Official Conor McGregor thread (part 3) *Updated Warning in 1st Post Re:Boxing match

bmcc10 · 21-06-2017 06:00PM

Fromvert wrote: »

I'm a much bigger MMA fan than a boxing one, and a huge McGregor fan and the only shot I give McGregor is a freak injury to Mayweather and some crazy KO that I can't even imagine how it would occur. McGregor will land a few but mostly to the arms and glancing blows

Am I being disparaging to 'our' sport?

If Mayweather doesn't get him out of there he loses credibility in being able to call himself the best.

And the ironic thing is non of these people would be having an opinion on 'our' sport if it wasn't for his beloved Conor

Outlaw Pete · 21-06-2017 06:01PM

The way I see the fight going is Floyd starting out with lots of matrix esque showboating moves, almost laughing at McGregor's efforts.... but then McGregor suddenly catches Floyd with a hard left to the body hurting his ribs and totally changing the fight.....from that point on they trade blows in a very close and brutal affair with both fighters close to getting counted out at many points throughout, even in the 12th... and just before the final bell sounds a bloody and breathless Floyd whispers in McGrgeor's ear that he ain't getting no rematch.... and McGregor snaps back that that he don't want one.

Barely able to see out of one eye Conor ignores efforts to interview him and starts hollering for Dee... who we then see slowly running from the tunnel, spotlit, holding Conor Jnr...... crowd are going wild..........but she slips...... and the baby goes flying through the humid Vegas air............... but McGrgeor jumps up on the ropes and flings himself off, just managing to catch him before he lands on the press booth...... whereupon Conor Jnr says his very first words.... 'You'll do nothing!' A journalist immediately runs over and sticks a mic in McGregor's face and says 'Conor, that was some catch, Real Madrid need a new keeper, would you do it??' McGregor says: 'I hear them talking alright and yeah, I could catch anything, going at any speed.... we'll see'.

Folks don't take it all so serious... it's just a fight and we may as well enjoy the madness as none of us truly have any bloody idea what's going to happen in all fairness.

Frank Bullitt · 21-06-2017 06:08PM

wonderfullife wrote: »

We'll see.

What was that other meme about? What % chance do you give Floyd in a street fight against Conor? (No weapons, no third parties. they are alone in the middle of a street).

Pal, what the hell has a street fight got to do with a boxing match? I'm not giving any % chance on such a silly question.

wonderfullife · 21-06-2017 06:35PM

Fromvert wrote: »

I'm a much bigger MMA fan than a boxing one, and a huge McGregor fan and the only shot I give McGregor is a freak injury to Mayweather and some crazy KO that I can't even imagine how it would occur. McGregor will land a few but mostly to the arms and glancing blows

Am I being disparaging to 'our' sport?

If Mayweather doesn't get him out of there he loses credibility in being able to call himself the best.

I predicted Conor will lose in the 9th round. Thinking he will lose is not disparaging MMA.

Others are refusing to discuss it as a fight, hinting at scams/fixes/it being rigged and saying Floyd would have a better chance in MMA than Conor has in boxing.

The above is disparaging.

bmcc10 wrote: »

And the ironic thing is non of these people would be having an opinion on 'our' sport if it wasn't for his beloved Conor

Everyone had an entry into following MMA that was through a fighter or a particular fight.

Whether that was Royce Gracie, Chuck Liddell, Anderson, GSP, Conor.

I'd never say it's ironic you have an opinion on MMA because you got into it through Chuck Liddell.

Gintonious wrote: »

Pal, what the hell has a street fight got to do with a boxing match? I'm not giving any % chance on such a silly question.

You posted a sarcastic meme in response to my post about a street fight, so you obviously care enough to go fetch a meme to try look clever.

There's 3 ways many people discuss Conor fighting Floyd:

Boxing
MMA
On the street.

Irish bookies who love money have Conor at 4/1 to WIN the fight and 11/8 for it go the full 12 rounds.

I'd argue in MMA it would be 100/1 Floyd to win the fight and 500/1 for it to go the full 5 rounds.

