Enter Blue Guy Posted June 15, 2007 Author Report Share Posted June 15, 2007 (edited) Mixed martial arts icon Royce Gracie, best known as the slender gi-wearing Brazilian who twisted oversized competitors into knots during the early days of the Ultimate Fighting Championship, tested positive for traces of Nandrolone, a commonly used anabolic steroid, following his decision win over Kazushi Sakuraba, June 2 in Los Angeles, the California State Athletic Commission revealed Thursday. Gracie (14-3-3) has been suspended from June 2, 2007 through May 30, 2008, and is fined $2,500, the maximum penalty by the CSAC. The 40-year-old member of the legendary fighting family has until July 13 to appeal the suspension to the CSAC. Calls to Gracie's representatives were not immediately returned. -Sherdog.com Edited June 15, 2007 by Enter Blue Guy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ACCBiggz Posted June 18, 2007 Report Share Posted June 18, 2007 Michael Bisping vs. Ken Shamrock at UFC 75 -The Fight Network. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maxx Posted June 18, 2007 Report Share Posted June 18, 2007 So Shamrock really likes getting paid to embarass himself hmm? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gabriel Posted June 18, 2007 Report Share Posted June 18, 2007 So Shamrock really likes getting paid to embarass himself hmm? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maxx Posted June 19, 2007 Report Share Posted June 19, 2007 Since 2000, Shamrock is 3-7 and hasn't won a fight since 2004. His last 4 fights, all loses ended in the first round. He's washed up and Bisping is going to dominate him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ACCBiggz Posted June 19, 2007 Report Share Posted June 19, 2007 He still has talent... in those losses since 2000: Tito Ortiz (x3) Kazushi Sakuraba Rich Franklin Don Frye Kazuyuki Fujita Those losses are against some of the best fighters in the world, not scrubs. It's not like he is a horrible fighter. Bisping has proved nothing to me. I'm sorry, Josh Haynes and Elvis Sinosic are not on Shamrock levels either. As for a prediction. I'm a bit miffed as to what to go with. No doubt Bisping has been improving, but Sinosic had him hurt a bit in the fight. I think an early prediciton I may stick with is Shamrock by a leg lock. I don't think Bisping is well enough equipped to handle his leg locks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maxx Posted June 19, 2007 Report Share Posted June 19, 2007 He also got destroyed in most of those fights, hasn't been in a fight that's gone more than one round since 2004. Lets not forget Rich Franklin is a great fighter now, but when he fought Shamrock he was supposed to get destroyed, we could be saying the same thing about Bisping down the line. Shamrock doesn't have the stuff anymore. He's not fast enough to handle Bisping, and if Bisping takes him to the ground, its over, cause Shamrock sucked at defending himself in his prime, its only going to be worse now. I'd say Bisping by TKO in the first. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ACCBiggz Posted June 19, 2007 Report Share Posted June 19, 2007 He also got destroyed in most of those fights, hasn't been in a fight that's gone more than one round since 2004. Lets not forget Rich Franklin is a great fighter now, but when he fought Shamrock he was supposed to get destroyed, we could be saying the same thing about Bisping down the line. Shamrock doesn't have the stuff anymore. He's not fast enough to handle Bisping, and if Bisping takes him to the ground, its over, cause Shamrock sucked at defending himself in his prime, its only going to be worse now. I'd say Bisping by TKO in the first. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liam Posted June 19, 2007 Report Share Posted June 19, 2007 Maybe I'm missing something in what you said, Biggz, but aside from the one shot that had Bisping reeling (and probably, against a better fighter, would have been a lead in to a finish), Bisping manhandled Sinosic for practically the whole fight. Not saying that makes him great, but it was pretty decisive outside that one shot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gabriel Posted June 19, 2007 Report Share Posted June 19, 2007 In the Bisping/Sinosec fight, Elvis was completely calm, cool and collected. He ate some blows and that busted him open, but by no means was Michael Bisping completely dominating the fight. Elvis got a lot closer to winning that fight than he should have against a guy that Dana White and the UFC believe is ready for a fight with Shamrock. Which is to take nothing away from Elvis Sinosec. He's an exciting guy to watch and I like him a lot, but I saw that as a test for Bisping, which he just happened to pass, but definately not with flying colors. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ACCBiggz Posted June 19, 2007 Report Share Posted June 19, 2007 Like I said, Sinosic had him hurt "a bit" in the fight. I didn't say Sinosic was dominating. And if Shamrock or someone has him hurt like that it will be over with. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liam Posted June 19, 2007 Report Share Posted June 19, 2007 Oh yeah, I get that, Biggz, but I was just saying that one mistake at this point in time isn't the end of the world for Bisping, as he definitely isn't the finished article, but on the whole, you could call his victory pretty comprehensive. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ACCBiggz Posted June 19, 2007 Report Share Posted June 19, 2007 I never said it was. I simply said he has not proved anything to me. His wrestling isn't that great, it's capable however, he's getting better at striking, and so forth. Sinosic was a test for him, the same test they gave Tito and Forrest previously. No one thinks of Sinosic as an excellent fighter, many had Bisping beating him. Shamrock isn't Sinosic. This will be a decent test for Bisping that he is capable of winning, but I think he'll get caught in a leg lock and tap out. Personally, I fell that if the Bisping/Hamill match went down as origanall planned Hammill would have won that by LnP. Hamill could control Bisping easily. I could be wrong about Bisping, but I don't think he is anything special. Right now at 205 there is a ton of talent ahead of him and I don't really ever see him becoming a title contender. