Why was Lashleys opponent not approved??

Nastycrow

Nastycrow

Mr. BlobTitz
Staff member
Originally posted by: ThatWillBeAll
Date: January 15, 2010 at 11:58 AM
Source: https://forum.mmajunkie.com/threads/why-was-lashleys-opponent-not-approved.21485/
Click to expand...

This seems a bit strange to me. The guy was 2-1, Lashley is 4-0 against cans.
It doesn't seem that much of a mistmatch on paper, why couldn't this fight take place?
Now they are talking of having him fight Jimmy Ambriz instead. With a 13-12 record he looks like an average journeyman, but when you look at his actual record ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jimmy_Ambriz ) it tells a different story. From 2001-2003 he went 8-0 fighting noname people in small shows.
Since then he's went 5-13. Personally I'd rather see what someone who was 2-1 could do, rather than see him fight someone who loses three quarters of his fights in the first round...
 
Originally posted by: Sedulous
Date: January 15, 2010 at 12:04 PM
Source: https://forum.mmajunkie.com/threads/why-was-lashleys-opponent-not-approved.21485/
Click to expand...

I get that Lashley wants to start slow but his opponents have been total jokes. Starting slow is having one or two fights against cans but when you are fighting for one of the top 2 orgs you gotta fight someone at least top 25. It doesn't really matter who they get for Lashley at this point. It's a joke.
 
Originally posted by: smfowns4
Date: January 15, 2010 at 12:07 PM
Source: https://forum.mmajunkie.com/threads/why-was-lashleys-opponent-not-approved.21485/
Click to expand...

Well I mean, at least his opponets losses are against great competition.
Josh Barnett, Sergei Khat., Jeff Monson twice, Ricco Rodriguez, Justin Eilers, Scott Junk, etc.
 
Originally posted by: ThatWillBeAll
Date: January 15, 2010 at 12:09 PM
Source: https://forum.mmajunkie.com/threads/why-was-lashleys-opponent-not-approved.21485/
Click to expand...

smfowns4 said:
Well I mean, at least his opponets losses are against great competition.
Josh Barnett, Sergei Khat., Jeff Monson twice, Ricco Rodriguez, Justin Eilers, Scott Junk, etc.
Click to expand...
What exactly does prove? I could fight all of those guys too and do exactly what he done - lose in the first round every single time.
 
Originally posted by: thabestevah
Date: January 15, 2010 at 12:10 PM
Source: https://forum.mmajunkie.com/threads/why-was-lashleys-opponent-not-approved.21485/
Click to expand...

I posted this same exact post in the Strikeforce Miami discussion thread but so everyone here can see it here it is again
this must be why they dont ever have major MMA shows in Florida, who is the Florida commission to decide whats a competitive fight and whats not before you attack Strikeforce think about the fact Bobby has had only one more fight than this guy and this guy is a boxer who just knocked out a guy in 19 seconds and no one has really seen Lashleys chin tested or much of his stand up. I can almost guarantee it will be awhile before UFC or Strikeforce come back to Florida I find the commission deciding fights between 2 guys with 3 and 4 fights respectively under there belt is the biggest joke among this not Strikeforce or anyone else. Although Bobbys camp should have let him fight Del Rosario in the first place but its still not a commissions job to deem fights between 2 guys with very little MMA experience "uncompetitive".
can someone explain how them denying his opponent makes any sence at all
 
Originally posted by: carl258
Date: January 15, 2010 at 12:19 PM
Source: https://forum.mmajunkie.com/threads/why-was-lashleys-opponent-not-approved.21485/
Click to expand...

Sedulous said:
I get that Lashley wants to start slow but his opponents have been total jokes. Starting slow is having one or two fights against cans but when you are fighting for one of the top 2 orgs you gotta fight someone at least top 25. It doesn't really matter who they get for Lashley at this point. It's a joke.
Click to expand...
exactly, there is no problem on staring slow, but do that in small promotions, he needed a better oponent, i´m not said that he should fight someone like big foot, rogers, wedrum, kind of figther, but still with the same figthers that he has been faced in small promotions, here is not the place, if his managmeant wants that he keeps figthing with can´s and small competition strikeforce is not the place, or if he wants to be in strikeforces SHOMMA is the best that they can give to him, and this is not strikeforce falls, they give him Shane del Rosario but his managmeant didnt want that kind of figther for Lashley.
 
