tested at 175.


Cool, that's interesting. I wonder what I would test at


----------



## shatterproof (Jul 16, 2008)

HexRei said:


> Guess I'll bow out too, I gotta go get a piece of shatter's girl before she bunkers down with him for the night. Just kiddin man


damn... that's what i get for checking the thread one more time before signing out. bastard.


----------