On the street, Floyd has almost no chance of surviving. As close to zero as possible - 0.00001%.

If people believe Conor has no chance in boxing but Floyd has some chance on the street or in the Octagon, then they're not worth taking seriously.

hatrickpatrick · 21-06-2017 06:37PM

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

The way I see the fight going is Floyd starting out with lots of matrix esque showboating moves, almost laughing at McGregor's efforts.... but then McGregor suddenly catches Floyd with a hard left to the body hurting his ribs and totally changing the fight.....from that point on they trade blows in a very close and brutal affair with both fighters close to getting counted out at many points throughout, even in the 12th... and just before the final bell sounds a bloody and breathless Floyd whispers in McGrgeor's ear that he ain't getting no rematch.... and McGregor snaps back that that he don't want one.

Barely able to see out of one eye Conor ignores efforts to interview him and starts hollering for Dee... who we then see slowly running from the tunnel, spotlit, holding Conor Jnr...... crowd are going wild..........but she slips...... and the baby goes flying through the humid Vegas air............... but McGrgeor jumps up on the ropes and flings himself off, just managing to catch him before he lands on the press booth...... whereupon Conor Jnr says his very first words.... 'You'll do nothing!' A journalist immediately runs over and sticks a mic in McGregor's face and says 'Conor, that was some catch, Real Madrid need a new keeper, would you do it??' McGregor says: 'I hear them talking alright and yeah, I could catch anything, going at any speed.... we'll see'.

Folks don't take it all so serious... it's just a fight and we may as well enjoy the madness as none of us truly have any bloody idea what's going to happen in all fairness.

This has been my view all along (well not EXACTLY my prediction, I reckon Conor knocks out Nate Diaz with a passing punch while in the middle of running to catch Conor jr, and shouts "BEST OF THREE"... minor detail)

It'll be interesting and it'll be a bit of craic. Purists of either sport will undoubtedly despise it, which is why I'd honestly suggest that they consider skipping it altogether - if you know you won't enjoy it because you don't approve of the concept to begin with, what's the point? I'm interested in this fight to see what happens, whether Conor can rise to the challenge, but even if I wasn't, I'd watch for the same reason I'll watch Ireland in the football world cup despite being a rugby man - if nothing else, he's an Irishman competing on the world stage at the very highest level, and that's something to be celebrated in and of itself. As Conor says, "it is what it is". Few beers with the lads, bit of sport, cheering on a national hero - even if I haven't so far been nearly as much of a boxing follower as an MMA follower.

I suspect the same will be true for a lot of people when it comes around - even those who have poured scorn on this fight from the beginning and agitated against it will probably end up in some bar at 5AM with an Irish flag wrapped around themselves and shouting themselves hoarse.

bmcc10 · 21-06-2017 06:38PM

I'm talking about all the boxing people that your slating over there opinion of MMA.

wonderfullife · 21-06-2017 06:45PM

bmcc10 wrote: »

I'm talking about all the boxing people that your slating over there opinion of MMA.

I wouldn't dream of giving an opinion on Floyd without having watched his fights, that's why I spent 12 hours re-watching every single fight I could find. I watched some multiple times. Most I'd seen before, others I hadn't.

I think if people want to give a fair opinion on how Conor's boxing might translate from an octagon to a ring, at least watch his fights.

Frank Bullitt · 21-06-2017 06:46PM

wonderfullife wrote: »

You posted a sarcastic meme in response to my post about a street fight, so you obviously care enough to go fetch a meme to try look clever.

There's 3 ways many people discuss Conor fighting Floyd:

Boxing
MMA
On the street.

Irish bookies who love money have Conor at 4/1 to WIN the fight and 11/8 for it go the full 12 rounds.

I'd argue in MMA it would be 100/1 Floyd to win the fight and 500/1 for it to go the full 5 rounds.

On the street, Floyd has almost no chance of surviving. As close to zero as possible - 0.00001%.

If people believe Conor has no chance in boxing but Floyd has some chance on the street or in the Octagon, then they're not worth taking seriously.

