[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=71AIes4cjVg[/ame] If with all this talk from the swede i still saw Matt might just slide by and get the win on this one. Thoughts?
If Hamill can't take him down, and I do believe he might find problems there, I think Gustaffson beats him over the stretch.
Why is everyone so keen on Gustaffson here? The bookies have him as the favourite too, I don't get it. Hammil has been in with much tougher operators than Gustaffson, and has several wins against bigger names than anyone Gustaffson's got a W against. I really don't think Hammil is that outclassed in any aspect of the game, and should be able to repeat Phil Davis tactics on route to a comfortable decision.
Because you're reading resumes and going on experience rather than being an analyst and looking at what skills each brings to the table. On the feet it's a wash because Hamill throws really telegraphed power punches, has a lackadaisical jab to put it nicely, and the speed difference is wide. Gustafsson throws concise combinations and has a really good jab and straight right that will probably land all night on Hamill's exposed head because he throws wide loopy overhands and drops his left hand after he paws with it. Also, Hamill is no Phil Davis as in he's not an athletic and slick wrestler with a deep shot and the ability to chain wrestle for a takedown if the shot fails. He's a power wrestler that has a very average double and good but not great clinch takedowns and clinch takedowns are much harder to get against an opponent that's far more fleet of foot than yourself and has the ability to dictate the range with a jab and footwork. Hamill is the bookies' underdog here for a reason. Not only is he technically outgunned with his only advantages being a meagre one in the wrestling department and an intangible like experience, but he also stepped in as a semi-late replacement for Matyushenko.
Cheers for the reply, this was the sort of answer I was looking for, especially the analysis of the striking. In my predictions, I have a bias towards wrestlers. It's a cliché to say that the Unified Rules favour wrestlers, that wrestlers can just win by lay and pray and that wrestling allows you to dictate a fight - but it's also more or less true. I've seen Gustafsson's four brief UFC fights, and I've seen nothing yet to suggest he can stop Hamill's takedowns. I agree that Hamill isn't one the elite wrestlers at 205lbs. He's no Rashad, Bones or Davis - but he's sure as hell no Diabaté, Hamman or Te-Huna. In fact, if James Te-Huna can put Gustafsson on his back thirty seconds into a fight, I'm pretty sure Hamill can. I also didn't like how Gustafsson reacted when he was on his back previously. He gave up side control too easily, took some solid shots and only got back to his feet when Te-Huna got too ambitious and allowed him a chance to get up. If he gets hold of Gustafsson, I can see Hamill content to smother him against the mat, perhaps even offering a serious enough threat from submissions or ground and pound to really start dragging out the rounds by preventing resets. I could also see an ugly clinch game with the stronger Hamill getting a hold of the Swede and bullying him up against the cage for long periods. Either way Gustafsson will be fatiguing and losing confidence, his striking reduced to throwing a few shots when they separate, before the fight goes back to the wall or mat. Gustafsson still remains an unknown quantity, but I've seen enough of Hamill to favour him over an unproven striker with no track record against wrestlers. Perhaps I'm wrong and he'll be brutally KO'd in the first round of the fight (and I'll come back and give you props if he does) but I'm still going to be backing him on Saturday.
Nice analysis yourself. Did you forget how Gustafsson was able to thwart Davis on several attempts before finally giving up the one that got him submitted? Those attempts before the successful takedown were more serious than anything that Hamill is going to have for him not to mention that ceding a single takedown against Hamill isn't likely to lead to as devastating a consequence as it did with Davis. I favor Gustafsson because of his more dynamic and well-rounded skillset not to mention Hamill's highly overrated takedown ability but with the right ref Hamill can grind out an ugly win. If Goddard ref'd in the States, however, Hamill would be ****ed because you've got to impress that guy with activity to stay rolling on the ground.
Just to let you know that phil davis has been working with gustafsson ever since that defeat and gustafsson is whupping everyone in the gym. Davis can no longer take gustafsson down. Bet the house on gustafsson. In a year or so he will beat jon jones.
MetalMandible knew what he was talking about here. Gustafsson still has holes in his game but he could be a real contender in a year or two.
Yeah, Gustafsson has a lot of physical gifts, he's just lacking technically. If he figures out that he's 6'5'', uses his jab more (it's good when it appears), and figures out how to tuck his chin and put his hands up then he could go somewhere. As it stands, he's definitely going to beat a lot of B-fighters and has-beens like Hamill.
He sure did, he was ready for hamill in this fight. He stuffed his takedown and he timed his shots when hamill attack. Good win for alexander.
I saw him at both 105 and 120 and he looked the real deal then as well. Him and Davis will prove very interesting challenges for Jones in eighteen months time.
