damonster Posted February 2, 2012 Share Posted February 2, 2012 What do you mean by not official? It's a copy and paste of the press release sent out by THQ sent out this morning. I have the exact same thing in my inbox. Oh, I thought it might have been false. Do you know if this all the dlc? Is so then I was hoping it was false. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brashleyholland Posted February 2, 2012 Author Share Posted February 2, 2012 Oh, I thought it might have been false. Do you know if this all the dlc? Is so then I was hoping it was false. That's everything. The pre-order pack of Diaz, Stann, Davis and Mayhem will be available something like 90 days after launch. Otherwise you have KOREAN ZOMBIE, Hathaway, Krauss, Sakara and Noke in the international pack, and Lauzon, Stout, Oliviera, Rory MacDonald and Rumble in the FOTN pack. Plus all the Ultimate Fights listed. Here's the full list... Complete list of Undisputed 3 DLC Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigtplaystew Posted February 2, 2012 Share Posted February 2, 2012 I can care less about ultimate fights. So I now know to not bother with the season pass. The two fighter packs are only 400 points each. I save money. Score! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
damonster Posted February 2, 2012 Share Posted February 2, 2012 Edit: deleted link, not sure if their is a virus at link. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xspudx Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 Roy Nelson is a warrior, man. And its time of the main event, baby. Lets get it on. I've got Diaz but I'm cheering for Condit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ampulator Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 wow that was total toal fing bs. 100% agree with what Diaz said and the judges make me sick. man I don't even see how koscheck was a split descion. I feel like Diaz, I am so burned out of this bs I'm starting to not even care anymore. I can Condit winning the fight. Condit exploit his weaknesses: Lack of Wrestling, Kickboxing, and Muay Thai. Diaz couldn't take it the ground for most of the fight, he couldn't do deal well with the leg kicks, and his clinch work was terrible. Nick only has himself to blame-he doesn't like wrestling, fine. But some fighters will explot his boxing through using Muay Thai and Kickboxing. And that's what Condit did. As for Pierce Koscheck fight, he lost the second round. He lost the first. He could have won the third. It would have said the fight was more a Draw, but if I had to give to someone, it would have been Koscheck... and this is coming from a guy that thought Pierce was going to be EXTREMELY tougher than people made him out to be. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brashleyholland Posted February 5, 2012 Author Share Posted February 5, 2012 It amazes me that some people don't understand the difference between a close decision and a robbery. HINT = That was not a robbery. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xspudx Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 Nick Diaz was so butthurt. You got outstruck man, deal with it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brashleyholland Posted February 5, 2012 Author Share Posted February 5, 2012 Nick Diaz was so butthurt. You got outstruck man, deal with it. Not only that, but (and this is the real story of the fight for me) Diaz only landed 110 times in five rounds. Frankly anyone who doesn't constantly move out of his striking range is an idiot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zoloftjunkie Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 He ran away like a bitch. Diaz came to fight and pressed forward the whole time. I mean come on, you wanna see fighting or a tickle contest? All that talk about being a warrior and a real fighter, psh w/e. You can have the snooze fest of gsp and him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ampulator Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 He ran away like a bitch. Diaz came to fight and pressed forward the whole time. I mean come on, you wanna see fighting or a tickle contest? All that talk about being a warrior and a real fighter, psh w/e. You can have the snooze fest of gsp and him. What was he supposed to do? Stand there like Cerrone and get punched in the face? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daffanka Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 I'm fiercely enjoying the contingent of EDUCATED INTERNET FANS who are complaining like crazy that Condit fought an incredibly smart fight and figured out Diaz's style without going for takedowns. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adam Ryland Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 NB: I don't know why there's been a sudden rise, but I've had to delete several recent posts in this thread due to people ignoring the rules about swearing. Warnings will be given out if it continues. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
critical-23 Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 What was he supposed to do? Stand there like Cerrone and get punched in the face? I guess so...lol But seriously, Diaz has come off like a whiner. Gonna quit because the judges didn't give you the win? Diaz was right: he kept coming forward and pushed the action. BUT Condit stuck to his gameplan of not getting trapped and scoring points. There was no way that Condit was going to stand there like Cowboy and get his energy sapped away by Diaz' chicken punches. Good fight and I look forward to Condit/GSP. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fantabulous Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 I'm fiercely enjoying the contingent of EDUCATED INTERNET FANS who are complaining like crazy that Condit fought an incredibly smart fight and figured out Diaz's style without going for takedowns. Some people are stupidity junkies, I guess. Condit fought the perfect fight for Diaz and I thought he outworked Diaz in just about every area. No surprise to see Diaz acting like a baby and quitting because he's not getting his way. He'll be back once he's calmed down and perhaps been winded. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Shape Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 Disagree with the decision, especially 49-46s, but really looking forward to Condit/GSP and think Condit will knock him out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