I posted it because you involving a street fight scenario was hilarious to me, I guess you don't find your own jokes funny.

This is a boxing match, plain and simple. Talking about the what-ifs of an MMA fight or a street fight are useless.

wonderfullife · 21-06-2017 06:57PM

Gintonious wrote: »

I posted it because you involving a street fight scenario was hilarious to me, I guess you don't find your own jokes funny.

This is a boxing match, plain and simple. Talking about the what-ifs of an MMA fight or a street fight are useless.

You said yourself in the past that you credit John Kavanagh personally for your improved self-confidence and weight loss and those early days of training in SBG.

If John 100% believes in Conor to win this fight, would that not lead you to conclude Conor's chances are better than you first imagined? I imagine Owen Roddy was also down there when you first went and he 100% believes in him.

Do you not think it's possible that these guys have more evidence than us to gauge Conor's pure boxing ability and if they say they believe he will win, that's a good tip in itself?

The reason I raised the question of MMA and street-fights was because a lot of boxing purists I see on this forum and online, seem to believe that Floyd has a good chance in a street fight and a decent chance of KO'ing Conor with 4oz gloves in the Octagon.

Axwell · 21-06-2017 07:03PM

I posted earlier about keeping it in the realms of sensible discussion but you are just talking nonsense at this point. This is a boxing match plain and simple, this talk of what would happen in a street fight or if this and that is just off topic waffle. Keep it on topic and enough of the personal comments - you have your opinion others are allowed have theirs.

wonderfullife wrote: »

It doesn't sink in your head.

Repeat after me: There is nothing Floyd can do to save himself in a street fight.

He can't bite Conor, eye gouge him, head butt him, whatever is going through your mind.

By the time Floyd even considers the above he'll be on his back getting choked out.

I'm also muting you for a) your ignorance and b) my sanity.

Vargas is ignorant and arrogant about MMA because he clearly states he knows nothing about MMA in the same interview.

You're also muted.

Frank Bullitt · 21-06-2017 07:04PM

wonderfullife wrote: »

You said yourself in the past that you credit John Kavanagh personally for your improved self-confidence and weight loss and those early days of training in SBG.

If John 100% believes in Conor to win this fight, would that not lead you to conclude Conor's chances are better than you first imagined? I imagine Owen Roddy was also down there when you first went and he 100% believes in him.

Do you not think it's possible that these guys have more evidence than us to gauge Conor's pure boxing ability and if they say they believe he will win, that's a good tip in itself?

The reason I raised the question of MMA and street-fights was because a lot of boxing purists I see on this forum and online, seem to believe that Floyd has a good chance in a street fight and a decent chance of KO'ing Conor with 4oz gloves in the Octagon.

Look, I am well sure that John and his team believe in this. Them believing it doesn't really sway my opinion that this is a non-boxer going against the best boxer of all time.

I am a boxing fan before an MMA fan, have been for years. The evidence they might have on Conor is pretty much the same as the previous 49 trainers and teams that went against Mayweather. Not only that, but John is a hugely successful MMA coach and Martial Artist himself, he is not a boxing coach. Its not a poke or a stab at him, that is just fact.

Freddie Roach sang from the rafters that Manny would beat Floyd, and look what happened there. Coaches can believe and swear and maintain a belief that their fighter will always win, but that doesn't always happen.

The evidence that makes me believe that Mayweather wins this easy are the 49 pro victories throughout his career, and the calibre of fighter that he beat on the way.

Fromvert · 21-06-2017 07:14PM

You can't take anything that comes from any camp at face value.

Kavanagh/Roddy etc all have invested interests in McGregor both as a friend/training partner and financially.

And what experience do they have in boxing, whether it is competing, preparing a fighter to compete or even predicting previous boxing matches that give their opinions weight?

hatrickpatrick · 21-06-2017 07:22PM

Just released

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SO6cIlxMhco

Sofiztikated · 21-06-2017 07:27PM

Just seen that McGregor can use superman punches. .

Spam them, timer runs out, insert another coin, "Here comes a new challenger!"

kwestfan08 · 21-06-2017 07:28PM

Saw this posted on Reddit a few days ago and it perfectly sums up now I see the fight going.

