New fighter update?
Collapse
Recommended Videos
Collapse
X
-
Re: New fighter update?
Hes not saying "der just buff him everywhere" at all....
When Cal first started posting about Ortrga I responded with "Doesn't he have great stats already?". But I kept an open mind when he responded with a deep arguement and multiple examples supporting his arguement, and After reading his take, I realized I was wrong and he was right.
Look at his posts, Like, what more could you want?
How is a technical break down, with video evidence as proof a "general arguement"?Comment
-
Re: New fighter update?
Because the argument wasn't about that. cal was conflating his original argument with "well, his stats are underpowered anyway, change them". The original argument was, "his stats should be buffed regardless of his performance against Holloway pending a win".
aholbert rightfully says his stats shouldn't be buffed without regard to how he looks. Should he be buffed if he gets absolutely tooled for four rounds and then gets some insane flying armbar? The answer is clearly no.
Should Ortega have better stats? Yes. If alhobert was making the argument that Ortega was properly made stats-wise currently, I think most people would agree that he is wrong. But, it isn't what he was arguing in this case.
Pretty simple stuff, but I'm not surprised the distinction has been lost with you.Comment
-
Re: New fighter update?
Hes not saying "der just buff him everywhere" at all....
When Cal first started posting about Ortrga I responded with "Doesn't he have great stats already?". But I kept an open mind when he responded with a deep arguement and multiple examples supporting his arguement, and After reading his take, I realized I was wrong and he was right.
Look at his posts, Like, what more could you want?
How is a technical break down, with video evidence as proof a "general arguement"?
Again, I'm targeted when I respond to a post. Someone said Ortega has never been rocked. I referenced a round against Guida where he was knocked down and he was stunned later in the round. Cal thinks he wasnt hurt during the knockdown (I can see that) and that the stun later in the round was caused by an eye poke (dont agree with that looking at the tape and based on the play by play of MMA media members watching the fight).
My ONLY position has been "lets wait and see". He has specifically stated that he wants a blocking, chin, endurance and stamina buff for him no matter what happens in the Holloway fight. My position is AGAIN...lets wait and see.
I dont agree that Ortega is substantially underpowered at all based on his fights. ****, we buffed him in 14 categories based on the Edgar and Swanson fights. Could we buff him some more? Sure. Would those buffs be justified right now? I dont know if I agree but Cal has made a very valid counter argument.
I wont even get into how he's ranked anywhere from 1-4 in the division (a division with maybe an OP Aldo and a OP Conor in some areas) practically every significant stat category in the game since those buffs.
Now putting that aside, I stand by my comments about you. I can go from thread to thread with overly broad suggestions or comments that you either present or agree with. When I or others try to break them down you will either respond with something like "I dont know...JUST FIX IT" or you will make a half *** attempt to break it down and then get frustrated when we explain why something is the way it is.
Anyway, its my fault for continuing to address it and I'll stop from this point forward.Last edited by aholbert32; 11-12-2018, 02:17 PM.Comment
-
Re: New fighter update?
Wait a minute Aholbert32, what’s with the selective bias? Weidman is KO’d 4 out of his last 5, taken big damage in his last 7, but you say the “tape over the course of his career” justifies his 95 block rating. Didn’t we just “wait and see” that he ate pretty much every power shot in the pocket and was KO’d again. I’ll then use your same logic in a whole career of tape and fight metric stats to point out John Lineker is mis rated with a low 88 strike stamina / 88 endurance. His output alone against Dodson is amongst the top ever over 5 rounds in BW history. But 88? You then come here and say, “let’s just wait and see what happens next fight” or it’s “we don’t make changes based off one performance”. Never know which way the wind is blowing with your bias.
Sent from my iPhone using Operation SportsComment
-
Re: New fighter update?
Wait a minute Aholbert32, what’s with the selective bias? Weidman is KO’d 4 out of his last 5, taken big damage in his last 7, but you say the “tape over the course of his career” justifies his 95 block rating. Didn’t we just “wait and see” that he ate pretty much every power shot in the pocket and was KO’d again. I’ll then use your same logic in a whole career of tape and fight metric stats to point out John Lineker is mis rated with a low 88 strike stamina / 88 endurance. His output alone against Dodson is amongst the top ever over 5 rounds in BW history. But 88? You then come here and say, “let’s just wait and see what happens next fight” or it’s “we don’t make changes based off one performance”. Never know which way the wind is blowing with your bias.
Sent from my iPhone using Operation Sports
but **** that.
Some of my favorite fighters have some of the lowest ratings in the game so a bias accusation is insane. You call me biased, you dont get a response from me anymore.Comment
-
Re: New fighter update?
Yeah Aholbert is pretty fair.
There is only one man that he hates with a passion so he criminally underrates him.
That man is Jan BlachowiczComment
-
Comment
-
Re: New fighter update?
Because the argument wasn't about that. cal was conflating his original argument with "well, his stats are underpowered anyway, change them". The original argument was, "his stats should be buffed regardless of his performance against Holloway pending a win".
aholbert rightfully says his stats shouldn't be buffed without regard to how he looks. Should he be buffed if he gets absolutely tooled for four rounds and then gets some insane flying armbar? The answer is clearly no.
Should Ortega have better stats? Yes. If alhobert was making the argument that Ortega was properly made stats-wise currently, I think most people would agree that he is wrong. But, it isn't what he was arguing in this case.
Pretty simple stuff, but I'm not surprised the distinction has been lost with you.
Tell me where I said “well, his stats are underpowered anyway, change them” I mean, you used quotation marks and everything so I must’ve said that somewhere.
