[Bullitt68]

Originally Posted by Flexwave2003

Can somebody tell me what Rings really has to do with anything here? The topic is not about Rings, so why are you cats focusing in on it?

Because it was restrictive as well but is still considered MMA the same as Pancrase.

What Bas, Ken, Frank, Funaki, Suzuki, Mezger, Kondo, and everybody else that achieved success in Pancrase did deserves to be recognized throughout the MMA world.

You may not like it, but Pancrase was a legitimate MMA organization and produced great mixed martial artists in the early days.

[Flexwave2003]

Bas has had 3 MMA fights under true MMA rules. If you believe grabbing ropes to escape submissions, no elbowing or knees, no punching with a closed fist is MMA then I would have to respectfully disagree with your opinion.

It is disrespectful of the fighters who have competed in true MMA events throughout their career to consider the two the same imho. There is a big difference in walking out for an old school Pancrase rules fight and walking out to a modern MMA rules fight or old school NHB event. The "cajones" factor is considerably different with the difference in rules.

[Bullitt68]

Originally Posted by Flexwave2003

Bas has had 3 MMA fights under true MMA rules. If you believe grabbing ropes to escape submissions, no elbowing or knees, no punching with a closed fist is MMA then I would have to respectfully disagree with your opinion.

It is disrespectful of the fighters who have competed in true MMA events throughout their career to consider the two the same imho. There is a big difference in walking out for an old school Pancrase rules fight and walking out to a modern MMA rules fight or old school NHB event.

That's fine. That's your opinion. I'm just saying that regardless of the way you feel, more people believe Bas is a MMA legend than don't, and you saying he doesn't deserve to be considered a MMA legend is what is disrespectful.

Originally Posted by Flexwave2003

The "cajones" factor is considerably different with the difference in rules.

I'll take the skill involved in a Pancrase match over the "cajones" involved in NHB matches like Tank/Ferrozzo any day.

[Flexwave2003]

Originally Posted by Bullitt68

That's fine. That's your opinion. I'm just saying that regardless of the way you feel, more people believe Bas is a MMA legend than don't, and you saying he doesn't deserve to be considered a MMA legend is what is disrespectful.

lol, get out of here kid. If you cant see the major differences between the two rules sets you are beyond hope. When putting something into perspective is considered disrespectful then you have lost all credibility with me.

[Mochan]

The rules you listed for Pancrase from Wiki are more or less correct, those are congruous to what I recall.

Should note that Pancrase is known to have a lot of works in it and this has been openly admitted by the heads of Pancrase. This is true for the earlier years but not hte later years, and although Bas has said he has never participated in a work, we should only take this at face value, what fighter would admit to participating in a work?

But not to dwell on that too much, I am not a big fan of Pancrase because I too do not consider it "true" MMA and if you look at the records, many Kings of Pancrase do not translate all that well into other orgs, probably because of the rules (best example I guess would be Yuki Kondo).

I like Bas and I especially love him for his commentary but I hold no illusions, I don't thin he's the best fighter ever and I honestly think that Bas in his prime would lose to a lot of even just "average" HWs and LHWs today. I still hold him in the highest respect despite this, though. I still consider him a legend of MMA same way Royce is a legend of MMA -- he may have fought under "different rules" but I still consider Pancrase to be part of the sport.

I also do not take everything Bas says to heart, I mean Bas believes Randy will beat Fedor and I simply cannot agree with that. A lot of people like to use Bas and what he says in arguments as if this is undeniable fact or Gospel Truth that cannot be swayed but that's just bollocks. Bas is a human just like anyone else and what he says is not infallible.

[Violent Violin]

Originally Posted by Bullitt68

"cajones"

I believe that the word you're looking for is "cojones"...

VV

PS - EL GUAPO IS DA MAN!

[Bullitt68]

Originally Posted by Flexwave2003

lol, get out of here kid. If you cant see the major differences between the two rules sets you are beyond hope. When putting something into perspective is considered disrespectful then you have lost all credibility with me.

"Kid?" So when someone disagrees with you, you have to become condescending in order to mask the inefficiency in your [lack of a] rebuttal? You say it's disrespectful to NHB fighters to consider Pancrase MMA. THAT is disrespectful.

