Setting Themselves Up to Lose???

Underground
1

After watching countless years of MMA and combat sports in general I am inclined to believe that every MMA fighter will lose no matter who it is - and in embarrassing fashion (i.e. Royce-Hughes, Silva-CroCop, etc.). Why, do you ask? Well, I believe that karma (or some higher power) does not like the fact that fighters aim to brutally injure fellow human beings - so she collects her debt eventually, in a terrifying way. Take Mirko CroCop for example: he's always humiliated opponents by KOing them with his devastating high kick. But as we seen, he was KOed in a similar but even far more brutal manner. Coincidence? Perhaps. But I don't think it is.

Let's look into it further, shall we? What about when Wanderlei used to stomp opponents in a maniacal course of destruction? You see, I feel that this has now caught up to him - both CroCop and Henderson destroyed him and left him crushed as he laid there defeated both physically and psychologically... like he made his opponents feel. What about Royce? And Sakuraba? On top of the world at one time? No more. Destroyed in the ring and made to feel helpless and inadequate. So in short, my UG brethren, is this sport not safe? Not safe in that... well... it's wrong to do, as a fighter? And perhaps that's why every fighter "gets his desserts", as Fedor once eloquently put it? You be the judge and jury, folks.

BTW, I know that some of you may bring up fighters that have NOT faced crushing defeats in their career. Like for instance, when I brought this subject up to a buddy of mine he was like, "Nonsense, look at Rickson - no one's beat him up." True. True indeed. HOWEVER, much like the movie Final Destination (where characters eventually met their morbid fate), did karma decide to collect her inevitable debt in the form of his son? I don't know. I just don't know. And now I'm starting to wonder if as a spectator, am I responsible for fighters' misfortune in some way... much like a meat eater is responsible for the slaughtering of animals. I apologize if this whole notion is absurd or if I've offended any fighter. I'm just speculating here... taking a deeper look into things.

2

You sir, are a retard.

3

You sir, are a retard.

4

You sir, are a retard.

5

"Much like a meat eater is responsible for the slaughtering of animals"

Your Goddamn right we are!

Now I'm starting to wonder if not eating meat makes you fucking stupid.

Thanks for your apology in advance btw, and yes your notion is very absurd.

I almost forgot

You sir, are a retard

6

Retarded. Did you see how Rocky Marciano brutalized Joe Louis and Jersey Joe Walcott? "Karma" never got back at him.

7

Mmmmm, bacon.

8

"Karma" never got back at him."

Well actually I would guess he isnt the best example seeing as how he died young in a plane crash.

9

This is the STUPIDEST thing I've EVER read, and that says alot . Everyone in EVERY sport eventually loses, often to someone newer, better, or younger. It just so happens that in MMA EVERYONE is trying to WRECK each other so when you lose you often lose BIG.

Bringing up Rickson's son was REALLY dumb. It's not even like Rickson brutally WRECKED alot of people, he tapped most of them which is pretty humane.

10

i think even the best will lose eventually, theres always a luck factor and anyone can catch bad luck

11

FRAT

12

"For every animal you don't eat, I'll eat three!"

13

"You sir, are a retard."

I will watch your career closely to see how you end up. Hopefully you'll be able to prove me wrong as you seem like a really respectful individual.

"Bringing up Rickson's son was REALLY dumb. It's not even like Rickson brutally WRECKED alot of people, he tapped most of them which is pretty humane."

Humane? He punched people in the head and then submitted them in front of their peers. Don't get me wrong, I love the sport, but I just have to wonder if the reason that fighters meet such a violent or morbid end is really because of karmic repercussions.

"Well actually I would guess he isnt the best example seeing as how he died young in a plane crash."

lol That was the first thing I thought of as soon as I read that.

"I almost forgot

You sir, are a retard"

That was very witty and can't help but feel like I was owned. writes that one down

"i think even the best will lose eventually, theres always a luck factor and anyone can catch bad luck"

I couldn't have agreed more with you at one time. However, I'm not so sure there's really such a thing as luck. I think there's a higher power managing what happens to who. Again, I can be wrong. Afterall, I'm only human and don't have the answers. But in my defense, evidence seems to be pointing toward my theory.

"Kostakio, I think you may be over analysing it too much. I think that it's really just a case of MMA having so many weapons that you have to defend against that you eventually may get caught."

Again, I believed this also at one time, but like I said, now I'm not so sure because as of late, I've found there to be something wrong with this logic. Why are there no examples of fighters quitting before they get viciously brutalized - inside or out of the ring?

14

This is for all of you fighters that think you're immune to karma (blue namers please):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XYd6mCAcQw8

15

So all the years of watching MMA turned you into a lil girl....hmmmm pretty scary

Buddhists are funny btw...

How can you possibly relate karma to a competitive sport? How is beating your opponent in someway deserving of a 'karma attack'?

Granted when you win all the time, everyone wants to see you lose, not because they hate you or envy you, but for the mere fact of changing things up.

It happens to whoever is on the winning streak, and especially an undefeated one.

However I do believe in reaping what you sow...

If you purposely injure your opponent, then you will get yours, it's only a matter of time...

...

The Karma people always take it way too far, yes it's true if you do bad things, bad things will follow, and the same with good things. But applying Karma to competition is ridiculous

Interesting thoughts either way

16

How about this: The retarded guy is essentially correct about the nature of karma for those who brutalize others during matches - (as opposed to brutalizing if necessary on the street as an act of self defense when attacked = no bad karma).

But so what?

People learn from all of this, retard!

And then eventually they move on to better things. BUT ONLY AFTER THEY'VE LEARNED a whole bunch of things about fighting, preparation, hard work, sacrifice, respect for your opponent's abilities, character and sportsmanship, courage, etc. - as well as perhaps having had an opportunity to feed their families in the process from the money they earned.

Don't be pussy about the learning process.

That's one way to get retarded.

17

"But in my defense, evidence seems to be pointing toward my theory"

It's not a theory dude. Theories involve first a hypothesis, then experimentation, then a conclusion, and most importantly, a theory exists only when no other experimentation, ever, has yielded evidence to the contrary.

What you have offered is superstition, or spurious logic, or a combination of the two.

Hmmmm fighters lose eventually, that must mean there is some mystical force that keeps track of their fighting deeds and decides when they get their, "just desserts".

Or, fighters lose b/c, well, they fight, and someone has to lose....

18

"If you purposely injure your opponent, then you will get yours, it's only a matter of time..."

So you agree then!

And to all of those that are callin' me a retard... I'd make you bitches my monkey, you vaginal discharges... wait, then karma will punish me... I take that back. Doh!