I'm typing this while I'm at work right now, so I can't include links, bold face type, different size text or anything like that. I have to use a website called unblocktwitter.com just to get to use Blogspot. I still wanted to get in some predictions for tonite's UFC 114 before the show begins at 10 pm EST. The card has a super main event and a lot of other big names on the card, but they aren't fighting any other big names.
MAIN EVENT
Quinton "Rampage" Jackson (30-7) vs. "Suga" Rashad Evans (19-1-1)
This is the match that the UFC has been hyping since last fall's Ultimate Fighter. It was supposed to happen at December's UFC 107, but Rampage pulled out to play B.A. Baracus in the upcoming A-Team movie. If you know anything about the UFC or have seen a commercial for the pay per view, you know that these two have engaged in a legendary war of words for the past year and a half. Rampage hasn't fought since January 2009 and came in to his training at 251 pounds, meaning he cut 46 pounds in the last three months. Rashad trains all year round and is coming off a lackluster decision win over Thiago Silva at UFC 108 this past January. Coming into this fight, I would say that Rashad has the advantage in speed and conditioning while Rampage has a size, strength and striking advantage, as well as having a jaw made of granite. You need to unload on Rampage in a way that is considered felony assault to drop him. Rashad doesn't have that kind of jaw, as witnessed by his destruction at the hands of Lyoto Machida. If Rashad can push the pace and can take Rampage down to the ground, he will win the fight. If they stand and trade punches, Rampage should be able to put him down like he's Old Yeller. I WANT Rampage by KO since I can't stand Evans as a personality or as a fighter. However, Rampage could have quite a bit of rust. The longer it stays standing, the more likely Rampage wins, but I THINK that EVANS will win by DECISION.
CO-MAIN EVENT
Michael "The Count" Bisping (19-3) vs. Dan Miller
Miller is dealing with a lot of personal strife, having a baby die at birth before one of his most recent fights and another who as just born that is in very poor health. I can't imagine his heart and mind are 100% into fighting right now, and understandably so. Bisping is coming off a tough, but domintating decision loss to Wanderlei Silva back in February. I like Bisping, I think he works hard and gets a bad rap from a lot of people because of his personality. He has solid boxing and wrestling and decent ground and pound. He doesn't have too much power, but the dude tries real hard and I appreciate that. I don't know much about Miller and I've never seen him fight, but I hear he has some good jiu-jitsu and mediocre striking. Miller probably deserves a win for all the shit he is going through, but Bisping is a pretty good fighter and one of the better fighters in the middleweight division. I think BISPING wins by DECISION.
MAIN CARD
Todd Duffee (6-0) vs. Mike Russow (12-1)
Duffee is coming off a record setting six second KO victory in his last fight and is a highly touted, very athletic heavyweight prospect. The hype train around him is huge right now. Mike Russow is coming off a decision win back in August over fellow journeyman heavyweight Justin McCully. I've never seen either of them fight before, but at the weigh ins last nite Russow looked pretty fat and wore a t-shirt as he was weighed, never a good sign. We'll go with DUFFEE by KO.
Antonio Rogerio "Minotauro" Nogueira (18-3) vs. Jason "Hitman" Brilz (18-2-1)
Don't let the similar records fool you; Lil Nog is a beast who has been in some epic wars in his 21 fights. Brilz is a middle of the road journeyman fighter with no significant wins. This was originally supposed to be Nogueira vs. Forrest Griffin as the co-main for this, but Forrest pulled out with an injury and Brilz is replacing him on two weeks notice. Nog is a badass who has great boxing and jiu jitsu and has had a monster fight with current LHW champ Shogun Rua, a submission win over Dan Henderson, and a win over current Strikeforce HW champ Alistair Overeem. While an upset could happen, I think NOGUEIRA wins BY KO or SUBMISSION.
Diego "Nightmare" Sanchez (23-3) vs. John "The Hitman" Hathaway (13-0)
This is Sanchez's return to welterweight after getting annihilated by BJ Penn in a fight for the lightweight title. Diego is known for his relentless cardio and energy, as well as solid wrestling, striking, and ground and pound. Hathaway is of a similar mould as a fighter, but not really known for the cardio and energy. I don't really know Hathaway that well to make any real picks on this fight. I do think it will go all three rounds and I'll go with SANCHEZ by DECISION.