Originally posted by: carl258
Date: January 15, 2010 at 12:21 PM
Source: https://forum.mmajunkie.com/threads/why-was-lashleys-opponent-not-approved.21485/
Click to expand...

ThatWillBeAll said:
This seems a bit strange to me. The guy was 2-1, Lashley is 4-0 against cans.
It doesn't seem that much of a mistmatch on paper, why couldn't this fight take place?
Now they are talking of having him fight Jimmy Ambriz instead. With a 13-12 record he looks like an average journeyman, but when you look at his actual record ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jimmy_Ambriz ) it tells a different story. From 2001-2003 he went 8-0 fighting noname people in small shows.
Since then he's went 5-13. Personally I'd rather see what someone who was 2-1 could do, rather than see him fight someone who loses three quarters of his fights in the first round...
Click to expand...
another good post, definity i agree too, in paper Banks seems more competitive than this new guy, he seems to be a total can and someone that has almost zero chances to pull the upseat, at least Banks has fighting with strikeforce in the past, he is a boxer and has KO power
 
Originally posted by: Jak
Date: January 15, 2010 at 12:23 PM
Source: https://forum.mmajunkie.com/threads/why-was-lashleys-opponent-not-approved.21485/
Click to expand...

killadakiller said:
can someone explain how them denying his opponent makes any sence at all
Click to expand...
Some people might actually care about a fighters safety.
It's great that you can determine his opponent was a quality opponent because you read some stats about him. But sending a guy on short notice against a 265+ pound wrestler can lead to injury for an inexperienced fighter.
Lashley has known about this fight for a while and has been training. His opponent is a very inexperienced in MMA and got a fight on super short notice. His boxing experience is of little relevance when being sanctioned for an MMA bout.
While i don't always agree with Commissions, i do dislike when they actually do put a fighters safety first and a get questioned on it simply because the people disagreeing are solely looking at it from a pro SF pro Bobby Lashley perspective.
You can disagree all you want, but sometimes it's actually good for the sport when commissions won't sanction some fights. It happens all the time in smaller organizations and nobody complains, it just so happens that this time it included a big "named" fighter.
 
Originally posted by: carl258
Date: January 15, 2010 at 12:32 PM
Source: https://forum.mmajunkie.com/threads/why-was-lashleys-opponent-not-approved.21485/
Click to expand...

Jak said:
killadakiller said:
can someone explain how them denying his opponent makes any sence at all
Click to expand...
Some people might actually care about a fighters safety.
It's great that you can determine his opponent was a quality opponent because you read some stats about him. But sending a guy on short notice against a 265+ pound wrestler can lead to injury for an inexperienced fighter.
Lashley has known about this fight for a while and has been training. His opponent is a very inexperienced in MMA and got a fight on super short notice. His boxing experience is of little relevance when being sanctioned for an MMA bout.
While i don't always agree with Commissions, i do dislike when they actually do put a fighters safety first and a get questioned on it simply because the people disagreeing are solely looking at it from a pro SF pro Bobby Lashley perspective.
You can disagree all you want, but sometimes it's actually good for the sport when commissions won't sanction some fights. It happens all the time in smaller organizations and nobody complains, it just so happens that this time it included a big "named" fighter.
Click to expand...
your argument has sense, but still if banks was denied his licence, what would be the argumeant of giving the licence to this new guy, yes he has more experience but lately his experience is to lose in the first round, i think is more safe to said this guy is more expose to receive more damage for LAshely than Banks
 
Originally posted by: ThatWillBeAll
Date: January 15, 2010 at 12:54 PM
Source: https://forum.mmajunkie.com/threads/why-was-lashleys-opponent-not-approved.21485/
Click to expand...

Exactly, he's on a massive losing run and obviously has even less time to prepare than the original guy...
 
Originally posted by: thabestevah
Date: January 15, 2010 at 02:11 PM
Source: https://forum.mmajunkie.com/threads/why-was-lashleys-opponent-not-approved.21485/
Click to expand...

