Ian Garry

Great effort from Ian but he loses 3-2 in my opinion.

He got really close to stopping him.

First guy to go the distance with him. Great effort. Respect.

Really thought he was gonna choke him there.

Great fight by Ian and I'd say he'll win a rematch in a year when Shavkat has the title.

His takedown defense was impressive. He always seems to have a very good plan for his fights. He took on the best there, a potential future p4p no.1.

I thought it was pretty clear who won each round and the judges all went that way too. 1,2 and 4 for Shavkat, 3 and 5 to Garry.

extremely solid performance from Garry, he definitely lost fair and square but I think he surprised a lot of people of how well he performed against an elite fighter, he was very close to getting the submission which would of been insane. He is still very young and this could be a very good lesson and great experience, I think he probably gained respect if anything

result was fair. Garry did well, but needed more urgency and action during stand-up. Too many lulls. Raknonov was there for the taking

They should do him and Leon Edwards next

He did very well. A close 3-2 fight.

He was in a position to finish, but his RNC technique was not there. Just holding with one arm and the second arm not doing anything. Needed to get his left hand behind the head, or when he couldn't, switch to a short choke behind the back. The finish was there.

I don't know if you seen any of his pressers but he was finally allowed to be himself again. He showed nothing but respect before and after the fight. If you look at his press conferences he came across as a good guy. Before he made the UFC he was always like that. He came across as a naturally respectful man.

I've said all along that this awful stuff he was saying was not him. I always believed that his partner was behind it. It always looked like bad acting to me.

To go in there on short notice and put on a performance like that was incredible.

They'll definitely meet again and it'll be for the belt.

I'd guess his next fight will be Leon Edwards.

He definitely wasn't fighting with a torn MCL. It may have been a light sprain but no worse than that. One kick to any part of the leg and he would be on the floor if he tried to fight on a torn MCL.

A sprain is a torn MCL though. There are degrees to how much a ligament is torn.

You are incorrect, on both points.

A sprain is simply the name for a ligament injury, as opposed to a muscle/tendon injury. A sprained ligament is literally another name for a torn ligament. Neither gives any indication of the severity.

Example below below from the Cleveland Clinic, one of the worlds leading centres. Showing the the range of grades of sprain/tears.

If you say a person has a torn MCL you are describing a very serious injury.

Nope. A torn MCL can be very minor (grade 1), on the other hand a grade 3 sprain is as bad as any tear can be - literally all fibres 100% fully torn aka ruptured.

I've torn both MCLs, separately. One lead to surgery to repair my meniscus, and the other time I didn't notice and ran a 5km race the next day - certainly wasn't a "very serious injury".

People tend to informally use sprain for mild injury, which is not medically accurate. And then leads to them confusing torn ligament with fully ruptures. Whenever a fighter fight through a knee injury, the media makes out their knee was blown, even if it was a minor grade 1.

Shavkat obviously didn't have a ruptured MCL. But if it was a mild knee injury, as in a mild "sprain". The MRI would literally report it as a Grade 1 MCL tear. Which DC likely got wind of.

DC didn't say it was severe, you assumed that was implied. Thinking (in ignorance) as "all tears are serious". You're proving my point above.

Regardless, I was responding to your post not to DC. Sprains are ligament tears, that is simply the mechanism of injury in ligaments . The grade is only indicator of severity. Neither of those links disproves anything I've said, they are individual injuries.

Here's another example where Israel fought with a knee injury, KO'd Pereira and took no time off. It's described as a grade 1 tear. Do you think that this was a "very serious injury" because it was called a tear?

https://www.espn.com.au/mma/story/_/id/36303736/israel-adesanya-says-won-ufc-title-fighting-torn-mcl

Do you think my grade 1 LCL tear and and grade 1 ITB tear was a serious injury? Must have been if it was a tear right?

Instead of articles referring to random injuries. Any number of websites will explain it for you, and highlight that you are wrong to assume.

https://www.physio-pedia.com/Ligament_Sprain

A sprain can range from mild (tearing of just a few fibres) to severe (complete rupture of the ligament, leading to joint instability).

The severity of a sprain is graded according to how badly the ligament has been damaged and whether or not the joint has been made unstable:

Grade I - structural damage only on microscopic level, with slight local tenderness and without joint instability.

Grade II - partial tear (rupture) of the ligament, visible swelling and noticeable tenderness, but without joint instability (or with mild instability).

Grade III - a severe sprain: complete rupture of the ligament with significant swelling and with instability of the joint.

Just because people tend to use sprain for mild tears, that doesn't you can assume that's always the implication. As this example literally proves.

Shavkat probably had a mild injury, a grade 1 like Adesanya. It's correct to call it a sprain, it's also correct to call it a tear. If he had a scan to diagnosis, that is more likely yo use the tear nomenclature.

The media has no idea how severe any injury is - they’re not medical professionals as you said. They just repeat what they’re told.

Besides I’m talking about what you said, not the media.

You said a sprain isn’t a torn ligament. That’s incorrect.

You said Shavkat couldn’t have had a torn ligament - again incorrect.

You assumed MCL tear meant debilitating, it doesn’t (thankfully).

A torn MCL is their description of a very serious injury.

Except for the times it doesn’t mean that… Like, for example, Shavkats injury. This Is literally a case when a non serious injury was describe as a tear in the media. And you’re insisting it can’t mean that in the media. LMFAO

Simple question. Israel’s injury above reported above in mainstream media as a tear?? Was it a serious injury, or not serious?