UFC 115
UFC 115 is in the bag and I would have to give the show a solid thumbs up. More of the fighters were engaged in action with fewer periods of simply laying on the opponent (though there was some of that in the Rothwell vs Yvel fight.
Danzig got jobbed. Incredibly poor ref stoppage. Danzig did allow himself to get into that situation, but it still did not reflect a just ending to the fight.
MacDonald vs Condit provided an interesting dilemma. If the ref was to allow the fight to continue to the end then MacDonald likely takes it on the scorecards. Stopping the fight at that point (seconds left in the 3rd) awarded a TKO to Condit. Here we have a problem with scoring in MMA. With only 3 rounds and an unlikelihood of awarding a 10-8 round, squeeking out a round awards as many points as dominating a round. If the fight had been stopped in the 2nd at the same point I doubt nearly so many in the audience would have complained. How do you score these things? While a fight can turn on a dime, projecting the momentum of the fight as it was happening in the 3rd, does anyone think MacDonald would have survived a 4th round? Controversial stoppage, but I believe it was a good one. The right person won.
Rothwell vs Yvel has a great first round and some moments in the second. Both of these individuals need to step up their conditioning though. This was almost as bad as watching TUF heavyweight season. Rogan called it correctly, the 3rd round had bowling shoe tendencies. How Yvel has not upped his ground game at this point in his career is mind boggling. It continues to cost him fights that he might otherwise win. It cost him the fight against Barnett and it cost him this one. He seemingly can be taken down by simply blowing hard on him.
Kampmann vs Thiago demonstrated total domination by Kampmann. How he lost to Daley is beyond me.
Cro Cop vs Barry was interesting and entertaining. Cro Cop in his last few fights seemed to have his will broken fairly easily. If the guy didn't run away or collapse under a kick then Cro Cop would allow himself to be pushed back and mauled. In the first round of this fight he went down twice and yet battled back. By the 2nd he was primarily coming forward and in the 3rd he totally took over as Barry was spent. He showed much more versatility in his offense. I still do not think he is a contender, but he saved his job and will certainly get another fight. Barry really needs to work on his conditioning. It is getting embarrassing to hear about how hard someone's camp was and then they gas out at 7 minutes of fighting. Still, it was a fun fight to watch.
Liddell vs Franklin entertained. Two popular fighters who unlike the Evans vs Jackson main event engaged with great frequency. Liddell simply has no chin left. It isn't that he is being hit more now; he simply cannot take even a small shot to the chin anymore. Hard to say where Franklin winds up after this. His big wins against W. Silva and Liddell came after both were shells of their former selves. He lost to Machida, Belfort, Henderson and A. Silva. Given that Machida is at 205 and A. Silva is probably heading to 205 it is hard to say where Franklin fits in. Perhaps he will be used in more of an attraction role. Much like this Liddell fight, put him against a name to generate PPV buys.
Overall this card rates highly with me in terms of delivering. Refs had a tough night though.
Sunday, June 13, 2010
Thursday, June 10, 2010
God Doesn't Fret the IRS
In which I have a theological disagreement with VD and the ilk.
Friday, June 04, 2010
Now, it is important to note that it is not any wiser to refuse to pay the tax money demanded by the IRS than it is to refuse to pay the protection money demanded by the Mafia. But it does mean that the Biblical justification doesn't apply.
As for government, the liberal Christian's logic breaks down because what applies to a divine Emperor manifestly does not apply to a democracy, not even a constitutional republic in which the democracy is strictly limited. Whereas the imperial subject owes the Emperor nothing but obedience, the citizen of the republic has a duty to ensure that his duly elected government acts legitimately according to the bounds of the republic's constitution.
What gave Caesar legitimacy? The military supremacy of Rome. Many of the people who fell under Rome's sphere of influence did so without the consent of the people. So what is the logic of saying that it matters one wit what the people of this nation think about taxation? The Republic has mostly been dismantled and the people who hold to the idea of the Constitution are as occupied as certain Jews believed their nation to be. Power changes the status quo. If Paul was not advising people to concern themselves with their state in the world e.g. slavery, why would we think there was a significant concern about taxation for the Christian.