I'll check in this week after the ppv with my thoughts and how well I did with my predictions. Peace.
Saturday, May 29, 2010
Sunday, May 23, 2010
Short reviews of some CDs I've bought/listened to recently
The title of the entry says it all. In the last month or so I've either purchased or borrowed several albums, some new and some old, and I decided to grace you all with a little bit about each one and whether or not I feel it is worth your time to check any of them out. Here goes:
Tom Waits - Blue Valentine: This was from way back when Waits was doing his piano balladeer/jazz singer routine, but about two albums before he started his Captain Beefheart/distorted blues phases. In comparison to an album like Small Change, the songs on this album are much more sparse. It is probably due to the fact that Waits loses a lot of the string parts common in his earlier work and adds electric guitar and keyboards to his sound. His songs are still about bohemians and lowlifes like in his prior work, but there seems to be more of a harder edge to the music and his vocals. You can see where he is going with this in his next album Heart Attack and Vine, which contains much more guitar and has some edgier, more raw sounding songs. Heart Attack and Vine is the real transition album before he became the Howlin' Wolf of this generation, but Blue Valentine is the transition to the transition, if that makes sense. I wouldn't really recommend it unless you have more than a passing knowledge of Tom Waits' music. It's a good album, but I don't think it would really turn anyone on to him that wasn't already a fan. If you would like to hear a song on this album,, you should check out "Christmas Card From a Hooker in Minneapolis." Overall, I would give this album a 6.5 out of 10.
Iggy and the Stooges - Raw Power (Legacy Edition): This is a reissue of the seminal 1973 album by Iggy Pop and his band the Stooges. In 1997, it was released on CD with a new mix done by Iggy. The original was done by David Bowie and was criticized for being too tame sounding. The Iggy mix is the exact opposite and is too loud to really enjoy. Seriously, it is the loudest album put out on CD ever. The Legacy Edition corrects this wrong and has rereleased the Bowie mix. It, other than the fact it is very quiet, is a much better mix. There are better textures and nuances in the music that were lost in Iggy's mix. One only needs to hear the version of "Gimme Danger" from it to really hear what I'm talking about. As for the quality of the remaster, the sound could be boosted a bit and still be able to preserve the integrity of the material, like with the excellent reissues of the Beatles catalog that came out last year. The second disc contains eight live tracks and two unreleased songs. The concert is cool to hear the Stooges back in their heyday since there is precious little good quality recordings of them at that time. I feel that this disc could have been better and they could have included some of the older songs that were never officially released like "I Got A Right" and the studio version of "Cock in my Pocket" (there is a live version included on the second disc). Overall, I would say anyone who is a fan of old school punk, a hardcore David Bowie fan, or a major fan of Iggy Pop should buy this album just to have the David Bowie mix of the album. If you can get it without the second disc for $10 I would do it, but it is only like $13 for the two disc version. The first disc is a 10 of 10 and the second disc is about a 6 (since it is only for essentialists), so we'll give it an 8 out of 10.
Dead Weather - Sea of Cowards: For those not in the know, the Dead Weather is a Jack White (of the White Stripes) side project where he plays the drums and shares some vocals with lead singer Allison Mosshart of the Kills. The band is rounded out by Dean Fertita of the Queens of the Stone Age on guitar and Jack Lawrence of the Raconteurs on bass. Their first album came out last year and was a lo-fi 70s inspired rock album that was above average, but did not reach the quality of either of Jack White's other bands. With Sea of Cowards, they have really turned a corner and put out a great rock album. My favorite track on it has to be "The Difference Between Us." There isn't really a weak track on this at all and I would recommend it to anyone who is a fan of Jack White's music or alternative rock in general. It is a solid 8.5 out of 10.