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maxx Posted June 20, 2007 Report Share Posted June 20, 2007 Apparently its still Hamill Vs Bisping at 75. Should be a much better fight. Biggz, I don't buy the excuse that Shamrock only lost because he was fighting these great fighters. He's supposed to be one himself is he not? More often than not a great fighter vs a great fighter doesn't end in the first round, and thats exactly how Shamrock's last 4 fights ended. 4 straight losses, all in the first round, that doesn't sound like a great fighter to me, not anymore at least. Plus look at the records of the guys he's beaten since 2000. Not impressive. His last 3 wins are against Kimo Leopoldo in 2004, who's currently 9-7-1, Sam Adkins in 2001 who's an astounding 7-18-2 and Alexander Otsuka in 2000, who's rocking a solid 4-12 record. You're saying Bisping has proved nothing to you, tell me exactly what has Ken Shamrock proved to you in the last 7 years? Go even further back, since 1996 the best fighter he's beaten based on record is Takahanshi, who's 28-21 and that was in january of 1996. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gabriel Posted June 20, 2007 Report Share Posted June 20, 2007 Seriously... most "great fighter" vs "great fighter" match ups end with a judge's decision in underwhelming fashion. Shamrock got owned by those fighters... so what? It didn't bore the shit out of the people...*cough* Franklin/Okami *cough* Rampage/Chuck didn't even last. In fact, other than Couture/Sylvia, I can't remember a big fight that went the distance that I didn't feel cheated by. Even then, Sylvia did dick shit and totally got his ass handed to him for 25 minutes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maxx Posted June 20, 2007 Report Share Posted June 20, 2007 Who cares if they're boring, thats not the point. I love watching Shamrock get his ass kicked its very enjoyable. Point being if he's as good as people claim, he shouldn't be getting destroyed in one round. Yeah it happens, it just happened to Chuck, but thats one time. With Shamrock its a trend. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gabriel Posted June 20, 2007 Report Share Posted June 20, 2007 The point is, that unless it's a 15 or 25 minute snore-fest, the big fights usually only last one or two rounds. That's the way of the sport. Was Shamrock dominated? Yes. Does that mean he's not capable? Not at all. It just means that he keeps finding himself in positions against better opponents. Who's to say that Chuck Liddell doesn't go on a five fight KO'd in one or two rounds streak? It's the way the sport is designed. The fact that Shamrock was dominated by better talents means that he was beaten by better men. Not that he isn't a good fighter himself. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maxx Posted June 20, 2007 Report Share Posted June 20, 2007 But he's not a good fighter anymore. The majorty of his wins came before he left for wrestling, back around the time of single digit UFC cards, a completely different era where he was fighting guys who were no where near his level besides Gracie and Severn. He's never beaten Grace and he's 1-1 against Severn. I'm asking someone to tell me what he's done lately and everyone just keeps saying he's a great fighter. Since he came back in 2000 he's 3-7 and of those 3 wins, only one guy has a records over .500 The sport has changed and its passed Shamrock by. 3-7 in the much more talented UFC era is not the record of a great fighter, not to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ACCBiggz Posted June 20, 2007 Report Share Posted June 20, 2007 Shamrock has evolved more than any fighter. And people hanging off of Bisping's nuts while bashing Ken is just funny because while Bisping has won, he has done it against poor competition. He did not even look that great against Eric Schaffer. I never said Ken was an elite fighter now, but you make his losses seem like he has been getting beat by poor competition, including saying Rich was brought in to lose to him... which... is just hilarious because he was not... not at all.. :lmao: Shamrock has been fighting top of the line fighters with Saku, Fujita, Tito, etc. Regardless of how he has looked against Tito the past two times. Ken has altered his style from when he first dominated due to injuries, he is more of a stand up fighter now, but still has the no how of the ground, he just doesn't use it as much because of the wear and tear on his knees. Hopefully the fight goes down, I'll stick by it being a good test for Bisping and I think Ken can win by a leg lock some point during the fight. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maxx Posted June 20, 2007 Report Share Posted June 20, 2007 He hasn't shown anything lately because his last 4 fights were over in a combined time of less than 10 minutes. Where are you pulling all of this out of Biggz, because there's no evidence to back up what you're saying, but there's tons to contradict it. So he's evolved? Is he winning? No he's getting wrecked. Not just getting beaten, he's getting wrecked. That doesn't scream evolution to me. Ken Shamrock was good, he isn't now. And don't tell me Franklin was supposed to wipe the floor with Shamrock, it was just like it is with Bisping now, people thought Franklin could certainly hold his own, but figured Shamrock would surely win it. I bet even you predicted it that way. If Shamrock wasn't a name from UFC's past, they wouldn't be returning his phone calls based on the record he's had since 2000. He was a decent fighter before that, he's just an average one now. This is guy who's biggest wins were against Bas Rutten in 1994 and 1995, Masakatsu Funaki in 1995 and Dan Severn in 1995, who he lost to again the next year. Other than that its scrubs besides Manabu Yamada. If you're going to defend shamrock's loses cause of the caliber of his opponents, then I'll be degrading his wins for the same reason. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.