Originally Posted by Liddellianenko
How did everyone know? Nice try trying to pawn off your opinion as some sort of unanimous gospel. And obviously BONNAR was the last person that "knew" this supposed truth of yours, because of what he attempted in octagon. Completely idiotic statement.
I was convinced Bonnar would lose either way, but his grappling creds at least match up way better than his striking creds.
Your analogy is far stupider. Staying on the plane while trying to steer a crash landing is a much better option, considering the chances are far higher. In this case the plane happened to be flying over freaking Mordor (i.e. best striker in the history of combat sports) and there wasn't a patch of water in sight.
There was still a chance of crash landing at least (grappling and hoping for a miracle sub / smothering victory), at least 3 people have accomplished that in the past and another has come very close. Who is stupider? The free falling jumper or the pilots that have been trained for years to try for crash landings with occasional success?
How can it 'supposedly' be true if it happened? I said before the fight that he shouldnt grapple because Anderson will be able to stay standing easily and beat him down in the striking. What happened? Anderson was able to stay standing and beat him down in the striking. I mean, you cant argue with my prediction if that's what happened.
The only area where Bonnar is better than Anderson is brawling. Anderson is a martial artist before he is a fighter, and he's never been dragged into a scrappy war. If Bonnar could have got him there, we'd either see a new element to Silva's game or a Bonnar win.
You think steering a plane is easier? And there is always a patch of water in sight in the analogy. Anybody can knock out any body at any time.
Wait, Bonnar is a pilot? Damn, never knew that. In the analogy, Bonnar is a passenger. If he's a pilot then obviously he'll just fly to safety. You have now confused and effectivley ruined the analogy. I hope you're proud of youself!