Stone Temple Pilots - Core: This is the first STP album from back in 1992. It features the hit songs "Sex Type Thing," "Creep," and "Plush." It is also my least favorite of all their albums. It isn't bad, but it is very much a period of the times and apes Nirvana ("Creep") and Pearl Jam ("Plush") a bit too heavily. By the mid-90s, their sound became more defined with the hard riffs evident here and Scott Weiland's vocal evolution into a David Bowie/Jim Morrison/Iggy Pop hybrid. That being said, "Crackerman" is fucking awesome and so is "Piece of Pie." I would recommend this to STP fans (who probably already own it) and people who liked early Pearl Jam and the later imitators like Creed. That isn't to call STP a cheap Pearl Jam knockoff, but Core only hints at what they are capable of. I'll give it a 7.0 out of 10.
Rolling Stones - Exile on Main Street (Deluxe Edition): This is a reissue of the 1972 album by the Stones, an album that I would say without hesitation is the greatest rock album of all time. The deluxe edition contains a second disc featuring ten extra tracks, which were mostly written back in the day, but had new vocals and guitar pieces added to them. As far as reissues go, you can't get much better than this. The sound quality of the original album has been boosted and enhanced, but not in a way that interferes with the integrity of the original album. Jagger's vocals are still low in the mix, the band is still loose sounding, but you can hear everything in the album (the horns, the background vocals) much better. The second disc is pretty neat. "Plunder My Soul" is the highlight of this disc and the songs in general are pretty cool, although not totally essential. At the very least, you should own the single disc since its the best album ever and the remaster does a great service to the original album. Either way, this is easily a 10 out of 10.
Bruce Springsteen - The Wild, The Innocent, and the E Street Shuffle: This isn't the best Bruce album or even his Bruciest album, but it is definitely my favorite one. Bruce gets down with his white boy Jersey funk/jazz/rock fusion in a way he never really does again after this. "The E Street Shuffle" is possibly his funkiest song, "Kitty's Back" is his best jazzy rocker and "Rosalita" is in the top 2 or 3 Bruce songs ever. If you don't like that song, there might be something wrong with you. It is easily his most fun song to listen to and in general, this album is lighter in subject and tone than a lot of his subsequent work. I would recommend this to anyone who is a fan of Bruce Springsteen and 70s singer-songwriter rock. No doubt, a 10 out of 10.
That does it for this entry. Hopefully someone found it interesting. If anyone who reads this has checked out something new recently, leave me a comment and let me know about it.
Tom Waits - Blue Valentine: This was from way back when Waits was doing his piano balladeer/jazz singer routine, but about two albums before he started his Captain Beefheart/distorted blues phases. In comparison to an album like Small Change, the songs on this album are much more sparse. It is probably due to the fact that Waits loses a lot of the string parts common in his earlier work and adds electric guitar and keyboards to his sound. His songs are still about bohemians and lowlifes like in his prior work, but there seems to be more of a harder edge to the music and his vocals. You can see where he is going with this in his next album Heart Attack and Vine, which contains much more guitar and has some edgier, more raw sounding songs. Heart Attack and Vine is the real transition album before he became the Howlin' Wolf of this generation, but Blue Valentine is the transition to the transition, if that makes sense. I wouldn't really recommend it unless you have more than a passing knowledge of Tom Waits' music. It's a good album, but I don't think it would really turn anyone on to him that wasn't already a fan. If you would like to hear a song on this album,, you should check out "Christmas Card From a Hooker in Minneapolis." Overall, I would give this album a 6.5 out of 10.
Iggy and the Stooges - Raw Power (Legacy Edition): This is a reissue of the seminal 1973 album by Iggy Pop and his band the Stooges. In 1997, it was released on CD with a new mix done by Iggy. The original was done by David Bowie and was criticized for being too tame sounding. The Iggy mix is the exact opposite and is too loud to really enjoy. Seriously, it is the loudest album put out on CD ever. The Legacy Edition corrects this wrong and has rereleased the Bowie mix. It, other than the fact it is very quiet, is a much better mix. There are better textures and nuances in the music that were lost in Iggy's mix. One only needs to hear the version of "Gimme Danger" from it to really hear what I'm talking about. As for the quality of the remaster, the sound could be boosted a bit and still be able to preserve the integrity of the material, like with the excellent reissues of the Beatles catalog that came out last year. The second disc contains eight live tracks and two unreleased songs. The concert is cool to hear the Stooges back in their heyday since there is precious little good quality recordings of them at that time. I feel that this disc could have been better and they could have included some of the older songs that were never officially released like "I Got A Right" and the studio version of "Cock in my Pocket" (there is a live version included on the second disc). Overall, I would say anyone who is a fan of old school punk, a hardcore David Bowie fan, or a major fan of Iggy Pop should buy this album just to have the David Bowie mix of the album. If you can get it without the second disc for $10 I would do it, but it is only like $13 for the two disc version. The first disc is a 10 of 10 and the second disc is about a 6 (since it is only for essentialists), so we'll give it an 8 out of 10.
