I saw the Vera Couture fight a while ago and Couture won by unanimous decision but I think that Vera should have won the fight because Vera knocked out Couture twice with kicks how gay.

Pacman destroyed Cotto in the 10th round Pacman rules!!!

I didnt see the fight between Vera and Couture but I heard Vera was giving it to Couture but still lost. Nyone saw the fight? How did you score it?

Knocking someone OUT once is brutal enough but he actually knocked him OUT twice and still lost?

Yeah, Vera shouldve won that fight. He knocked Couture down in the 2nd round and put him down and got on top of him yet two of the three judges still gave that round to Couture which was absolutely ridiculous. I thought Vera absolutely won round 2 and did enough damage to Couture in the 3rd to seal the win 2 rounds to 1. And the one round that Couture PROBABLY won which was round 1 wasnt even that clear. All he did was hold on to Vera and manage to take him down briefly before Vera got back again and they hold some more till the end of the round.

No man can beat the pacman. He's gonna retire undefeated.

lol did you even bother to look up his win/loss record?

I know he lost to the Thai guy and maybe a few others in his early carrier since I didn't follow his early fights much.

Point is, I said: "...He's gonna retire undefeated."

Do you know what that means? can you read English? lol

I'll give you a hint, it DOESN'T mean he's going to retire with a zero-loss record.

I know he lost to the Thai guy and maybe a few others in his early carrier since I didn't follow his early fights much.

Point is, I said: "...He's gonna retire undefeated."

Do you know what that means? can you read English? lol

I'll give you a hint, it DOESN'T mean he's going to retire with a zero-loss record.

I know he has lost before. I said so in my last post

When talking about a TITLE holder and saying "He retired undefeated" it has ALWAYS meant a person who won the belt and defeated all challengers and retired while still holding the belt. It doesn't mean a person never losing,ever-that would be impossible. Everyone, no matter how great has at least and likely more than one loss in there early carrier. this phrase, in reference to a champion has always meant no losses on title defense.

For those who still don't get it, it means " retired Undefeated as the XXX Champion of YYYY"

Now, if a boxer has a belt, then losses it. then regains his belt and keeps it for many challengers then retires with the title. I don't know if this can be still said to be "retiring undefeated". I'd have to ask around for the answer.

Doesn't Pacquiao have more than two belts? Did he ever loss in defence of a belt? did he regain the belt? I thought all his losses were before his title shots.

If Pacquiao has successfully defended all challengers for at least on of his titles, then he still has a shot of "Retiring undefeated".

I heard 105 has on regular TV. Dana knew it would be weak.

He knew he couldnt compete with Pacquiao vs Cotto so he brought UFC 105 to England and show it for free. Rumor has it Pacquiao vs Cotto made 1.5 - 2 million ppv, so much for "boxing is dead".

Besides that, boxing is dead.

At least in boxing hugging is not allowed therefore it is not a gay sport.

UFC 105 is the gayest of them all because all what Couture did is just he hugged and hugged Vera all throughout the fight whcih is very gay.

MMA is less dangerous than boxing, and there are numerous reasons why. Firstly, it’s less dependent on strikes to the head. Concussions are caused by repeated head trauma. For a fight to finish inside the distance in boxing, you have to knock your opponent out. In MMA, there are other ways to finish – numerous submission holds can be applied. Even taking aside the actual finish, in boxing you either strike to the head (the weapon of choice for probably over 80% of the time) or strike to the body. In MMA, apart from this, you can strike to the legs or attempt to take an opponent down. Once on the ground, there are various grappling and submission-related ways to further your aims that can be used as well as simply striking. The simple fact that there’s so much more that a fighter can do pulls the sport away from a matter of hitting the other guy over and over again in the head.

That broadcast makes reference to Douglas Dedge, who died as a result of injuries sustained in an MMA match. I would like to make clear that I’m not making light of this incident, but this was an individual who had been refused permission to fight by the state athletic commissions in the US, and flew to the Ukraine of his own accord to fight on a dodgy little show without basic medical provisions in place. I can assure you that such shows do not happen in this country, and that Dedge’s death (however tragic) is not even remotely related to anything you might see at Cage Rage or CageWarriors or any local promotion. Frank Warren saying “There will be a fatality one day” is particularly ironic, meanwhile. MMA has had one death since the beginnings of its present form in 1993. Boxing has about three or four per year.

12oz boxing gloves vs 5oz mma gloves.. Now, what is more gay again? lol


taking elbows to the head and knees to the nose and so on...

UFC is cool when they're exchanging blows, but jus gets downright gay when they begin to grapple

and quite famously, the WBC Flyweight title to Erik Morales. Granted, Manny was a different fighter back then. neither in your skewed understanding or the general understanding of "retiring undefeated" will Mannny retire undefeated.

I like grappling better than sloppy striking. You guys are just part of the ignorant masses. You don't know an omoplata from an arm triangle or the subtleties of half-guard.

At least in boxing hugging is not allowed therefore it is not a gay sport.