Christians spend a great deal of energy fretting about the world which obviously has been given over to Satan. The kingdoms of the world belong to Satan regardless of the form of government. 5%, 10% or 100% of what the principalities and powers of this world designate is irrelevant to the soul of a Christian.
Christians are citizens of the Kingdom... the fact we devote so much emotional energy to being Citizens of nations/states/ideologies robs us of spiritual peace.
Now obviously we exist in the world and within the confines of our systems we have as much right to attempt to influence and act as anyone, but this life is passing and our focus should not be there. Citizenship has its uses. Paul used his Roman citizenship. American citizenship might be useful in ministry... but ultimately it is a tool not an end.
Phil. 3:20 For our citizenship is in heaven, from which also we eagerly wait for a Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ;
Col. 3:1-3 If then you have been raised up with Christ, keep seeking the things above, where Christ is, seated at the right hand of God. Set your mind on the things above, not on the things that are on earth. For you have died and your life is hidden with Christ in God.
Ephesians 2:11/Therefore, remember that formerly you who are Gentiles by birth and called "uncircumcised" by those who call themselves "the circumcision" (that done in the body by the hands of men)— 12remember that at that time you were separate from Christ, excluded from citizenship in Israel and foreigners to the covenants of the promise, without hope and without God in the world. 13But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far away have been brought near through the blood of Christ. 19Consequently, you are no longer foreigners and aliens, but fellow citizens with God's people and members of God's household, 20built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, with Christ Jesus himself as the chief cornerstone. 21In him the whole building is joined together and rises to become a holy temple in the Lord. 22And in him you too are being built together to become a dwelling in which God lives by his Spirit.
In which I have a theological disagreement with VD and the ilk.
Friday, June 04, 2010
Mailvox: give to Caesar
JB wonders when it applies:Not sure if you've run into this, but I've noticed a pattern when debating a liberal (Christian or not) about taxes and big government. When they get to the point where they have lost the argument, they throw a grenade with the statement, "Render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's".I usually run into this with regards to taxes. My response is always the same as the response that preceded the advice. "Show me the coin used for paying the tax. Whose portrait is this? And whose inscription?" In other words, show me Caesar! So, while you can reasonably use this verse to justify writing a check to assorted dead men or the Federal Reserve, it is a poor argument in support of state or Federal taxation.
Now, I'm not one to take the words of Christ lightly. It is true, Jesus did not go out of His way to incite rebellion against Rome, and seemed to endorse the concept of taxation with that statement. However, something doesn't sit right with the liberal's logic when they resort to that statement.
I wonder if you or the Ilk have a solid response to the Render Unto Caesar argument.
Now, it is important to note that it is not any wiser to refuse to pay the tax money demanded by the IRS than it is to refuse to pay the protection money demanded by the Mafia. But it does mean that the Biblical justification doesn't apply.
As for government, the liberal Christian's logic breaks down because what applies to a divine Emperor manifestly does not apply to a democracy, not even a constitutional republic in which the democracy is strictly limited. Whereas the imperial subject owes the Emperor nothing but obedience, the citizen of the republic has a duty to ensure that his duly elected government acts legitimately according to the bounds of the republic's constitution.
What gave Caesar legitimacy? The military supremacy of Rome. Many of the people who fell under Rome's sphere of influence did so without the consent of the people. So what is the logic of saying that it matters one wit what the people of this nation think about taxation? The Republic has mostly been dismantled and the people who hold to the idea of the Constitution are as occupied as certain Jews believed their nation to be. Power changes the status quo. If Paul was not advising people to concern themselves with their state in the world e.g. slavery, why would we think there was a significant concern about taxation for the Christian.
Christians spend a great deal of energy fretting about the world which obviously has been given over to Satan. The kingdoms of the world belong to Satan regardless of the form of government. 5%, 10% or 100% of what the principalities and powers of this world designate is irrelevant to the soul of a Christian.