Go ahead and take comfort in your 2003 join date, because the only person it means anything to is you.

Originally Posted by Mochan

Should note that Pancrase is known to have a lot of works in it and this has been openly admitted by the heads of Pancrase. This is true for the earlier years but not hte later years, and although Bas has said he has never participated in a work, we should only take this at face value, what fighter would admit to participating in a work?

"A lot of" works? If three is a lot to you, then you must loathe PRIDE, which has had multiple works. Even the early days of the UFC saw worked fights.

Pancrase isn't the only organization to have ever had a worked fight, and the subject of this thread is a man who never competed in a worked fight, so it's completely irrelevant.

Originally Posted by Mochan

But not to dwell on that too much, I am not a big fan of Pancrase because I too do not consider it "true" MMA and if you look at the records, many Kings of Pancrase do not translate all that well into other orgs, probably because of the rules (best example I guess would be Yuki Kondo).

Ken Shamrock: 17-3 in Pancrase and the first KOP. His "true" MMA record: 6-2-2, the two draws being fights where he clearly held the upper hand.

Bas Rutten: 25-4-1 in Pancrase and former KOP. His "true" MMA record: 3-0 with two stoppages.

Frank Shamrock: 11-6-1 in Pancrase and former Provisional KOP. His "true" MMA record: 10-2.

Guy Mezger: 17-7-1 in Pancrase and former KOP. His "true" MMA record: 10-7 with several of those losses (Shoji, Sakuraba, Arona, and Rogerio) arguably being decisions that should've gone Mezger's way.

Semmy Schilt: 17-9 and former KOP. His "true" MMA record: 8-5, including three losses to the men who are arguably the top three HW's in the sport in Fedor, Nog, and Barnett, the latter twice.

Just because a couple of Kings of Pancrase lost matches outside of Pancrase doesn't make that a science.

Originally Posted by Mochan

I like Bas and I especially love him for his commentary but I hold no illusions, I don't thin he's the best fighter ever and I honestly think that Bas in his prime would lose to a lot of even just "average" HWs and LHWs today. I still hold him in the highest respect despite this, though. I still consider him a legend of MMA same way Royce is a legend of MMA -- he may have fought under "different rules" but I still consider Pancrase to be part of the sport.

Agree with everything except the bold.

Originally Posted by Mochan

I also do not take everything Bas says to heart, I mean Bas believes Randy will beat Fedor and I simply cannot agree with that. A lot of people like to use Bas and what he says in arguments as if this is undeniable fact or Gospel Truth that cannot be swayed but that's just bollocks. Bas is a human just like anyone else and what he says is not infallible.

Not relevant to whether or not Bas should be considered a MMA legend.

Originally Posted by Violent Violin

I believe that the word you're looking for is "cojones"...

I was quoting Flexwave.

[Flexwave2003]

Originally Posted by Bullitt68

"Kid?" So when someone disagrees with you, you have to become condescending in order to mask the inefficiency in your [lack of a] rebuttal? You say it's disrespectful to NHB fighters to consider Pancrase MMA. THAT is disrespectful.

Go ahead and take comfort in your 2003 join date, because the only person it means anything to is you.



.

As I said kid, your opinion is worthless to me at this point.

My lack of rebuttal? You come into my thread talking about Rings, when Rings has absolutely nothing to do with Bas Rutten or Pancrase. You cant even keep yourself on subject.

Your argument is pretty much Pancrase is MMA because it is. Now you want to talk to me about lack of rebuttals? Since when is grabbing the ropes too avoid a submission or bad position MMA? Since when is posting with open hand strikes only MMA? When is no elbows or knees considered MMA?

When you equated my putting into perspective what Pancrase really is to disrespect, all credibility you may have had went out the window. If you cant respect what it takes to compete in a real MMA fight, or NHB fight that is your problem. It shows a profound lack of understanding about the sport to me on your end. If you truely think stepping into Pancrase under those specified rules is the same as stepping into a MMA event you're a bigger joke then I think you're! And ofcourse you dont care about join dates, or who has been watching MMA longer. Your thoughtless opinion and lack of respect for MMA pretty much guarantee your inability to post a legitimate argument to the subject. You would like nothing more then this thread to get off topic, as exemplified by your Rings statements and ignorant, ill thought out responses about what MMA is that are blatantly lacking any supporting statements at all.