People who aren't fans of Mayweather and don't typically watch his fights will tune in by the droves. They'll watch Floyd do his thing, he'll barely be hit, he'll clinch when he wants to, and he'll get out relatively unscathed.

These people will say that Floyd is boring, not a fighter, and will say things like "People pay to watch this ****?". They'll say that McGregor is the better man on principle because "at least he came to fight". That's if McGregor doesn't get Hatton'd.

It happens every time Floyd fights. He's great at attracting the casuals but they have no appreciation for his game. The outcome and response are almost always the same.

Frank Bullitt · 21-06-2017 07:32PM

kwestfan08 wrote: »

Saw this posted on Reddit a few days ago and it perfectly sums up now I see the fight going.

Nail, meet head.

walshb · 21-06-2017 07:41PM

wonderfullife wrote: »

I wouldn't dream of giving an opinion on Floyd without having watched his fights, that's why I spent 12 hours re-watching every single fight I could find. I watched some multiple times. Most I'd seen before, others I hadn't.

I think if people want to give a fair opinion on how Conor's boxing might translate from an octagon to a ring, at least watch his fights.

Kind of just hammers home that you aren't as clued in to the event as you think you are.

Nobody with an ounce of knowledge of combat sports should have to spend any time watching Floyd and/or Conor in order to realise that Conor has a ridiculously slim chance of victory under boxing rules.

MMA fans are of pretty much of the exact same view as boxing fans and casual fans in general as regards Conor's chances.. Hell, even non fans are of the view.

No need to go watching hours of tapes to form this view.

wonderfullife · 21-06-2017 07:44PM

Gintonious wrote: »

The evidence that makes me believe that Mayweather wins this easy are the 49 pro victories throughout his career, and the calibre of fighter that he beat on the way.

If you're searching for positives for Conor (and I am) then there are a few to be had - whether they make any difference is up for debate.

The first positive Conor has going into this fight is that he is unique relative to 48 of the 49 opponents Floyd faced.

The only 0-0 boxer Floyd ever faced was Roberto Apodaca in his pro debut but even then footage existed of Apodaca's amateur fights and vice versa with Floyd's amateur fights.

That makes Conor a unique opponent in that only Conor's side of the equation can study fight tape. It'll be Floyd's first opponent he has zero actual fight tape to go on.

The second positive, in my book, is Floyd's shoulder roll into a right-hand counter is far more effective on orthodox fighters and his left-hand counters are less potent.

The third positive is that multiple fighters have succeeded in engaging Floyd in the clinch and digging underhooks before separation. Conor will be extremely technical in those clinch exchanges.

The fourth positive is that Floyd has had 7 month+ gaps between fights 10 times in his career and only stopped his opponent twice after a lay-off (Victor Ortiz and Henry Bruseles). That's not a great sample size and might be meaningless statistically but it does point to an element of ring-rust.

The fifth positive is Conor disguises the straight left extremely well. One of favourite punches he ever threw was the straight left against Buchinger on the fence that just whipped through the guard from nowhere.

The sixth positive is that Conor has been preparing for this contest mentally for nearly 2 years now. For a guy that is strong on visualisation, the more time he spends on a contest the better. It's worth noting Conor has never lost a fight in his entire career where he had more than 30 days notice of the fight. The Sitenkov fight was 18 days notice, the Duffy fight was 29 days notice and Nate was obviously 10 days notice.

I think a lot of the arguments on this thread and online tend to be over the definition of "hitting Floyd". When people say "Conor won't hit Floyd" or "Conor will be hitting fresh air", I can't agree with that. If what's actually meant is Conor's shots will be rolled and he'll be hitting arms and shoulders, then I can see the merit behind that theory.

The negatives are there for all to see - Conor isn't a boxer. He has no experience. He doesn't have a consistent jab. Biggest negative is clearly Floyd Mayweather is a once-in-a-lifetime genius.