Christians are citizens of the Kingdom... the fact we devote so much emotional energy to being Citizens of nations/states/ideologies robs us of spiritual peace.
Now obviously we exist in the world and within the confines of our systems we have as much right to attempt to influence and act as anyone, but this life is passing and our focus should not be there. Citizenship has its uses. Paul used his Roman citizenship. American citizenship might be useful in ministry... but ultimately it is a tool not an end.
Phil. 3:20 For our citizenship is in heaven, from which also we eagerly wait for a Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ;
Col. 3:1-3 If then you have been raised up with Christ, keep seeking the things above, where Christ is, seated at the right hand of God. Set your mind on the things above, not on the things that are on earth. For you have died and your life is hidden with Christ in God.
Ephesians 2:11/Therefore, remember that formerly you who are Gentiles by birth and called "uncircumcised" by those who call themselves "the circumcision" (that done in the body by the hands of men)— 12remember that at that time you were separate from Christ, excluded from citizenship in Israel and foreigners to the covenants of the promise, without hope and without God in the world. 13But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far away have been brought near through the blood of Christ. 19Consequently, you are no longer foreigners and aliens, but fellow citizens with God's people and members of God's household, 20built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, with Christ Jesus himself as the chief cornerstone. 21In him the whole building is joined together and rises to become a holy temple in the Lord. 22And in him you too are being built together to become a dwelling in which God lives by his Spirit.
Fighting Cans
One of the most frequent criticisms of Fedor Emelianenko is that since 2005 he has only fought 'cans'. Is this just criticism? How does he stack up against other heavyweight fighters?
The current top 10 are as follows:
HEAVYWEIGHT DIVISION (over 205 pounds)
#1 Heavyweight Fighter in the World: Fedor Emelianenko
2. Brock Lesnar
3. Shane Carwin
4. Cain Velasquez
5. Junior Dos Santos
6. Alistair Overeem
7. Frank Mir
8. Antonio Rodrigo Nogueira
9. Fabricio Werdum
10. Brett Rogers
MMAWeekly World MMA Rankings last updated on June 2, 2010
On this list Fedor has defeated 2 of the top 10 and is scheduled to fight a 3rd.
Overeem, Lesnar and Mir both have wins over 1 person on this list. Lesnar is scheduled to fight another one on the list.
So, based on the current top 10 Fedor has fought and defeated the most at this point and time. If you want to discount his win over Nogueira (x2) then you have to argue that Nogueira is better now than he was back in Pride.
The 2 fights prior to Rodgers for Fedor were against Sylvia and Arvloski. Arvloski was ranked 3rd at the time of the fight and Sylvia 5. They have since dropped out due to defeats by Fedor and others. The fight against Couture was not made, but now that he is out of the top 10 wouldn't he also be considered a can? Fedor was also scheduled to fight Barnett who was ranked 2nd in the world at the time. The fight fell through due to steroids. So... the way Fedors last couple of fights shaped up.
vs # 5, vs #3, scheduled against #2, vs #8, vs #9 + prior victories over the current # 8.
Can't win... if you beat them they are cans. If you don't fight someone then you are a can...
You can look at some historical rankings.
Jan - 2008
1 Fedor Emelianenko
2 Randy Couture
3 Antonio Rodrigo Nogueira
4 Fabricio Werdum
5 Cheick Kongo
6 Tim Sylvia
7 Gabriel Gonzaga
8 Mirko Filipovic
9 Andrei Arlovski
10 Sergei Kharitonov
Fought most of those.
Dec - 08
1 Fedor Emelianenko
2 Antonio Rodrigo Nogueira
3 Brock Lesnar
4 Andrei Arlovski
5 - Randy Couture
6 - Josh Barnett
7 - Junior dos Santos
8 - Gabriel Gonzaga
9 - Tim Sylvia
10 Fabricio Werdum
Mostly the same group.
