brashleyholland

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Blackman" data-cite="Blackman" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="26660" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Does your job allow you early gameplay exposure to the new UFC video game? If so, it'd be very much appreciated to voice your expert opinion here. <img alt=":p" data-src="//content.invisioncic.com/g322608/emoticons/tongue.png.ceb643b2956793497cef30b0e944be28.png" src="<___base_url___>/applications/core/interface/js/spacer.png" /><p> </p><p> I'm living in constant fear it's going to suck. If it's just as good as UFC Undisputed 3, I'll be more than happy. Loved doing the career mode there.</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Probably not for a while. On the journalism side of things, it's rare for non-gaming media to get a look/play of anything that isn't nearly a finished product, or in a scenario which isn't stage-managed by staff. So for example you're brought into a room, given a controller of a game that's paused at a specific point, allowed to play until another specific point and then taken out of the room. </p><p> </p><p> Most non-gaming media won't have an appreciation for the development process of a game, so developers just want them to have the 'wow-factor' of the finished product/section. Funnily enough, when MMA was just a hobby and not a job, I worked in the games industry :-p </p><p> </p><p> I was invited to a media day for Undisputed 3...I want to say a month or two before it came out. They gave me a preview copy a week or so later. Nothing like that was done for EA MMA. I understand it was the UFC's UK office that was behind the Undisputed media day though, so I assume there will be something similar around the time of the game's UK release. Schedule permitting, I'll be there.</p>

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Kingster" data-cite="Kingster" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="26660" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Thank you very much for your efforts and for the inside info you seem to have. <p> </p><p> I just found out that there's a German UFC page on Facebook and they announced that the events will no longer be free. The way it reads there, all events will be affected by that decision. So, I'm not confident that the ppv's will remain free for long.</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> It's my job <img alt=":)" data-src="//content.invisioncic.com/g322608/emoticons/smile.png.142cfa0a1cd2925c0463c1d00f499df2.png" src="<___base_url___>/applications/core/interface/js/spacer.png" /></p><p> </p><p> My guy (who has worked for UFC in Germany) says the plan is for PPV's to be free for now, but things can change like the weather. A month ago there were no plans to charge for anything but fight pass.</p>

Well that was easy :-D - The decision has been made to charge $5.99/$8.99(HD) for all 'free TV' cards. PPV's will remain free, as of right now. Interestingly, the UFC have been given the right to challenge the legal ruling that has kept them off TV in Germany, so you could well have events back on TV at some point in the future.

I'll try and find out for you.

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Jaysin" data-cite="Jaysin" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="25823" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Paul Rudd is Henry Pym! I'm ecstatic!<p> </p><p> <a href="http://www.superherohype.com/news/articles/180849-paul-rudd-is-marvel-studios-ant-man" rel="external nofollow">http://www.superherohype.com/news/articles/180849-paul-rudd-is-marvel-studios-ant-man</a></p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Paul Rudd is Ant Man, but Michael Douglas is Henry Pym. Rudd will be playing Scott Lang. </p><p> </p><p> Assuming they fold Ant Man into the third Avengers film, they've already got Banner and Stark as genius scientist types. Maybe they'll focus on the reformed thief side of Lang's character. </p><p> </p><p> Douglas should give a relatively weak Marvel character a but of 'umph' at the box office too...my guess is that he gets killed off at the end of the movie.</p>

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Blackman" data-cite="Blackman" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="26660" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Wait... we can watch the events for free without resorting to other means? </div></blockquote><p> </p><p> In Germany, all UFC cards are free on UFC.tv. Obviously they're geo-blocked everywhere else.</p>

From what I'm told, no, there won't be a free trial. The trail is basically a live beta test. The expected uptake in places like the UK/EU is going to be so small, they're seeing it as a case of "Those who want it will buy it, those who don't, wont" rather than a revenue-generating product for NA fans. If you look at the schedule, there's only one FP exclusive event before March 1st anyway (last weekend's), so it's not like they're asking people to pay £5 individually for 3-4 cards. Also, the US office apparently wasn't aware that UK/EU fans were being charged for last weekend's event until the last minute. I've heard conflicting things about what's going to happen with Germany with regards to Fight Pass and FP exclusive cards. It seems strange to keep the free UFC.tv service, then charge you for FP. They're also looking at 2015 now for a Berlin event.