Maybe I'm too combative but it's much more fun discussing this as an actual fight than just dismissing it as a farce. I personally find it more interesting discussing what combinations or shots Conor might throw and how Floyd will look in there than just dismissing the whole affair.

everlast75 · 21-06-2017 07:46PM

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Just released

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SO6cIlxMhco

3 things after watching that video

1) fire the person in charge of subtitles
2) I really f'n hope Conor wins
3) he won't

Frank Bullitt · 21-06-2017 07:55PM

wonderfullife wrote: »

If you're searching for positives for Conor (and I am) then there are a few to be had - whether they make any difference is up for debate.

The first positive Conor has going into this fight is that he is unique relative to 48 of the 49 opponents Floyd faced.

The only 0-0 boxer Floyd ever faced was Roberto Apodaca in his pro debut but even then footage existed of Apodaca's amateur fights and vice versa with Floyd's amateur fights.

That makes Conor a unique opponent in that only Conor's side of the equation can study fight tape. It'll be Floyd's first opponent he has zero actual fight tape to go on.

The second positive, in my book, is Floyd's shoulder roll into a right-hand counter is far more effective on orthodox fighters and his left-hand counters are less potent.

The third positive is that multiple fighters have succeeded in engaging Floyd in the clinch and digging underhooks before separation. Conor will be extremely technical in those clinch exchanges.

The fourth positive is that Floyd has had 7 month+ gaps between fights 10 times in his career and only stopped his opponent twice after a lay-off (Victor Ortiz and Henry Bruseles). That's not a great sample size and might be meaningless statistically but it does point to an element of ring-rust.

The fifth positive is Conor disguises the straight left extremely well. One of favourite punches he ever threw was the straight left against Buchinger on the fence that just whipped through the guard from nowhere.

The sixth positive is that Conor has been preparing for this contest mentally for nearly 2 years now. For a guy that is strong on visualisation, the more time he spends on a contest the better. It's worth noting Conor has never lost a fight in his entire career where he had more than 30 days notice of the fight. The Sitenkov fight was 18 days notice, the Duffy fight was 29 days notice and Nate was obviously 10 days notice.

I think a lot of the arguments on this thread and online tend to be over the definition of "hitting Floyd". When people say "Conor won't hit Floyd" or "Conor will be hitting fresh air", I can't agree with that. If what's actually meant is Conor's shots will be rolled and he'll be hitting arms and shoulders, then I can see the merit behind that theory.

The negatives are there for all to see - Conor isn't a boxer. He has no experience. He doesn't have a consistent jab. Biggest negative is clearly Floyd Mayweather is a once-in-a-lifetime genius.

Maybe I'm too combative but it's much more fun discussing this as an actual fight than just dismissing it as a farce. I personally find it more interesting discussing what combinations or shots Conor might throw and how Floyd will look in there than just dismissing the whole affair.

The first "positive" confused me. How is not having any fight tapes (because they don't exist) be an advantage? What makes him unique is that he has zero pro-boxing experience, that is not a positive in the slightest.

2. The second one, Floyd is renowned for isolating a south-paws "advantage" and takes it away from them, look at what he did to Judah and Manny.

3. The clinch he might do well in, but it will be broken up before he lands too much, he also has to even get there to engage in a clinch.

4. Ring rust and Floyd don't match, he took 2 years off and came back against Juan Manuel Marquez and absolutely schooled him. It maybe takes him a round to get up and running, and that (again) is against a pro boxer. His experience in the ring regardless, against someone not used to a ring will also play up.

5. Floyd has been pro for 20+ years now, he is well seasoned, well prepared and is never more than a stones throw away from being fight ready. While it will help Conor get ready, it doesn't give him an advantage over a pro like Floyd. That is clutching at straws.

Conors jab really will need focus, he has a tendency to flare it out when he uses it, at least in MMA. If he paws at him, like Judah did, he will eat counters for years. Judah was super quick and had limited luck against Mayweather.

wonderfullife · 21-06-2017 08:21PM

Gintonious wrote: »

The first "positive" confused me. How is not having any fight tapes (because they don't exist) be an advantage? What makes him unique is that he has zero pro-boxing experience, that is not a positive in the slightest.