June - 09
1 Fedor Emelianenko
2 Frank Mir
3 Brock Lesnar
4 Antonio Rodrigo Nogueira
5 Josh Barnett
6 Randy Couture
7 Gegard Mousasi
8 Brett Rogers
9 Junior dos Santos
10 Cheick Kongo
Dec - 09
1 Fedor Emelianenko
2 Brock Lesnar
3 Antonio Rodrigo Nogueira
4 Frank Mir
5 Junior dos Santos
6 Josh Barnett
7 Brett Rogers
8 Cain Velasquez
9 Fabricio Werdum
10 Shane Carwin
So... who was he supposed to fight before just these past few months where you have the UFC heavyweights making an appearance? They made names beating people he had defeated.
Can the current crop of heavyweights generate a fight that defeats him? Sure. But he has fought 'competition' since 2005. He does not fight frequently and he has not fought unknown prospects... unless you consider Rodgers in that manner.
One of the most frequent criticisms of Fedor Emelianenko is that since 2005 he has only fought 'cans'. Is this just criticism? How does he stack up against other heavyweight fighters?
The current top 10 are as follows:
HEAVYWEIGHT DIVISION (over 205 pounds)
#1 Heavyweight Fighter in the World: Fedor Emelianenko
2. Brock Lesnar
3. Shane Carwin
4. Cain Velasquez
5. Junior Dos Santos
6. Alistair Overeem
7. Frank Mir
8. Antonio Rodrigo Nogueira
9. Fabricio Werdum
10. Brett Rogers
MMAWeekly World MMA Rankings last updated on June 2, 2010
On this list Fedor has defeated 2 of the top 10 and is scheduled to fight a 3rd.
Overeem, Lesnar and Mir both have wins over 1 person on this list. Lesnar is scheduled to fight another one on the list.
So, based on the current top 10 Fedor has fought and defeated the most at this point and time. If you want to discount his win over Nogueira (x2) then you have to argue that Nogueira is better now than he was back in Pride.
The 2 fights prior to Rodgers for Fedor were against Sylvia and Arvloski. Arvloski was ranked 3rd at the time of the fight and Sylvia 5. They have since dropped out due to defeats by Fedor and others. The fight against Couture was not made, but now that he is out of the top 10 wouldn't he also be considered a can? Fedor was also scheduled to fight Barnett who was ranked 2nd in the world at the time. The fight fell through due to steroids. So... the way Fedors last couple of fights shaped up.
vs # 5, vs #3, scheduled against #2, vs #8, vs #9 + prior victories over the current # 8.
Can't win... if you beat them they are cans. If you don't fight someone then you are a can...
You can look at some historical rankings.
Jan - 2008
1 Fedor Emelianenko
2 Randy Couture
3 Antonio Rodrigo Nogueira
4 Fabricio Werdum
5 Cheick Kongo
6 Tim Sylvia
7 Gabriel Gonzaga
8 Mirko Filipovic
9 Andrei Arlovski
10 Sergei Kharitonov
Fought most of those.
Dec - 08
1 Fedor Emelianenko
2 Antonio Rodrigo Nogueira
3 Brock Lesnar
4 Andrei Arlovski
5 - Randy Couture
6 - Josh Barnett
7 - Junior dos Santos
8 - Gabriel Gonzaga
9 - Tim Sylvia
10 Fabricio Werdum
Mostly the same group.
June - 09
1 Fedor Emelianenko
2 Frank Mir
3 Brock Lesnar
4 Antonio Rodrigo Nogueira
5 Josh Barnett
6 Randy Couture
7 Gegard Mousasi
8 Brett Rogers
9 Junior dos Santos
10 Cheick Kongo
Dec - 09
1 Fedor Emelianenko
2 Brock Lesnar
3 Antonio Rodrigo Nogueira
4 Frank Mir
5 Junior dos Santos
6 Josh Barnett
7 Brett Rogers
8 Cain Velasquez
9 Fabricio Werdum
10 Shane Carwin
So... who was he supposed to fight before just these past few months where you have the UFC heavyweights making an appearance? They made names beating people he had defeated.
Can the current crop of heavyweights generate a fight that defeats him? Sure. But he has fought 'competition' since 2005. He does not fight frequently and he has not fought unknown prospects... unless you consider Rodgers in that manner.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)