<p>Thoughts on Fight Pass? Any of you US guys got on the free trial yet? </p><p> </p><p> It's not available where I am until the 1st of March, so we're having to pay £5-7 to watch the 'International Fight Night' Fight Pass exclusive cards until then. A lot of people over here are up in arms about it, but I think it's perfectly reasonable. The main event and the Kawajiri fight in Singapore were worth a fiver alone. </p><p> </p><p> If the video library gets sorted out, I can't see much reason to complain about FP. Seems like a great idea, especially for those who don't already own the Pride/WEC/UFC library.</p>

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Capelli King" data-cite="Capelli King" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="26660" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>The way the point system works needs a rework. Takedowns, moving forward (called octagon aggression or control) and cuddling in particular get way too much credit.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Takedowns constitute effective grappling, and as such should figure heavily in scoring. </p><p> </p><p> Effective aggressiveness is the fourth criteria, and is weighed least. It's also not just 'moving forward', it's effectively pressing the fight and instigating legal exchanges. </p><p> </p><p> Control of the fighting area is the third criteria, and also isn't weighed as much as effective grappling/striking (which are equal). Like 'aggression', it usually only comes into play when the other two are even. Here's the official description </p><p> </p><p> <strong><em>Fighting area control is judged by determining who is dictating the pace, location and position of the bout. Examples of factors to consider are countering a grappler's attempt at takedown by remaining standing and legally striking, taking down an opponent to force a ground fight, creating threatening submission attempts, passing the guard to achieve mount, and creating striking opportunities.</em></strong></p><p> </p><p> </p><blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="26660" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>In particular you see many fighters which take someone down and get beaten up, but still get the point for the round simply because they were on top and got the takedown. </div></blockquote><p> </p><p> It happens, but it's difficult to win a fight from the bottom under the criteria. </p><p> </p><p> </p><blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="26660" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Or you get someone win a round which was even simply because they got a takedown which they did not take advantage of.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> If the round was even aside from the takedown, then they should absolutely win the round regardless of what they did/didn't do with it. Without point deductions, it should be very, very difficult to score a round a draw. </p><p> </p><p> While judging isn't perfect, I maintain that most people reasons for wanting it changed stem from them not knowing how to correctly apply the criteria to a fight. </p><p> </p><p> Watch this....</p><p> </p><p> <a href="http://sport.bt.com/video-01363814401986?videoid=2946957941001" rel="external nofollow"><strong><span style="text-decoration:underline;">Judging Criteria Discussed</span></strong></a></p><p> </p><p> ...debunks a few things.</p>

boxing originally brought it in to supplement their existing systems, which as boxing evolved proved inadequate. Originally fights were fought 'to a finish'; literally until one fight could not continue, regardless of whether that took 10 rounds or 60 rounds. As it became more of a spectator sport, a finite number of rounds was needed and if it went the distance the ref would decide the winner by raising his hand. Hands up if you can spot how this could lead (and frequently did lead) to corruption :-p Judges were eventually added (first one, then two, now three) as outside adjudicators separate from the ref. They originally scored by simply awarding the round to a fighter, with the winner being the fighter who had won the most rounds. As the system developed, there was a need to expand the scoring. If a fighter lands 200 punches in a round, but is knocked down three times by the only three shots his opponent throws, how do you judge that? Point deductions for fouls also had to be factored in, as things had progressed beyond the bare knuckle days when a cheeky headbutt or biting someones nose off only warranted a ticking off from the ref and was laughed about in the pub afterwards. Potentially you could have one fighter scoring a number of knockdowns, and committing a number of fouls...so who wins then? Also, in vary rare cases, points can be deducted for corner misconduct. The 10-point system allows for posotive and negative attrition of points. Keep in mind that back in the day bouts were sometimes fought over 20+ rounds, so there was lots of scope for lots to happen, points-wise. Some places use a 5-point must, others use a 1-point must (although 10-point must scores are still kept in case of a draw) and some places in the UK still use the hand raise. I've seen a couple of refs raise a hand and make a run for the car park :-p MMA is making the best of the system, and honestly, it's the least subjective one out there when the criteria are applied properly by competent officials. The Pride system was horrible, despite appearing 'noble' on the face of things. While we don't have set posotive deductions for knockdowns etc, there are criteria for 10-8's, 10-10's, 9-9's and 10-7's...I've even seen a 9-7 round in MMA.

