UFC Fight Night : Gonzaga vs. CroCop 2

Eight years after Gabriel Gonzaga (-175) immortalized himself and posterized Mirko "CroCop" Filipovic (135) by turning the tables on the head kick king of MMA, the rematch is set. UFC brass setting the rematch in Krakow, Poland is a huge statement on the draw power of the main event combatants. Nonetheless a fight night we have, an interesting one at that.

Right kick hospital. Left kick cemetery. That was the pre-2007 CroCop. At their first meeting, CroCop was coming off his (anyone's really) biggest achievement. The previous year CroCop won the Pride Absolute Grand Prix defeating Wanderlei Silva and Josh Barnett on the same night. Ask any champion in any organization to do that now. He had finally arrived in the UFC and looked sluggish in his first outing, but won. The match against Gonzaga was simply a rest stop on his way to a title bout against Randy Couture. Gonzaga ended those hopes and changed CroCop's career with a high kick at the end of round 1. Does CroCop have an answer or something different now?

Since his match against Fedor Emelianenko foes became aware that CroCop didn't do well when not allowed to set. Fedor kept him retreating, never allowing him to unleash his patented offense. CroCop does not deal well with opponent's who either don't fear him or don't fall at his strikes. He has not only become gun shy due to multiple recent KO and TKO losses and his 40 year old body does not function the way it used to. CroCop still has some power left in him, it's a matter of his being able and willing to unleash it. He can no longer dart in and out and sprawl the way he used to and has always had a tendency to keep his hands low. See the Gonzaga KO. Is CroCop a shot fighter? Hard to tell. But the physical attributes that placed him at the top of the heavyweight division and masked some of his shortfalls are no longer there. He is still not someone you want to stand and bang with, taking chances. On the feet is his best chance at victory, via multitude of strikes.

Gabriel Gonzaga conversely has deteriorated in the years since the first fight, but remains the better all around fighter. I do not believe in luck in sports, especially MMA. Athletes are highly trained, disciplined and prepared. I do believe that 98 out of 100 times Gonzaga does not land that kick on CroCop. Before that the fight was fairly even with Gonzaga spending some time on top. But Gonzaga did land that kick. Since that fight Gonzaga has been Ko'd or TKO'd 6 times out of 8 losses. Like many grapplers who find success in MMA using 4oz gloves, Gonzaga has fallen in love with his striking, believing he can stand with anyone if he did against CroCop. Maybe a seventh knockout loss will convince him otherwise. Gonzaga is top heavyweight grappler and submission specialist. He needs to focus on takedowns and ground control to win this fight. If he does so, he could easily win by submission or earn a late stoppage. CroCop will have no answer for his ground and pound. But if Gonzaga decides he can KO CroCop again, he is flirting with disaster. He does not have the footwork or strike savvy to back up CroCop, especially in round one with a fresh CroCop. And if CroCop can set and unload, right kick hospital, left kick cemetery.

In a pick 'em fight, one would expect Gonzaga to play it safe, especially with his UFC career most likely on the line. But Gonzaga has repeatedly and disastrously shown he believes he can stand with anyone. He forsakes his takedowns and gets lulled into a stand up battle he can't win. He does not posses a weak chin. In the heavyweight division, any punch or kick is devastating. The worst thing that will happen in this fight is CroCop landing a straight left or a high kick and Gonzaga eating it. He will believe he can take the strikes and remain standing, losing the fight. Fighting on as close to home turf as possible for CroCop, I expect him to step up and win this fight via unanimous decision.

You might also like:
What's wrong with judging in MMA?
UFC 185: Pettis vs DosAnjos 

What's Wrong with Judging in MMA?

At UFC Fight Night:Fairfax the ugly head of bad judging surfaced again. Depending on who you ask Liz Carmouche lost her match and Al Iaquinta was demolished by Jorge Masvidal. Fans want the system fixed. What they really want is for whomever they felt won to win.My opinion in those two bouts was that Carmouche lost and Jorge Masvidal handily beat Iaquinta. But are the judges to blame or is the parameters of the sport? What can realistically be done to fix the bad decisions? Or is bad judging just something athletes and fans must accept?

The sport of MMA needs to accept some blame for the bad decisions it produces. Judging combat sports is difficult. Extremely. Boxing has had countless bad decisions in it's history and in boxing all you have to look for is whether one guy punches the other. In MMA a judge has to look for striking, grappling, cage control, aggressiveness, ground control, top control, submissions, damage, and probably a dozen more things. And how do you judge all that? What carries the most weight? A takedown or a three strike combo? What if a guy gets two takedowns but is hurt by strikes later in the round, what carries more weight? None of that has been defined in MMA. Or what if nothing happens in a round, who wins the round? The one with center control or the one who's footwork forced the other to have "center" control? Judging is essentially opinion. What do you think happened? So when a round is not clear cut it leaves the judge with all the power to choose what he prefers, including the fighter. Why can Floyd Mayweather use his superior footwork and speed to avoid damage and conflict and win every round while a lesser fighter loses the same type of round because he was inactive? Because everyone loves Mayweather and really, it takes boxing skill to avoid the way he does in the ring. The Masvidal/Iaquinta match is a perfect example of perception. Iaquinta is a fan favorite. He takes the fight to his opponent. Almost a brawler. Masvidal is extremely skilled on his feet. He, in my opinion was picking Iaquinta apart. But viewers felt that Masvidal was coasting and running because Iaquinta kept chasing and throwing bombs that mainly missed. I saw one fighter head and shoulders above the other in the striking department. But what many fans and the judges saw was a lot of effort from Iaquinta and another fighter not engaging. That was the perception. I can see that. Even with me giving the fight to Masvidal in the back of my mind I was thinking they may thinking Iaquinta is the aggressor. And to me, that's the worst of judging or commentating. "Well he was the aggressor" or "He was busier, threw more strikes" That means hey you should win for trying. Now, after the fight stats showed that Masvidal actually was more active and accurate during the rounds 2 & 3 that he "coasted" what other reason do we have to award the rounds to Iaquinta? I personally dislike the use of statistics to prove a fighter won because judges don't have that available. A fight should be judged on what we see, not on generated numbers. But I use them here merely to point out how opinion and perception play a major role in today's MMA judging.