4. Ring rust and Floyd don't match, he took 2 years off and came back against Juan Manuel Marquez and absolutely schooled him. It maybe takes him a round to get up and running, and that (again) is against a pro boxer. His experience in the ring regardless, against someone not used to a ring will also play up.

5. Floyd has been pro for 20+ years now, he is well seasoned, well prepared and is never more than a stones throw away from being fight ready. While it will help Conor get ready, it doesn't give him an advantage over a pro like Floyd. That is clutching at straws.

Conors jab really will need focus, he has a tendency to flare it out when he uses it, at least in MMA. If he paws at him, like Judah did, he will eat counters for years. Judah was super quick and had limited luck against Mayweather.

1. Surely having tape on your opposition and them not having a tape on you, is a positive in itself? Especially if you're outmatched and need to come up with a specific gameplan to try win.

I'll give an example I know - Tony Ferguson v Lando Vannata. There was only 2 fights for Ferguson to study of Lando and they lasted a combined 7 minutes. Whereas Lando had over 2 hours of Ferguson fights on tape to study.

Lando came out unpredictable and had Tony in trouble early on.

4. I think it's interesting that Floyd very rarely stops fighters after a lay-off but many times stops fighters when he's fighting regularly.

5. It's a positive for Conor. I didn't say an advantage, just a positive. Conor does really well when he has time to prepare for opponents and less well in short notice fights. I think that's largely down to the fact he works out patterns and sequences and drills them.

In MMA Conor uses his lead hand mostly open-handed to trap his opponents hand and/or measure distance for his left. He did throw the right jab a tiny bit more against Eddie. He'll definitely need to adapt that as you cant open your hand with boxing gloves and he can't go in to this contest hoping to beat Floyd with just a left hand.

Frank Bullitt · 21-06-2017 08:35PM

wonderfullife wrote: »

1. Surely having tape on your opposition and them not having a tape on you, is a positive in itself? Especially if you're outmatched and need to come up with a specific gameplan to try win.

I'll give an example I know - Tony Ferguson v Lando Vannata. There was only 2 fights for Ferguson to study of Lando and they lasted a combined 7 minutes. Whereas Lando had over 2 hours of Ferguson fights on tape to study.

Lando came out unpredictable and had Tony in trouble early on.

4. I think it's interesting that Floyd very rarely stops fighters after a lay-off but many times stops fighters when he's fighting regularly.

5. It's a positive for Conor. I didn't say an advantage, just a positive. Conor does really well when he has time to prepare for opponents and less well in short notice fights. I think that's largely down to the fact he works out patterns and sequences and drills them.

In MMA Conor uses his lead hand mostly open-handed to trap his opponents hand and/or measure distance for his left. He did throw the right jab a tiny bit more against Eddie. He'll definitely need to adapt that as you cant open your hand with boxing gloves and he can't go in to this contest hoping to beat Floyd with just a left hand.

Yes, but not having tape because your opponent because he has never boxed before doesn't make it a positive. Its a mute point.

Conor use of the jab in MMA will have to be vastly different in boxing. He can use it as he pleases as he is usually against a poorer or inferior striker in MMA. He will be going against someone who has been doing it since he was a child.

Floyd goes into a mode where he is just cruising, his motivation isn't stopping his opponent, his motivation is winning, doesn't matter how.

cletus · 21-06-2017 09:03PM

This thread sure is something...well its a thing anyway.

Something that is fascinating is the percentages people are putting on the likely outcome of a victory for McGregor, and more specifically, how are they arriving at them. In one post, Wonder, you said that it was ridiculous to give Conor no chance, but you would accept if somebody gave him a chance of 0.01%. That is a probability of 1 in 10,000. In other words, if they fought 10,000 times, Conor wins once. That's statistically insignificant enough (for me, at least) to be on a par with Conor having no chance.

That is probably the reason why people say he has zero chance. They know 'something' might happen, but the odds are so small its not really worth considering

wonderfullife · 21-06-2017 09:07PM

Gintonious wrote: »

Yes, but not having tape because your opponent because he has never boxed before doesn't make it a positive. Its a mute point.

