But none of that proves anything. Its all very "broad" i guess is the term id use.
When a fighter says "Im going to knock him out" does this mean that he would only go for a knock out win??? Ofcourse not.
Chael Sonnens weakness is his BJJ. At that time everyone was saying that Chael might have some of the worst submission defense in MMA.
So having a gameplan where you are going to submit the guy who will willingly jump in your guard and is considered to have the worst sub defense, is not anything strange. That is perfectly normal and acceptable. The GI is just part of that. And telling your JJ coach that you are going to submit the guy that has some of the worst JJ defense??? pretty standard...
But that is the way i see it. Let me ask you a question..
Do you think if Anderson got the chance to knock Chael out that he would NOT have done it??? Even if it risks losing the fight and all the other things that come with that??
And who cares about what happened in the Rematch. That has no baring on the first fight. Chael didnt give Anderson a chance to finish him like he did in the second fight. To me it just proves that Anderson can Capitalize on the slightest mistakes and can do this in a variety of ways.
First fight he capitalized on the smallest opportunity to get that Triangle. In the second fight he capitalized on Sonnen falling to the ground.
+ I do remember Anderson trying to knock Chael out. Hell he rocked him pretty bad at one point.
Sideways we have been at this for years, your telling me you are going to deny how bad Silva's striking looked that night? Even on the ground compare the 1st round of the second fight there is a huge difference.
The one thing I will agree with is he was hurt in the first fight. I believe he meant to submit him, however as the fight prolong it became a fight and he was trying to knock him out. However I don't believe he tried to defend any takedowns or anything in the first fight. He pretty much just took everything from Sonnen, barely active on the ground,etc.