Jak said:
killadakiller said:
can someone explain how them denying his opponent makes any sence at all
Click to expand...
Some people might actually care about a fighters safety.
It's great that you can determine his opponent was a quality opponent because you read some stats about him. But sending a guy on short notice against a 265+ pound wrestler can lead to injury for an inexperienced fighter.
Lashley has known about this fight for a while and has been training. His opponent is a very inexperienced in MMA and got a fight on super short notice. His boxing experience is of little relevance when being sanctioned for an MMA bout.
While i don't always agree with Commissions, i do dislike when they actually do put a fighters safety first and a get questioned on it simply because the people disagreeing are solely looking at it from a pro SF pro Bobby Lashley perspective.
You can disagree all you want, but sometimes it's actually good for the sport when commissions won't sanction some fights. It happens all the time in smaller organizations and nobody complains, it just so happens that this time it included a big "named" fighter.
Click to expand...
my argument had nothing to do with pro SF or pro Bobby Lashley perspective. I seriously doubt Bobby knew who he was facing and they just didn't tell Banks. Its not like Bobby is a very experienced guy hes had one more fight against the same level of competition(except maybe Sapp). the guy (banks) hasnt fought in 18 months im sure he wasnt sitting on the couch eating Cheetos he was probably training waiting on a call from Strikeforce just like Bobby. its easy to say Bobby is a 265 pound wrestler so he cant fight him but that could have been said when he fought his first opponent and he hadnt ever had a fight and I dont believe was Banks size either. The bottom line is this is a weak attempt by the Florida commission to make people think there trying to protect a fighter and come across looking good because of it. When really all there doing by doing this is costing a guy (Yohan Banks) what would probably have been a pretty good paycheck (that he could probably use) by using there politics. I would almost guarantee no one wanted this fight more that Banks, and you make it sound like Banks is a LHW moving up for this fight, dude is pretty damn big im sure the size difference isn't that much and I know its not more than say couture-Lesnar or probably even Kimbo-Alexander.
and it would be really hard to justify letting this next guy fight but turn down Banks
 
Originally posted by: cxcelica
Date: January 15, 2010 at 02:44 PM
Source: https://forum.mmajunkie.com/threads/why-was-lashleys-opponent-not-approved.21485/
Click to expand...

When the commission rejects a license application, do they issue a statment regarding how they reached their conclusion. It would be interesting to see what factors went into determining whether someone was worthy of a license or not.
If they just state rejected, its kinda a copout.
 
Originally posted by: thabestevah
Date: January 15, 2010 at 06:30 PM
Source: https://forum.mmajunkie.com/threads/why-was-lashleys-opponent-not-approved.21485/
Click to expand...

cxcelica said:
When the commission rejects a license application, do they issue a statment regarding how they reached their conclusion. It would be interesting to see what factors went into determining whether someone was worthy of a license or not.
If they just state rejected, its kinda a copout.
Click to expand...
I wish they did issue a statement "not competitive" is a complete copout. If they do issue a statement I wanna see it.
 
Originally posted by: Leland
Date: January 15, 2010 at 11:51 PM
Source: https://forum.mmajunkie.com/threads/why-was-lashleys-opponent-not-approved.21485/
Click to expand...

I thought the same thing, what a dumb decision. He is 4-0 how can you say anyone is out of his league? If he fought UFC level opponents I would understand but he has fought no one spectacular. Sigh. Maybe they denied it due to the difference in pay scale??? No clue here.
 
Originally posted by: thabestevah
Date: January 16, 2010 at 11:52 AM
Source: https://forum.mmajunkie.com/threads/why-was-lashleys-opponent-not-approved.21485/
Click to expand...

I just watched Friday Night Fights last night on ESPN. If the first fight from that card can get sanctioned then theres no excuse for this one (I know different state but still it happens all the time in boxing uncompetitive fights are constantly sanctioned look at Mike Tysons run He knocked out like 19 chumps before he ever had a fight)
 
Originally posted by: MMA-P6U6N6X
Date: January 16, 2010 at 01:16 PM
Source: https://forum.mmajunkie.com/threads/why-was-lashleys-opponent-not-approved.21485/
Click to expand...

No one worry, I just called Scott, and we've come to terms. I will be fighting Big Bad Booby L, thats what he requested I call him, on the 30th of Januar in Miami. Headed to 24hr fitness right now, to get my swoll on, wish me luck.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top