Disagree. I'd argue all fighters have predictable patterns that they repeat consistently over time and that this is very useful knowledge to have on an opponent - even if they are terrible.

For example, Muhammad Ali consistently returned to his 'float like a butterfly' footwork sequence in 3x dozen of his fights.

The 4-step sequence we've all seen many times - a step to his opponents inside with his lead leg, brings his feet closer together while hopping on front foot, then hops off his front foot again and swings his back leg behind and then brings the front foot back into stance.

His jab was a thing of beauty but it all came from that predictable 4-step pattern. He'd nearly always throw the jab on step 2 of the 4-step sequence and because he covered such huge distance with the sequence it became hard for opponents to time him. The jab itself was pretty crazy because he put all his weight on his lead leg and often had his back leg in the air flicking it out.

Knowing someones footwork patterns and sequences enables a team to try come up with combinations. The fact that Floyd has no tape on Conor whatsoever means he'll be doing a ton of improvisation during the fight. He'll have to figure Conor out on-the-fly in the first round or two, adapt to his distance, range, footwork, timing and adjust accordingly.

Conor, on the other hand, will have constantly drilled counters to Floyd's footwork sequences. It might make no difference overall if he can't actually hit him cleanly but he'll be far more prepared for what Floyd is going to do than Floyd will be prepared for what Conor brings.

Conor should be ready from the opening bell for Floyd's footwork patterns.

wonderfullife · 21-06-2017 09:13PM

cletus wrote: »

This thread sure is something...well its a thing anyway.

Something that is fascinating is the percentages people are putting on the likely outcome of a victory for McGregor, and more specifically, how are they arriving at them. In one post, Wonder, you said that it was ridiculous to give Conor no chance, but you would accept if somebody gave him a chance of 0.01%. That is a probability of 1 in 10,000. In other words, if they fought 10,000 times, Conor wins once. That's statistically insignificant enough (for me, at least) to be on a par with Conor having no chance.

That is probably the reason why people say he has zero chance. They know 'something' might happen, but the odds are so small its not really worth considering

I'm just being pedantic I suppose but there's a lot of hyperbole going around about how mismatched the 2 men are. I just don't see it. I think it's going to be a right scrap for at least 6 rounds. I'm (obviously) open to eating crow if Conor gets obliterated.

Conor is faster, stronger and more precise than people give him credit for. I think he'll do really well.

cletus · 21-06-2017 09:19PM

wonderfullife wrote: »

I'm just being pedantic I suppose but there's a lot of hyperbole going around about how mismatched the 2 men are. I just don't see it. I think it's going to be a right scrap for at least 6 rounds. I'm (obviously) open to eating crow if Conor gets obliterated.

Conor is faster, stronger and more precise than people give him credit for. I think he'll do really well.

I got that, but I was just pointing out that you said you'd accept a 0.01% chance, was it just not a case of not realising what that was, statistically speaking?

Fromvert · 21-06-2017 09:21PM

cletus wrote: »

This thread sure is something...well its a thing anyway.

Something that is fascinating is the percentages people are putting on the likely outcome of a victory for McGregor, and more specifically, how are they arriving at them. In one post, Wonder, you said that it was ridiculous to give Conor no chance, but you would accept if somebody gave him a chance of 0.01%. That is a probability of 1 in 10,000. In other words, if they fought 10,000 times, Conor wins once. That's statistically insignificant enough (for me, at least) to be on a par with Conor having no chance.

That is probably the reason why people say he has zero chance. They know 'something' might happen, but the odds are so small its not really worth considering

I'd be one of those people, my opinion his chance of winning is closer to 0% than it is 1% but people just say 1%, 2% etc just to avoid the what if Floyd got injured etc that will follow

Frank Bullitt · 21-06-2017 09:22PM

wonderfullife wrote: »

Disagree. I'd argue all fighters have predictable patterns that they repeat consistently over time and that this is very useful knowledge to have on an opponent - even if they are terrible.

