Matt Hughes Loss
My analysis of the Matt Hughes / GSP fight is that he lost because he didn't stick with his strengths, the ground game, and instead tried strike, his weakest attribute, against GSP whose strongest assett is his striking.
The odd thing is that I think Matt went into this fight planning on trying to stand up with him and knocking him out. I think he got to cocky in a sense and didn't want to revert back to what he is known for, his ground game.
In the pre-fight interviews he talks about how he wants to knock him out. Also, during the fight you can hear the commentaors saying how when Matt gets an armlock around someone, he usually takes them down, but GSP got out of it. I think that was not because he couldn't take GSP down, but mentally he said I don't want to go to the ground, and stopped himself from taking him down. You could see when he was doing that the power and will to take him down just wasn't there.
Like I said, it's odd, but I think Matt was predetermined to beat him standing up, instead of just beating him however he could.
I like Matt Hughest a lot, however, during the recent UFC unleashed Hughes special, I was surprised to see that in almost all of the fights they showed he was losing / getting dominated, but always managed to pull out the win. Now, I'm not saying it's luck he happen to come back in all of those fights. The main question I have, is, why does Dana White always say he's the "most dominant fighter of all times"? (Also, I'm not an English major, but isn't it of all time, not all times?)
I think if Matt would have gone back to his roots he would have won. Hopefully we'll see him and Rich Franklin come back on top.