<p>Shane Del Rosario's life support is likely being turned off at some point this evening US time. </p><p> </p><p> For those who didn't know, he suffered a massive cardiac arrest a few days ago, and has lost all brain function. He's currently being kept alive by way of a life support machine. I understand that although it was a foregone conclusion yesterday, his family wanted to give him 24 hours just in case. </p><p> </p><p> Tragic thing to happen to someone so young.</p>

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="bigtplaystew" data-cite="bigtplaystew" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="26660" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>For what it's worth, Ricardo Lamas and Dominick Cruz were on Opie and Anthony and both agreed that GSP won the fight by scoring standards. Though Lamas made the distinction, "I think gsp won the competition but Hendricks won the fight. HE said something like "If I slap Dominick 20 times and he hits me once and breaks my nose, I probably wouldn't go running around saying I won that fight."</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Completely agree with that notion. Don't think there are many that'd argue about who got the better of the 'fight'.</p><p> </p><p> Anybody watching GLORY right now? Another sick night of fights so far, and possibly the biggest upset in kickboxing in one of the tourney fights.</p>

<p>BT Sport (the UFC's UK broadcast partner) rounded up a few media types for their verdict on the GSP/Hendricks thing. Some good reasoning here (aside from the one idiot - see if you can spot the odd one out). </p><p> </p><p> Also, there is a video on that link from Marc Goddard - should be able to watch it outside the UK - his explanation is probably the best. </p><p> </p><p> <a href="http://sport.bt.com/moresporthub/ufc/comment-stpierre-v-hendricks-was-close-but-no-robbery-S11363851179321" rel="external nofollow">http://sport.bt.com/moresporthub/ufc/comment-stpierre-v-hendricks-was-close-but-no-robbery-S11363851179321</a></p>

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Blackman" data-cite="Blackman" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="26660" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div><p> Afaik, there's no guideline for that. Seems like judges can pick orders at their leisure. Control-freaks (who often become judges) will opt for control of the cage in favor of striking dominance. </p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> There is a clearly defined order for the UR scoring criteria. Effective striking/grappling is weighed first, and most heavily. Then aggression, then ring/cage control. Effective striking and grappling is also weighted according to how much of the round is spend standing or grappling. So if the fighters are standing for 3.5 minutes, and on the ground for 1.5 the guy who dictates the pace with his jab/low kicks should (all things being equal) get the round over the guy who gets a TD or two and passes guard etc. </p><p> </p><p> Just going back to GSP/Hendricks rnd 1, the grappling was pretty much a wash as not much happened. Hendricks landed some knees to the legs in the clinch, GSP landed some knees to the body (usually weighed heavier all things being equal). The round will have been mostly scored based on effective striking.</p>

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="damonster" data-cite="damonster" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="26660" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div><p> In another note, does anyone think Hendricks tapped in the first round. At first it didn't look like it, but after seeing different angles and the clip multiple times, it looked like he did.</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Not in a million years.</p>

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="petecrimson00" data-cite="petecrimson00" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="26660" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div><p> </p><p> I don't see how the first round was so close.</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Then you don't understand how MMA is scored. It was the closest round in the entire fight, and the only one that split the judges. </p><p> </p><p> </p><blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="26660" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Seriously, what did he do to win that round</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Just sit down with a stopwatch and apply the scoring criteria. Even if you come back with a 10-9 for GSP, you'll see that it's a close round. </p><p> </p><p> How do you apply the scoring system to that round?</p>

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Blackman" data-cite="Blackman" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="26660" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div><p> </p><p> I wonder if the judges are indeed professionals and not just some schmucks who see a fighter get raised by his team and think: "oh, that one must've won the fight for sure". </p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> It doesn't even matter, as all the judges have an official stood behind them who takes their score after each round ends. By the time the fighters have done a lap with their arms up on their coaches shoulders, the scores for the last round are already in and being added. </p><p> </p><p> In my experience judging is better in general outside of the US, where judges are chosen based on experience and ability, rather than being assigned by a commission. </p><p> </p><p> </p><blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="EddieFnG" data-cite="EddieFnG" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="26660" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div> they always go in the champion's favor on the judge's scorecard.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Urban legend.</p>