My original argument, going back to the very start of UFC3 is Ortega is vastly underrated and even with the small boosts he’s had since release is still vastly underrated.Comment
-
New fighter update?
cal7_11 Ortega has come a long way. There was a UFC 2 super thread dedicated to the guy which actually got his move set buffed majorly. His defensive style is somewhat of an anomaly to translate in game as he gets hit a lot, but is rolling with the shots in doing so. His chin is tremendous. UFC 3 punishes players for moving into strikes like head kicks & uppercuts, but it doesn’t really do the opposite effect in taking damage off or “rolling with the punches”. You just get hit. The Holloway fight is less than a month out, there probably will be no change before hand. Aholbert will have his plate full with events every week until UFC 231 anyhow. Now, you should feel pretty good if you’re an Ortega fan leading into this fight... There was never a clear, definitive “smoking gun” to what ailed Max to withdraw from there previous booking? A lot of questions surrounding Holloway leading into this one, and Ortega’s striking has improved tremendously. Will the fight even happen? Max has pulled out of 3 PPV’s this year (Edgar/Khabib/Ortega). Rumor is if Holloway withdraws for any reason, the UFC will have someone on deck to make a Championship fight. If Ortega claims gold, all champs have been rated pretty generously in these UFC games. So in the words of the biased one, “let’s wait and see.” Lol
Sent from my iPhone using Operation SportsLast edited by SMOKEZERO; 11-12-2018, 06:33 PM.Comment
-
Re: New fighter update?
Well we were having a reasonable, mature back and forth. What makes you feel the need to jump in with this idiocy!?
Tell me where I said “well, his stats are underpowered anyway, change them” I mean, you used quotation marks and everything so I must’ve said that somewhere.
My original argument, going back to the very start of UFC3 is Ortega is vastly underrated and even with the small boosts he’s had since release is still vastly underrated.
Then again, you obviously took my jab at Haz as a slight against you, ignoring context and showing a failure of comprehension. I had no issue with anything you said before this. You're lucky I've got the holiday spirit flowing through me or I'd report your direct implication that I'm an idiot. I'd probably change that.Comment
-
Re: New fighter update?
LMAO You literally said the exact same thing in this very post. My "quotation" was for effect. You didn't verbatim say it, but I'm paraphrasing here. I still have no idea how you're going to take offense to the fact I said your argument is Ortega being underpowered so buff him, then say that exact thing in the post you just wrote like they aren't completely the same.
Then again, you obviously took my jab at Haz as a slight against you, ignoring context and showing a failure of comprehension. I had no issue with anything you said before this. You're lucky I've got the holiday spirit flowing through me or I'd report your direct implication that I'm an idiot. I'd probably change that.
And I literally did not say the exact same thing...Comment
-
Re: New fighter update?
Your Direct Quote - Given their vast differences in stats. Even ‘simply winning’ would surely be enough for a significant boost!? He needs a boost regardless of winning let alone if he gets any manner of victory.
My Paraphrasing - Well, Ortega is underpowered so buff him anyway.
Vast differences in stats is synonymous with him being underpowered in this case. Regardless is a synonym for anyway in this usage.
There. A breakdown of what words mean to completely nail you to your cross. Or will you continue to fight reality?Comment
-
Re: New fighter update?
Your Direct Quote - Given their vast differences in stats. Even ‘simply winning’ would surely be enough for a significant boost!? He needs a boost regardless of winning let alone if he gets any manner of victory.
My Paraphrasing - Well, Ortega is underpowered so buff him anyway.
Vast differences in stats is synonymous with him being underpowered in this case. Regardless is a synonym for anyway in this usage.
There. A breakdown of what words mean to completely nail you to your cross. Or will you continue to fight reality?
You also said that was my original argument, which again you were incorrect on.
If you actually look at my original post from the stat change thread it’s very specific on what Ortega needs buffing, that was based on every single Ortega fight until Max and regardless of how he performs next month those changes would still be warranted as its based on his previous fights.Comment
-
Re: New fighter update?
Your concept of "tone" is ridiculous considering you can't hear my vocal inflection and the statements are conceptual identical. Both versions of my paraphrasing are essentially the same. You want to play semantics now because I've caught you in recursive logic. You flat out called me an idiot because you thought I was referring to you with my quip at the end. You had to construct some sort of retort in order to justify calling me an idiot. It's very transparent.
I'm sorry I didn't get your original argument correct from an entirely different topic. lmfao Do I need to go back and look at your AIM chatlogs from the early 2000's to get the full context on the argument that spurred that argument too?
Aholbert was arguing that Ortega's performance against Holloway would determine how his stats were made. You declared that he should probably get a boost regardless of performance because of a perceived backlog of warranted buffs. Anything outside the scope of that debate is irrelevant to what we are currently talking about.
I'm not making a declaration on what Ortega's stats should be. I'm not making a declaration on what your opinions are. I'm not even making a declaration on what my opinion is about the argument between you and Aholbert. I'm just defining the argument being made in response to Haz. NOT YOU. Jesus Christ.
We'll use my second paraphrasing to reiterate because it is more accurate in "tone" according to you:
"Well, Ortega is underpowered so buff him anyway."
"He needs a boost regardless of winning..."
Consider everything before this a pretext for this crucial request: Explain to me how the above two statements are not conceptually identical. Considering your entire gripe with me is that I misrepresented your argument somehow. The first statement is me paraphrasing a direct quote from you. So, explain how it is a misrepresentation.Comment
Comment