Differnece between Ice and Axe

MMA JOE · 01-01-2008, 12:42 PM

After watching one of the best fights in 2007 and possibly ever in MMA between Wanderlei Silva and Chuck Liddell this past Saturday, I felt very satisfied. In one respect, the Iceman, poster boy for the UFC came back to form and looked more focused than ever. Looking like the dominant Liddell we were used to seeing for so long, a far cry from the lack luster performances against Rampage and Jardine. Chuck was counter punching, landing with pin-point accuracy and even threw in a couple of never seen before take downs! The fight was very exciting from start to finish, but what was the diffence?

From watching “All Access” the UFC, there is no way it was Wanderlei’s training regimine that did not prepare him for victory. So what was the difference in this fight? Chuck’s height/reach advantage? Wanderlei definitely looked much smaller than the Iceman, did the Axe Murderer not cut weight like most UFC fighters do? Has Wanderlei been taking juice through out his days in PRIDE that he had to cut? Juice might have also given WANDY that crazy edge that he always brought into the ring, that he seemed to not possess in the cage. I have never seen Wandy come out and ‘respect’ an opponent for so long before fearlessly attacking!

Possibly it was the lack of experience in a cage, rules(elbows) or just plain too much hype got to our beloved Wand. Could the fight have ended differently if Wanderlei landed one of those nasty hay-makers, or got Chuck in the Thai clinch, absolutely. One thing is for sure, and that is Wanderlei will not give any excuses for the loss, and will only praise Chuck for his excellent performance. Regardless of the reason for the outcome of the fight, it was one of the most entertaining fights I’ve ever seen. Both fighters deserve the utmost respect from all fans. Despite losing, Wanderlei won, in that he gained the respect of many US fans in displaying his never give up spirit and iron chin. Obviously the Iceman re-instated his career as one of the best fighters of all time. I can’t wait to see both fighters in action again soon!

Det_Kimble · 01-01-2008, 12:46 PM

Wand lost because he fought a better fighter that night. Sure he was in a new environment with new rules, but he's a professional, so there's no excuse. He lost to the better fighter. That doesn't mean Wand sucks; is overrated; or he's exposed. It just means Chuck was better prepared on the night of the 29th.

MMA JOE · 01-01-2008, 09:22 PM

I agree, WAND did not have a chance that night, and believe few would. My hats off to Chuck.

MMAeveryday · 01-02-2008, 11:19 AM

Nice read, I was waiting for Wanderlei to get chuck in the clinch all night, and he never even attempted it! I guess Chuck was being too elusive or Wandy just wanted to beat Chuck with punches.

UFCrules · 01-02-2008, 11:21 AM

Nice read.

MPD-Psycho · 01-02-2008, 11:24 AM

It was pretty obvious. Chuck simply came in with a better gameplan. Wand seemed just to slug it out with Chuck.

jerbabe22 · 01-02-2008, 11:25 AM

Wand definitely had a couple of opportunities to get chuck in the Thai Clinch but for whatever reason, didn't go for it.

Holy Diver · 01-02-2008, 11:25 AM

Great fight and I take nothing away from either one of them. That fight could have gone either way, and it was back n forth during each round. Both men, win or lose, should be proud with their effort.