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="petecrimson00" data-cite="petecrimson00" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="26660" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>well.. thats the least I've seen someone do to win a fight about ever. Hendricks was robbed. 1,2,4 at the least there is no question, if you can convince me in any way other than fightmetric and not watching the fight, amuse me. Even if GSP had more punches he did nothing to Hendricks in terms of damage</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> <img alt=":(" data-src="//content.invisioncic.com/g322608/emoticons/frown.png.e6b571745a30fe6a6f2e918994141a47.png" src="<___base_url___>/applications/core/interface/js/spacer.png" /></p><p> </p><p> When MMA fans say robbed, they mean 'close fight that didn't go the way I thought it would'. A robery would have been if everyone had Hendricks winning 5-0 or 4-1 and the nod went to GSP, but that didn't happen here. All three judges (and pretty much the concensus) had the last four rounds being split the same way. This was a fight that was decided by it's closest round, the first. </p><p> </p><p> Everyone is entitled to there opinion, but in my experience very few MMA fans know how to accurately apply the scoring criteria to a fight. Infact, you'd be amazed at how many media members, coaches and fighters don't know how to score fights either. Also, if you watched it in a bar, or while talking to friends, or you took a sip of your drink, looked at your phone or whatever for even a split second, your opinion doesn't count. </p><p> </p><p> I think the problem people are having with this decision (and others) is that while Hendricks took his rounds reasonably clearly, GSP only squeaked his. That's something the 10-point must system doesn't take into account, but that's a debate for another day. </p><p> </p><p> At least nobody is saying that Hendricks should have won due to damage :-p</p>

<p>I reckon GSP takes it tonight. He'll ride that jab like it's going out of fashion. His huge reach advantage over Hendricks is gonna make it difficult for Big Rig to get in and land that big shot, and GSP is never going to oblidge him in a firefight for the sake of entertainment. </p><p> </p><p> With that said, I'll be cheering Hendricks on until my throat hurts <img alt="" data-src="//content.invisioncic.com/g322608/emoticons/smile.png.142cfa0a1cd2925c0463c1d00f499df2.png" src="<___base_url___>/applications/core/interface/js/spacer.png" /></p><p> </p><p> Evans, MacDonald, Kos and Bagautinov as well!</p>

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Blackman" data-cite="Blackman" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="26660" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>So the UFC is really serious about women's MMA. I'd have liked it more than they'd expand the bantamweights more, as the division is still a little short on fighters, but I guess it wouldn't hurt to expand to another division.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> I think, much like with there 135 division now, you see a lot of girls moving up or down, so depth wont be an issue for long. I can honestly see them buying out Invicta and either WEC'ing it for a bit or straight up folding it into the UFC with Shannon Knapp looking after things. Shannon is awesome and is well liked by Dana and co. </p><p> </p><p> Looking forward to the likes of Calderwood, Herrig, Hyatt and co getting their time to shine. If anyone hasn't see Jo Jo Calderwood yet, go check her out...she's a menace. Here's a mini-doc (11 mins) on her. </p><p> </p><p> </p><div class="ipsEmbeddedVideo"><div><iframe width="200" height="113" src="https://www.youtube-nocookie.com/embed/uM9MF90kaDQ?feature=oembed" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="" title="Joanne Calderwood: You don't have to be loud to be heard"></iframe></div></div><p> </p><p> I defy anyone not to like her after that <img alt=":)" data-src="//content.invisioncic.com/g322608/emoticons/smile.png.142cfa0a1cd2925c0463c1d00f499df2.png" src="<___base_url___>/applications/core/interface/js/spacer.png" /></p><p> </p><p> </p><blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="26660" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>As for the bigger picture, we might even start seeing UFC applying for something bigger. The viability for MMA becoming an Olympic sport is slowly rising, especially now they're working on gender equality, which is one of their big prerequirements. 2024 might see Pankration coming back to the spotlights.<p> </p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> The problem is, and always will be, you need a global governing body to be eligible. Like the Shooto network, but on a global scale. Maybe we'll see it for amateur MMA at some point, but I'd say it's probably a good 10-20 years away yet.</p>

