add clay guida to the lay and pray list.

I love Guida, but it was clear Pettis was a ****ing master on his back. Clay did well to keep him there for 2 and a half rounds, then getting him back there when he was in trouble. His takedowns were plentiful though, so well done to him. He was clearly trying to pass and press the fight but he couldn't because Pettis always had risk control and was always throwing up triangles. He had a magnificent guard.

But this doesn't bode well for Clay. I'm very happy he's got the title shot (he ****ing better have, anyway. Clay's not gonna get another chance so just let him fight for it while you build the rest up) but his bobbing and weaving looked like it could be useless against a good striker and if he can't pass Pettis, he might have major issues should Maynard win.

I would love to see Edgar vs. Guida.

 

The worst thing in this fight I think is that Guida won because he was able to take Pettis down and that's pretty much it.

I think Pettis was better on his feet and the ground game was pretty much of the same level since Guida couldn't pass guard and Pettis couldn't sub him....

 

The sad thing is that Guida's stand up technique is probably just as bad as if not worse than what's on display in that video. At least Tank and Cabbage could finish a fight with their striking.

 

You guys need to take your strawmen out back and **** them in the ass. Criticizing ONE GUY for LNP is not being "anti-wrestler" it's being "anti-boring strategy that has no hope of finishing the fight". Guida CHOSE to take the fight to the ground over and over when it was clear he had no hope of finishing with the single hope that he would be able to stay on top and avoid subs and would get the decision. There are TONS of wrestlers who don't do this and who, when they can't do anything with their ground game TRY SOMETHING ELSE THAT COULD FINISH THE FIGHT. At least Pettis tried to end the fight by attempting subs while Guida just threw shoulder strikes and held on.

 

I don't think this is Guida's modus operandi. He tends to improve position, go for chokes, gnp and sets up an effective arm triangle.

I think maybe he didn't want to keep it standing because he knew it was risky, and his opponent was there for the takedown, and probably more dangerous than himself if he ended up taking full mount. So, Guida took full mount and survived.

Neither guy beat the other, but since very few people who have good knowledge about ground fighting are honest about it, people think Guida dominated..

Sad state.

 

Just watched this fight and I quite enjoyed it. Pettis is a beast off his back and full credit to Guida for surviving all those sub attempts. It's a pity the scoring system is set up the way it is because I just watched a very close and competitive match up that was almost entirely decided by Guidas takedowns. Pettis had the opportunity to turn this into a boring fight by holding on to Guida and waiting for the ref to stand it up. Instead Pettis was constantly working and looking to finish the fight off his back, and he came relatively close more than once.

 

I wonder if Pride would have given that fight to Pettis.

Pettis at least actively sought to finish the fight prettu much the whole time on his back.

Shitty card all round but.

 

Oh come on, this is getting ridiculous now. Nobody can make an excuse for Pettis winning the fight, man, not even with Pride rules. Guida took him down in every round and kept him there. You can't say Pettis was looking to finish the fight whereas Guida wasn't. Guida wanted to finish the fight too, most people do when they take it to the ground. He was actively seeking to get past Pettis' guard, Pettis was actively seeking to get him in a submission, failing everytime. The one time he did get a transition in his favour, Guida got back to his in about 30 seconds. It's just stupid to say Guida didn't try to finish the fight, he constantly tried to pass. What's he supposed to do, stand up because he can't get past the guys guard? He'd be a moron to trade with Pettis, you take away his strengths. It's not his fault Pettis has a great guard and he couldn't pass it.

And people act as if Guida hasn't gave us countless FOTN's and potential FOTY's, he's an exciting fighter who finishes fights and is a real character. It's foolish to compare him to Jon Fitch after meeting someone who was great on his back. Seems more like butthurt Pettis fans who can't accept the fact that their boy sacrificed his title shot due to activity. All because of one ****ing kick. Get over it, jesus. I mean, nothing against Pettis and all, but he's not the second coming.

 

The mentality that takedown and mount surmounts to control is wrong. I think this among the prime examples, it highlights that scoring is wrong for mma right now.

Not saying I thought Pettis won, I thought neither guy won. Guida got the takedowns, but Pettis controlled the grappling. So I saw it as even.

 

If that's a fight you thought neither man won, then jesus christ...

Pettis attempted submissions and failed all of them. He managed to get Guida into a position for 30 seconds before Guida got it back (and finished the fight in control, by the way)

Guida took him down 3 or 4 times, keeping him grounded for the full fight, but unable to pass. He did, however land some ground and pound, although nothing major.

And that's a fight you saw as even. Christ all-****ing-mighty. There is no hope for judging. You might have the slightest of points if Pettis decided to go to the ground on his own will. He has nobody to blame but himself.

 

You don't understand ground fighting.

 

No, I understand it perfectly. Don't start that bull****. You don't win a fight on anybody's card for being taken down for 3 rounds, hitting the opponent 0 times in return, and only having a ground advantage for 30 seconds. Considering the fact Pettis didn't take it to the ground on his own accord, there is no way it's an even fight at the end, and I'm stunned there's people out there that believe that. It's mental.

 

Still a bit iffed by this fight. It doesn't bode well for MMA. Credit to Guida, he took him down and won but Pettis was willing to trade and was the better striker. On the ground, he continously had him in guard and Guida couldn't pass.

I love wrestling but sometimes question how it is scored. Pettis was going for finishes and subs. Not saying he necessarily won but it doesn't appear the fight was even close.

 

You buy into the idea that mount equates to control.

Mount is generally the dominant position, but you need to do certain things to ensure it is. There are quite a few guys who fight so well from their backs and maintain wrist control so well, they actually are able to control from the guard.

If you don't understand this, you don't get it.

 

I do get it, I understand the art of fighting off your back, but Pettis doesn't get a draw nevermind a win in this fight. Being taken down in every round is the reason he lost. If he started every round and went to the ground to try and bait Guida in and then it went from there? Then you'd have a point. Credit to him for his guard, and well done on all the submission attempts and even getting Guida on his back. But what did Guida do? He reversed it. Thing was, Pettis' was more-so because Guida rolled too far, Guida reversed his with skill. He still landed some minor ground and pound.

I can't continue this discussion, I really can't. There's numerous people on this page alone that think it was even. Fair enough, it was a chess match on the ground and Guida didn't dominate him, but he controlled him on the ground for 3 rounds and got it to the mat. All this bull**** of "he didn't try to finish the fight" is ridiculous. He tried to pass numerous times, what do you do if you can't? You don't play to your opponents ****ing strengths and keep it standing, you do as much damage as you can in the best position you can get to. And what was he doing in the last ****ing round for **** sake! He got his back!

Boggles my ****ing mind how people score a fight. It really does. Pettis didn't want it on the ground, he merely decided it was in his best interests to try and get a submission for 3 rounds rather than get up. Hate to break it to you, but unless the guy is doing a significant amount of damage off his back and gets close submissions (I mean, like Dan Hardy-esque) and possibly manages to get his opponent on his back, he isn't winning the fight. Not on my card, not on UFC's, not on Pride's. Absolutely ridiculous.