Official Conor McGregor thread (part 2). **Read warning in 1st post**

jimmii wrote: »

Diaz is 10/11 you must be backing him at that price then surely? Thats like getting 2/1 on a coin flip!

Didn't you read what I said??

I Don't Gamble

jimmii wrote: »

Lol fair enough thats more like giving up free money than gambling.

I have no interest..I don't know what 11/10 means and I don't care either

The same as I have no interest in discussiong gambling on an MMA forum...there's a gambling forum for that I believe

Haven't you got anything to say about the actual fight itself?

pone2012 wrote: »

I have no interest..I don't know what 11/10 means and I don't care either

The same as I have no interest in discussiong gambling on an MMA forum...there's a gambling forum for that I believe

Haven't you got anything to say about the actual fight itself?

I was just curious apologies for taking the discussion in that direction! It basically means if you were that way inclined then you would be very happy!

I would agree Diaz sub would seem the most likely outcome but not overwhelmingly so you wouldn't think it would be made so easily available to him next time. You would expect a much smarter fight from McGregor next time if he is able to keep Diaz from taking him down it will be interesting to see how well Diaz can go on taking the hits it didn't seem to be having much effect in the short time they had in the first fight but after 3 rounds surely it will start to have a real effect on him! After all this hype and teasing it out it better be able to live up to it!

pone2012 wrote: »

I just can't see him beating Diaz on any level

On their feet he cannot hurt or phase Diaz... And Diaz rocked him with a jab and a cross...says it all really

On thr ground... Well Conor doesn't stand a chance there

Unless he stays back and just picks shots the whole fight...but even then he missed so many the last time...his accuracy wasn't that great

So..the evidence suggests it's a no go

And I don't gamble tbh...maybe a game of poker here and there..so that's not really relevant to me

They were on the ground the end of the 1st round, McGregor got on top and was in control.......a McGregor not blowing out of his ar** could take Diaz, how long could he have taken that first round punishment? if it continued .......you'd swear Diaz was some super fighter reading some on here, he hasn't and probably will never hold a belt.......everyone in the game is beatable, McGregor has shown he is and Diaz has certainly shown he is with 10 losses....to say there is only ever one outcome from this fight is nonsense at best (if agendas are to be ignored)

Depp wrote: »

My opinion is if conor manages the jump up to 170 better and gets the cardio side of things right he can use his obvious speed advantage to stay on the outside and pick diaz apart and break him down with shots to the body and not use all his energy trying to get the walk off ko he can get the decision definitely and possibly a finish in the later rounds, in the first round conor connected at will and diaz couldnt touch him till he was already knackered, Conor comes correct and takes diaz seriously he wins 10 times out of 10

sonofenoch wrote: »

They were on the ground the end of the 1st round, McGregor got on top and was in control.......a McGregor not blowing out of his ar** could take Diaz, how long could he have taken that first round punishment? if it continued .......you'd swear Diaz was some super fighter reading some on here, he hasn't and probably will never hold a belt.......everyone in the game is beatable, McGregor has shown he is and Diaz has certainly shown he is with 10 losses....to say there is only ever one outcome from this fight is nonsense at best (if agendas are to be ignored)

Just as well that Diaz was in tip top fighting condition and sharpness and doesnt have any room for improvement from the last fight

pone2012 is a Mod in waiting

newbbieb wrote: »

Its a common theme around here for people to look at his record and dismiss him,and i really am not a big fan or anything but his record doesn't tell the whole story of his career.His record is arguably better than Conors when you consider the calibre of opponents he faced.

This is mma not boxing unblemished records do not exist for everyone else not called Jon Jones.Fights aren't rigged and the competition is stiff,some of the greatest of all time have double digits losses.

GSP lost to matt sera. Nuff said

StringerBell wrote: »

Why was I even quoted in that? I didn't say Nate Always wins.

I would like to know what someones evidence is to hold the belief that Conor is the superior fighter, going off that first fight. The only evidence we have is that Conor threw everything he had, Nate was never in trouble and finished him with ease. To me that is evidence of him being the superior fighter from what we have seen.

I didnt say evidence says Nate always wins
I didnt say Nate was a sure thing
I didnt mention sure things at all
I didnt discuss the rematch at all
I didnt mention any other fights
I didnt mention bookies

I've tried to figure it out but I simply have no idea why you included me in the post. You didnt actually address the post you quoted at all either.....

I dunno.

Apologies, I misread your post as "no evidence of anything else happening", in reference to the rematch.
Nate was the superior guy absolutely, no arguement there

Seen McGrgors are in talks for their own reality show


http://www.breakingnews.ie/showbiz/conor-mcgregors-sister-reveals-were-in-talks-for-our-own-reality-show-736506.html

dave1982 wrote: »

Seen McGrgors are in talks for their own reality show


http://www.breakingnews.ie/showbiz/conor-mcgregors-sister-reveals-were-in-talks-for-our-own-reality-show-736506.html

Listening to that awful accent, ...no thanks.

heres a bit of it after surfacing anyway!

Stuxnet wrote: »

Listening to that awful accent, ...no thanks.

What the Irish one? well it's not Stockton in Californ-i-a I'll you that......this one post confirmed my long held suspicion alot of Anti-McGregorites hail from outside the Pale

Where in the hell is the rest of this ESPN interview? They've been showing women's baseball for the past 4 hours.

Unless there's some huge revelation in the remaining parts, they're really tearing the arse out of it.