Dead Weather - Sea of Cowards: For those not in the know, the Dead Weather is a Jack White (of the White Stripes) side project where he plays the drums and shares some vocals with lead singer Allison Mosshart of the Kills. The band is rounded out by Dean Fertita of the Queens of the Stone Age on guitar and Jack Lawrence of the Raconteurs on bass. Their first album came out last year and was a lo-fi 70s inspired rock album that was above average, but did not reach the quality of either of Jack White's other bands. With Sea of Cowards, they have really turned a corner and put out a great rock album. My favorite track on it has to be "The Difference Between Us." There isn't really a weak track on this at all and I would recommend it to anyone who is a fan of Jack White's music or alternative rock in general. It is a solid 8.5 out of 10.
Stone Temple Pilots - Core: This is the first STP album from back in 1992. It features the hit songs "Sex Type Thing," "Creep," and "Plush." It is also my least favorite of all their albums. It isn't bad, but it is very much a period of the times and apes Nirvana ("Creep") and Pearl Jam ("Plush") a bit too heavily. By the mid-90s, their sound became more defined with the hard riffs evident here and Scott Weiland's vocal evolution into a David Bowie/Jim Morrison/Iggy Pop hybrid. That being said, "Crackerman" is fucking awesome and so is "Piece of Pie." I would recommend this to STP fans (who probably already own it) and people who liked early Pearl Jam and the later imitators like Creed. That isn't to call STP a cheap Pearl Jam knockoff, but Core only hints at what they are capable of. I'll give it a 7.0 out of 10.
Rolling Stones - Exile on Main Street (Deluxe Edition): This is a reissue of the 1972 album by the Stones, an album that I would say without hesitation is the greatest rock album of all time. The deluxe edition contains a second disc featuring ten extra tracks, which were mostly written back in the day, but had new vocals and guitar pieces added to them. As far as reissues go, you can't get much better than this. The sound quality of the original album has been boosted and enhanced, but not in a way that interferes with the integrity of the original album. Jagger's vocals are still low in the mix, the band is still loose sounding, but you can hear everything in the album (the horns, the background vocals) much better. The second disc is pretty neat. "Plunder My Soul" is the highlight of this disc and the songs in general are pretty cool, although not totally essential. At the very least, you should own the single disc since its the best album ever and the remaster does a great service to the original album. Either way, this is easily a 10 out of 10.
Bruce Springsteen - The Wild, The Innocent, and the E Street Shuffle: This isn't the best Bruce album or even his Bruciest album, but it is definitely my favorite one. Bruce gets down with his white boy Jersey funk/jazz/rock fusion in a way he never really does again after this. "The E Street Shuffle" is possibly his funkiest song, "Kitty's Back" is his best jazzy rocker and "Rosalita" is in the top 2 or 3 Bruce songs ever. If you don't like that song, there might be something wrong with you. It is easily his most fun song to listen to and in general, this album is lighter in subject and tone than a lot of his subsequent work. I would recommend this to anyone who is a fan of Bruce Springsteen and 70s singer-songwriter rock. No doubt, a 10 out of 10.
That does it for this entry. Hopefully someone found it interesting. If anyone who reads this has checked out something new recently, leave me a comment and let me know about it.
Saturday, May 22, 2010
Hall of Shame: The Rest of the Worst
After raging about the Tea Party for a while and trying to forget how angry I am, its time to get back down to brass tacks and continue with the Hall of Shame.