UFC Fight Night Fairfax : Iaquinta vs. Masvidal

What Al Iaquinta(-130)and Jorge Masvidal (+100)lack in name recognition they will certainly make up for inside the Octagon with their high output thrilling styles. Both are on a three fight winning streaks and on the verge of demanding a top ten opponent with a victory.

Masvidal is the bettor's favorite and on paper he should be. He s more experienced, competed against better talent, and possess beautiful standup. He has held his own against the likes of Gilbert Melendez (lost), K.J. Noons (won) and Paul Daley (lost). Anyone who can go three rounds against Paul Daley with his head still attached to his torso deserves a hand. Masvidal's striking is varied and fluid. His hands are his best weapon but he can unload nice low and high kicks. He is difficult to take down but he probably doesn't have to worry about that against Iaquinta.

For years I have bet against Serra-Longo Fight Team. I was one of the one's who felt Chris Weidman was lucky against Anderson Silva. Then he did it again. Then he beat Lyoto Machida. What came through most in Weidman's performances was that his coaches, Matt Serra and Ray Longo, not only prepared their fighters but also devised pinpoint and top level game plans. Al Iaquinta has been a great beneficiary of his coaches' wealth of knowledge. He is gifted with cannon in his fists and an iron jaw. He has shown discipline in his fights following his corner's directions almost exactly. For that he has three straight TKO victories to show. It seems that things are falling into place for Iaquinta. He TKO'd Joe Lauzon in his last outing, one of the toughest and most durable fighters in MMA. He faced some adversity in that fight but he stuck to the gameplan and found the victory. There is nothing else excellent in the arsenal of Iaquinta, but if you could hit as hard as he does, you wouldn't need anything else either.

Masvidal tends to be hit early in his fights. Not a good thing against Iaquinta. Vegas has this one as essentially a pick 'em. With good reason. We have two young, rising talents with almost equal skill sets. But Masvidal has been knocked out in his career. His chin is not weak but Iaquinta has shown to make many a chins weak after he lands. After rocking Masvidal early in round, Iaquinta will finish the fight early in round two with strikes to the head. 

You might also like:

UFC Fight Night Fairfax : Mendes vs. Lamas

UFC FIGHT NIGHT : Maia vs. LaFlare

When the scheduled main event of Raphael Assuncao and Urijah Faber was scrapped due to injury fans were left with Demian Maia against Ryan LaFlare. The matchup is very intriguing pitting an undefeated rising fighter looking to make a name against maybe the best pure submission artist in MMA looking to put himself back in the title picture. But what it gains in intrigue it loses in star power. Nonetheless Maia vs. LaFlare could play a substantial role in the future of the UFC's welterweight division.

For a while now I've believed the UFC does no favors for up and coming fighters pitting them against veterans that can and many times do derail their careers. Instead of building someone, they feed them to the lions in a sink or swim lesson. Pitting the rising Erick Silva against Jon Fitch. Recently pitting Myles Jury against murderer Donald Cerrone. They normally don't do their young stars many favors. While Demian Maia is certainly no favor, Maia is tailored for the rising LaFlare.

Demian Maia is capable of controlling and submitting almost anyone at any time. He's submitted Rick Story and Chael Sonnen. If he can get the takedown or reach the hips, he is excellent at controlling and finishing the takedown as well as securing the submission once there. Pitting him on his back is also not the best idea, just ask Chael Sonnen. But he has always had problems against fighters with mobility and striking skills. Against Rory McDonald, Maia looked like an amateur fighting in slow motion. He shot for takedowns from too far away and at an elementary speed. He was never in the fight against McDonald. In fact, a fighter with more killer instinct would have probably finished Maia. Maia also struggles against bigger, stronger MMA adapt wrestlers. Chris Weidman and Mark Munoz both controlled and beat him en route to decision victories.

In Ryan LaFlare, Maia faces a very, very good wrestler with very good mobility and striking skills at a higher level than his own. If there was a prototypical fighter Maia would not want to fight, he would look a lot like LaFlare. LaFlare used his footwork and sharper striking in his last match against John Howard on his way to a decision. While LaFlare has not KO'd anyone since 2010 and fought to a decision in his last three bouts, his striking is adequate and against Maia that's all he needs. LaFlare has the skills to keep the fight standing if he wishes or to repeatedly take Maia down. I would not recommend he stay there though as that would be disaster. The other thing LaFlare has going for him is a 5 round fight. Maia is 37, while LaFlare is 31. The pace that LaFlare will impose upon Maia will wear the veteran down in the later rounds making the chances of a late submission almost null as in his bout against Rory McDonald. 

I expect LaFlare to impose his gameplan against Maia. Move around the Octagon peppering Maia with sharp strikes and utilizing the takedown at will. Either ending the fight via strikes in the later rounds or earning a unanimous decision against
Maia, sending a message to the rest of the UFC's welterweight division.