damonster Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 If their is anyone who was 'robbed' is was with me not winning a tap out shirt. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PilotMan Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 This is just my repost from another forum. It shouldn't be any surprise that a strategist like Jackson had a stellar gameplan in place for the main event. Condit did a great job being faster, setting the tone with leg kicks and moving very well. It was great seeing Diaz being the one frustrated. I don't think that there should be any controversy. The numbers speak for themselves. Condit was more accurate and landed more and more power shots. Even though he wasn't the aggressor being the aggressor doesn't win fights. I loves me some Big Country and his loss was expected, but I was more impressed with Werdum's Muay Thai skills. His standup looked good, and although he didn't really hurt Roy (nobody can put him away) he really did a whole shitload of damage. It's a good fight to put Werdum into the mix. Ugh, the rest of the fights didn't do a whole lot to set themselves apart. Barao has a great skill set, and Jorgensen is a tough dude. While the fight was entertaining neither fighter is all that intriguing. Koscheck's fight was just boring. Pierce was just not good enough, but Koscheck just isn't good enough to be a top contender either. Dustin Porier should have been on the main card. He did a great job with a beautiful submission. His ground game is smooth. I had never seen a fight finished with an armbar in the mounted triangle position. If anyone got to see the first fight with Stephen Thompson you got to see a great lead leg roundhouse. I had never heard of this guy, but I guess he is undefeated in MMA, Kickboxing and Karate matches. Makes an interesting story to say the least. His standup is going to need tweaking with more in and out like Machida or he is going to end up getting taken down and tapped out too fast. He pretty must stood still for much of the fight. A grappler would really give him a test. So that was it. Like I said last week, we continue to see a progression in MMA toward more decisions, where strategy continues to separate fighters but where casual fans have trouble getting into the fights.Fighter skill sets continue to merge even closer, and the fights become more tightly contested, and not necessarily in a way that is conductive toward exciting fights. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blackman Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 Wow. Diaz has such an awesome personality. The fight btw was pure art. Loved watching that. I know Diaz was talking BS at the end, but he was right on a couple of things. What we need to see is a progression in judging. You NEVER know what kind of strategy will be rewarded by the judges. You could have some judges that like control, some good takedowns (even when nothing happens). And you have some judges that only seem to regard the slight stand-up advantage. I mean: 49-46? Really? Those are some judges that never even heard of octagon control. I predicted a 48-47 split for Condit post-fight. 49-46 is unacceptable for me (god I start sounding like Diaz now ). Ok, so he landed more significant strikes. I saw that (I gave him the win didn't I?). He also landed a lot of low kicks, saw that too, but I would'nt really rate them that high. They're more useful in the fight itself if it goes nearer to the limit. I didn't really analyse the fight as I was too busy enjoying it. But it just seemed to me that Diaz did more to win the fight (which is, in effect, not valued at all by judges), and came pretty close to Condit in terms of technical fighting. Shouldn't you get more credit at that point? Point being: there should be some ordinal judging system in the sport, instead of just some guidelines. Judging factors should be based on objective criteria that are shared with the entire fighting world and justified post-match. I hope I get a job in the sports sector one day so I can get to the bottom of these kind of 'issues' (and not only in refereeing). Not to correct them, as I'm afraid that will be kind of hard. But I just never understood them. There are so many weird decisions and rituals in most sports. You could blame tradition, but it must be something more then that. Politics? I don't know. But hey, that's another story. Perhaps we should just blame the rules of the octagon. Diaz was never really in trouble. Neither was Condit (except at the end), but he seemed like he was dodging Diaz, trying to score the judges' favour, which should not be what MMA is about (in my book). Kickboxing, taekwando, freestyle wrestling, jiu-jitsu all work with points. If you want to grind out decisions, go and do that. But I guess that's the reason why I often put 12x5 as a ruleset in WMMA3 . Well, I guess I should stop ranting now. Too bad we won't see St. Pierre vs Diaz, but I guess this consolation prize is not bad. By the time the fight actually happens, other contenders will probably have been born (literally XD). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brashleyholland Posted February 5, 2012 Author Share Posted February 5, 2012 I think one mistake a lot of people make is not actually knowing the five criteria that judges score fights with. Effective striking Effective grappling Ring/Cage control Effective aggression Defence A lot of people are saying that Diaz was the aggressor...but was his aggression effective? Yes he came forward, but he came forward and got hit. Condit was on the back foot, but he was doing to to make Diaz miss and draw him in. Same with his turning off the cage. That scores under defence, while Diaz isn't scoring for effective aggression. Two judges giving four rounds to Condit was maybe a little unkind. I gave him 3, 4 and 5 (I think - I got caught in the snowstorm and had to do a 4 hour drive that should have taken 50 mins back from UCMMA last night, and was shattered by the time I got in), but I've seen people score each round to different fighters. It was that close. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Shape Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 I think one mistake a lot of people make is not actually knowing the five criteria that judges score fights with. Effective striking Effective grappling Ring/Cage control Effective aggression Defence A lot of people are saying that Diaz was the aggressor...but was his aggression effective? Yes he came forward, but he came forward and got hit. Condit was on the back foot, but he was doing to to make Diaz miss and draw him in. Same with his turning off the cage. That scores under defence, while Diaz isn't scoring for effective aggression. Two judges giving four rounds to Condit was maybe a little unkind. I gave him 3, 4 and 5 (I think - I got caught in the snowstorm and had to do a 4 hour drive that should have taken 50 mins back from UCMMA last night, and was shattered by the time I got in), but I've seen people score each round to different fighters. It was that close. I think the problem is from poor judging in the past people have kind of come to expect a certain thing. But regardless of that I think Diaz landed the much more effective strikes in the first two at least, had the back in the fifth, so would have to give him all of those. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zoloftjunkie Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 You can call running away smart and all but I would call it something else. I don't get excited for a FIGHT when someone doesn't come to fight but to out point someone. I want to see two men trying to finish the fight otherwise what is the point? I also want to know why 2 points was taken from Alex. Was hard to swallow him losing that fight when he clearley dominated it. I thought Alex did enough to win the first round after he was dropped by the head kick but I can see that either way I guess. Those three fights got me real sour(Alex,Koscheck,Diaz) on mma right now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Shape Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 Seeing some calls for a rematch now due to GSP's return date and a lack of other options outside Ellenberger/Hendricks/Sanchez and when introducing someone else into the mix would confuse the situation further. Personally think it makes perfect sense, would be very intrigued by five more rounds of that fight. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brashleyholland Posted February 5, 2012 Author Share Posted February 5, 2012 You can call running away smart and all but I would call it something else. I don't get excited for a FIGHT when someone doesn't come to fight but to out point someone. I want to see two men trying to finish the fight otherwise what is the point? I also want to know why 2 points was taken from Alex. Was hard to swallow him losing that fight when he clearley dominated it. I thought Alex did enough to win the first round after he was dropped by the head kick but I can see that either way I guess. Those three fights got me real sour(Alex,Koscheck,Diaz) on mma right now. That's where your problem is then. You're confusing a fight with a mixed martial arts contest. I thought it was a very bad call by the ref to deduct two points. Two-point deductions are there for flagrant abuses of the rules - like repeatedly or deliberately, without question, kicking a guy in the nuts with intent. Both those kicks seemed accidental...in which case a single point deduction is fair, especially as he was already warned. Even if they are accidents, the cumulative effect still has an impact on the fight. But two points? Nah, I don't see it. Although, if he'd only been docked one point, it'd have been a majority draw, so I guess it's not all the ref's fault. Apparently he's going to appeal, in which case I guess it'd be a no-contest. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
damonster Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 That's where your problem is then. You're confusing a fight with a mixed martial arts contest. I thought it was a very bad call by the ref to deduct two points. Two-point deductions are there for flagrant abuses of the rules - like repeatedly or deliberately, without question, kicking a guy in the nuts with intent. Both those kicks seemed accidental...in which case a single point deduction is fair, especially as he was already warned. Even if they are accidents, the cumulative effect still has an impact on the fight. But two points? Nah, I don't see it. Although, if he'd only been docked one point, it'd have been a majority draw, so I guess it's not all the ref's fault. Apparently he's going to appeal, in which case I guess it'd be a no-contest. he did get a "strong warning". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.