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="codey" data-cite="codey" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="26660" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Newcastle on the 27th, you say? I might just be in attendance since I recently moved about 20 minutes away!</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Newcastle on the 7th of December <img alt=":)" data-src="//content.invisioncic.com/g322608/emoticons/smile.png.142cfa0a1cd2925c0463c1d00f499df2.png" src="<___base_url___>/applications/core/interface/js/spacer.png" /></p><p> </p><p> <a href="http://www.cagewarriors.com/events-and-tickets/article/cage_warriors_62" rel="external nofollow">Cage Warriors 62 card</a> </p><p> </p><p> Curt Warburton's CWFC debut, UFC vet Ulysses Gomez fighting Europe's #3 flyweight Neil Seery for the 125lb title, Europe's #4 bantamweight James Brum, couple of female fights (one featuring Laura Howarth, who was on TUF) and a pretty sick undercard!</p>

<p>Some 'me' related news for anyone who gives a toss - My role with Cage Warriors has changed quite significantly. I'm no longer doing backstage interviews, I'm now basically CW's version of Burt Watson (don't sound nearly as cool yelling "WE ROLLIN'!! though), looking after the fighters on event week, weigh in day etc.</p><p> </p><p> Not only that, a week before the last event in Amman, Jordan, I was told I'd be taking over play-by-play duties. Apparently I did alright, as I've been given the nod to do the next three events to finish out the year. Not really one to blow my own trumpet, but I remember my old mum sneering at a UFC tape about 16 years ago, saying "what a load of old rubbish", so it's pretty sweet to have her watch me broadcasting live on TV all these years later, making a living from this crazy game...</p><p> </p><p> Even if I did end my first live link by saying "It's great to be back in Amman"... </p><p> </p><p> And check this, we've got three cards in December. Newcastle on December 7th, Dublin on New Years Eve...and on the 14th of December we just booked a show in Baghdad, Iraq. Sure beats a 9-5!</p>

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="jesterx7769" data-cite="jesterx7769" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="26660" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div> Whether it is the UFC or the TV people being involved in the editing </div></blockquote><p> </p><p> UFC bods have the absolute final say over what goes out. </p><p> </p><p> </p><blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="26660" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Tate has also made more effort to go mainstream with things like the "sexy" ESPN shoot. </div></blockquote><p> </p><p> All solicited and booked by the UFC. </p><p> </p><p> </p><blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="26660" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Casual fans are not voting for the UFC video game cover, people that follow the UFC on Facebook are. As mentioned earlier, those fight fans may be getting a little sick of Rousey's attitude by now, even if they will still support her come fight night.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Good point. I wonder though, how blurred the line is these days between casuals and those who follow UFC on Facebook? </p><p> </p><p> </p><blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="26660" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>There is also probably a good amount of people that wanted to "stick it" to Rousey and voted for Tate.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Another good shout.</p>

<p>Interesting bit of news today as well - Meisha Tate beat Ronda Rousey in the first round of voting to be on the cover of EA UFC. </p><p> </p><p> Has RR's portrayal on TUF been detrimental to her popularity? </p><p> </p><p> ***Tinfoil hat time*** Was that the plan all along? Given how much control the UFC has over what airs on the show, did they intentionally make Ronda look bad so as to avoid another Gina Carano situation? They've invested a lot on Rousey and she's already crossing over into movies. Stranger things have happened.</p>

<p>What a crazy 12 months we're having. Silva gets KO'd, two guys who have been fighting since the mid 90's headline a UFC card, Hendo gets stopped for the first time in 16 years, Jones comes within a whisker of losing and JDS gets wrecked twice. </p><p> </p><p> Makes you wonder about this weekend's main event....</p><p> </p><p> I tipped Hendricks before he got to the UFC, and I tipped him again once he'd made it to the big show. GSP looked beatable for the first time against Condit and while Hendricks is a very different kind of fighter, I genuinely believe he can get it done. I don't think I've said that (and meant it) about anyone GSP has faced. </p><p> </p><p> I've got Evans, MacDonald, Kos, Bagautinov, Cerrone, Leites, Story, Perez, High, Pettis and Donovan underneath.</p>