For example, Muhammad Ali consistently returned to his 'float like a butterfly' footwork sequence in 3x dozen of his fights.

The 4-step sequence we've all seen many times - a step to his opponents inside with his lead leg, brings his feet closer together while hopping on front foot, then hops off his front foot again and swings his back leg behind and then brings the front foot back into stance.

His jab was a thing of beauty but it all came from that predictable 4-step pattern. He'd nearly always throw the jab on step 2 of the 4-step sequence and because he covered such huge distance with the sequence it became hard for opponents to time him. The jab itself was pretty crazy because he put all his weight on his lead leg and often had his back leg in the air flicking it out.

Knowing someones footwork patterns and sequences enables a team to try come up with combinations. The fact that Floyd has no tape on Conor whatsoever means he'll be doing a ton of improvisation during the fight. He'll have to figure Conor out on-the-fly in the first round or two, adapt to his distance, range, footwork, timing and adjust accordingly.

Conor, on the other hand, will have constantly drilled counters to Floyd's footwork sequences. It might make no difference overall if he can't actually hit him cleanly but he'll be far more prepared for what Floyd is going to do than Floyd will be prepared for what Conor brings.

Conor should be ready from the opening bell for Floyd's footwork patterns.

Im lost at your logic.

Of course there are plenty of tapes of Mayweather, I'm sure his opponents would have used them as well.

But to say that Mayweather is at a disadvantage because there are none of McGregor (because they don't exist) doesn't add up. It's not like they exist and they are super secret, they just don't exist, unless he looks as the sparring with Van Heerden.

He could look at how he throws his punches in MMA, in which case he will see that he drags his hands back a lot and lets his chin rise up.

All of this still puts McGregor on the back foot when they enter the ring, still.

wonderfullife · 21-06-2017 09:31PM

Gintonious wrote: »

Im lost at your logic.

Of course there are plenty of tapes of Mayweather, I'm sure his opponents would have used them as well.

But to say that Mayweather is at a disadvantage because there are none of McGregor (because they don't exist) doesn't add up. It's not like they exist and they are super secret, they just don't exist, unless he looks as the sparring with Van Heerden.

He could look at how he throws his punches in MMA, in which case he will see that he drags his hands back a lot and lets his chin rise up.

All of this still puts McGregor on the back foot when they enter the ring, still.

The logic is very simple.

If you refuse to see how it's a positive for one camp to have lots of tape on the fighter from the other camp, then that's your right. But most fair minded people will agree they'd rather have lots of tape on their opponent to study rather than none at all.

ESPECIALLY relevant if the opponent is terrible. I've heard many pro boxers say it takes them a bit longer to adjust to sparring complete novices who move in weird patterns.

Me saying it's an advantage for Conor doesn't mean he will actually achieve anything using the advantage.

Frank Bullitt · 21-06-2017 09:39PM

wonderfullife wrote: »

The logic is very simple.

If you refuse to see how it's a positive for one camp to have lots of tape on the fighter from the other camp, then that's your right. But most fair minded people will agree they'd rather have lots of tape on their opponent to study rather than none at all.

ESPECIALLY relevant if the opponent is terrible. I've heard many pro boxers say it takes them a bit longer to adjust to sparring complete novices who move in weird patterns.

Me saying it's an advantage for Conor doesn't mean he will actually achieve anything using the advantage.

The logic I am seeing is that you are saying that McGregor has an advantage over Mayweather cause he can just youtube some of his fights and use them to his advantage. But Mayweather has no such tapes of McGregor so will have to adjust etc to him.

This is despite the fact that there are no tapes due to him never boxing before, he hasn't fought in a ring, and his sheer lack of experience in the ring isn't there to study.

There is nothing for Mayweather to see, because it hasn't happened, never has.

When something like this doesn't exist how is it an advantage to the other? If anything it just points to McGregor not having ring experience against anyone, which automatically gives an advantage to Mayweather.

Am I making sense?

Official Conor McGregor thread (part 3) *Updated Warning in 1st Post Re:Boxing match

Comments