UFC 168 Silva v. Weidman
- Thread starter bou
- Start date
![[YDEK] fi$hy k!tty](/data/avatars/m/10/10707.jpg?1353037336){kind=avatar}
I was following this fight but lost track of it. Who won? I know Anderson has broken knee or ankle or something
Um... Weidman. If you break your opponent's leg when you kneecheck their kick, it's pretty much a guaranteed win.
It was also icky to watch.
I have had this disagreement with several people...Silva did not lose the first because he's obnoxious and showboats a lot. It's a tactic Silva employs in all his fights. Psyching out if you will...he's done this literally every time. Even if you remove him from that, Weidman was beating the living shit out of him before he got caught when he was taunting.
I'm not a Weidman fanboy, but you watch this fellow, he's going to roll over Belfort. If he gets Machida it could be a good fight but Weidman beat Anderson's ass both times. It could also be because Anderson is aging. Anderson has generally struggled against good wrestlers though as evident by Chaels 4 round domination of him pre Anderson ninja triangle.
He does it because he's one of the best counter-strikers, and since he isn't getting any younger, it's a fairly decent way to end a fight quickly, since getting hit with a counter does more damage than just getting hit. On the other hand, since he isn't getting younger, he's expecting to be able to dodge strikes well enough to land the right hit once he has his opponent's timing down when they're frustrated. If you're fighting a wrestler, it's more difficult obviously, since you're grappling rather than striking.
I don't really have anything against people who are counter-punchers, but the way Silva went about doing it wasn't very classy and doesn't really go well with his previous title of being the best there ever was. The law of averages was going to catch up with him eventually regardless of age.