If you had even taken the time to read my thread, which clearly you didnt it would have been clear to you that Ive given Bas Rutten plenty of respect, because he deserves it. But his accomplishments do not mean I should have an inflated opinion of his credentials.

Originally Posted by Flexwave2003

Bas's accomplishments have to be put into perspective, sometimes his word is taken as gospel truth around here. I agree Bas knows quite a bit about MMA and is a colorful and talented spokesperson for the sport. But in my eyes Bas Rutten isnt a legend of MMA. He is a legend of Pancrase though. Apples and Oranges. This isnt a Bas Rutten hate thread, as I said I think Bas is a funny guy, and would love to meet him. But Im also a true fan of MMA, who has been around the sport for a very long time. And Ive got tremendous respect for those guys who do compete in modern MMA rules, old school Vale Tudo/NHB rules.


.02 cents

Bas does deserve major respect for what he accomplished in Pancrase, but when it comes to true MMA fights Bas only fought 3 times. And even though he won the UFC Title, it was a hotly contested decision that many feel should have went to Kevin Randleman.

You can blast away with whatever noobish opinion you want, at this point you're just one of the thousands of new guys who have a long ways to go.

[Bullitt68]

Originally Posted by Flexwave2003

Your argument is pretty much Pancrase is MMA because it is.

Pancrase had striking, wrestling, submissions, and GNP. That's what MMA is. There doesn't need to be any further arguing. There shouldn't even be an argument in the first place.

Originally Posted by Flexwave2003

When you equated my putting into perspective what Pancrase really is to disrespect, all credibility you may have had went out the window.

You don't think Bas deserves to be considered a MMA legend. That's disrespectful. I don't need to say anything else.

Originally Posted by Flexwave2003

If you had even taken the time to read my thread, which clearly you didnt

I read the thread. I read where you don't consider Pancrase MMA by your standards---and as I have learned in this thread, your standards are the best and the only ones that matter---and I also read how you don't think Bas deserves to be called a MMA legend. I disagree with that, but that doesn't matter because the only opinions you deem worthy are by those who agree with you or who joined this forum in 2003 or earlier.

Have fun continuing to stroke your ego on this forum. I'd tell you that you're not superior to anybody, but then you'd just say the word "noob" and feel good about yourself again.

[Flexwave2003]

I notice you mention Ken Shamrock alot in relation to your opinion on worked fights in Pancrase. Do you lend credibility to these fights you consider works? How do you know which fights are works and which fights are not works?

Originally Posted by Bullitt68

Ken Shamrock Matt Hume
Ken Shamrock/Minoru Suzuki II
Minoru Suzuki/Masakatsu Funaki
Don Frye/Mark Hall III

So you recognize the fact some of the Pancrase fights were/are known works. But you want to cherry pick which fights are legitimate and which fights are real?

Do you know which fights were works? Why did you name Ken Shamrock so much in your quote about worked fights? Do you realize Ken Shamrock beat Bas everytime they fought in Pancrase?

Does Bas's fights with Ken Shamrock in Pancrase lend credibility to you even though you believe Ken was involved in known works?

Is Bas Rutten a bigger legend then Ken Shamrock?

Even though Ken beat Bas everytime they fought in Pancrase?

Even though Ken has many more true MMA fights then Bas Rutten?

And even with all of that in mind, this doesnt the facts about the this situation. Bas has three(3) true MMA fights.

Pancrase rules are not like true MMA rules. They are completely different. A closed fist strike in Pancrase could have(and apparently did) change the course of many of the fights. As would have elbows, knee's and soccer kicks.

In MMA there is no grabbing the rope to escape submission, you either get out of it or you dont. In Pancrase, you had the ability to escape submission by grabbing the ropes. Does this sound like the MMA rules we know today? Where these even remotely in place in the early UFCs? Ofcourse not!

Are these rules congruent with NHB rules? Where essentially there were no rules? Not even close.


Pancrase is Pancrase, and the accomplishments of a fighter in Pancrase absolutely deserve respect. But there is a difference between Pancrase and MMA. Anybody who is remotely familiar with both organizations can easily recognize the differences between the two.