Thursday, May 20, 2010
Hall of Shame: Tea Party Edition
My original list for this installment of the Price Vincent Hall of Shame was six people. As I started fleshing out my reasons for gaining this very prestigious honor, my reasons for the Tea Party (and two people in particular in the movement) made the column far too long. Instead, I'll talk about the other entries later and focus this one on the Tea Partiers, Rand Paul and Mark Williams in particular.
Since I first started using this blog last August and September and updated it periodically over the last two months, I've somehow managed to remain curiously silent on the Tea Party movement. I didn't specifically mention them in my August 21, 2009 entry on health care obstructionists, but that was really the beginning of the Tea Party movement. For some reason that escapes me, I also somehow managed to ignore writing about them in the beginning of the year when they were sending death threats to people who voted in favor of health care reform, a move that calls to mind the memories and reform of the kristallnacht period. In my first installment of the Hall of Shame, I referred to Sean Hannity and the state of Arizona, two bastions of Tea Party support. I even managed to stay silent when my uncle joined a Tea Party group in our hometown and brought his ten year old son with him and had him carry a sign that read "In God We Trust, Not Obama." This week, however, I decided that I couldn't really stay quiet about them any longer.
The Tea Party movement managed to corrall enough angry, Jesus lovin', racist, white people to gain some primary victories and set the national agenda for the Republican Party. This agenda is simple: not having to pay taxes, calling Obama a socialist, not helping the less fortunate, ending government spending on medicare and social security, and advancing a message of states' rights/social Darwinism/hating people who aren't middle class (at least) and white/blaming the "other" for every problem in America. The irony of not wanting government programs escapes them since forty percent of them are over 55 and 22 percent are under age 35, so they will be eligible for Social Security payments, which I would be willing to bet they aren't going to return to the government in protest. Also, 70 percent of them want the federal government to foster job creation and to limit the abuses of Wall Street. They are either hypocritical, stupid, or both. Before anyone says I'm generalizing the movement, 79 percent of them are white, and 44 percent of them are born again Christian.
Now some of you might still be saying, "Shahen, the Tea Party movement doesn't condone racism and ignorance. Just because they are white, Christian, and include an inordinate amount of Birthers doesn't make them racist. It's about the size of government, not that the President is black. Besides, the leadership of the movement can't control the masses who protest, as that would be anathema to the purpose of the movement and free speech. It's a grassroots movement and doesn't express any cohesive ideology besides lower taxes and less government." After wondering how you were able to tell me this with a straight face, I would then tell you that you're a fucking moron, question how we even know each other, tell you that not only does it condone racism, ignorance, and hatred, but it endorses it and is an explicit part of their platform. Let's have a look at two shining examples of leaders within the Tea Party movement and how fucked up they are: Tea Party Express chairman Mark Williams and Kentucky US Senate nominee Rand Paul.
Mark Williams: Mark Williams is evidently a radio host and blogger, as well as the leader of the Tea Party Express, which I guess is some kind of deal where Williams and some other asshats are going countrywide in a bus to spread their message. Kind of like the Partridge Family but the Tea Partiers are even bigger douchebags. They enlist noted intellectuals like Sarah Palin to give policy speech and provoke meaningful dialogue and understanding. Just kidding, they make up a bunch of stories about "death panels" and taking back democracy for the (white) people. Don't believe me? Well, Mr. Williams makes it clear exactly where he stands and where his followers should stand. For starters, Mr. Williams is a birther and has referred to Obama as an "Indonesian thug turned welfare fraud," a "half-white racist," a "half black racist," and a "Nazi." I'll point it out, although it isn't necessary, but the Dixie Chicks were mauled in the media for saying they were embarrassed to be from the same state as Presidfent Bush. This idiot says the above things and he is considered a viable voice for political change. He shouldn't even be asked to be on television. The birther movement is bullshit and his refusal to recognize Obama as even a human being is appalling and disgusting. Not as disgusting as the shit he pulled this week. In a blog on his website this week he wrote about a planned 15 story community center being built by a Muslim group that will feature a mosque, performing arts center, a gym and a swimming pool that will be put up near Ground Zero in NYC as a monument to celebrate terrorism. His exact words were, "The monument would consist of a mosque for the worship of the terrorists' monkey-god." The blog also featured an illustration called "Nazi Muhmmad" that featured Muhammad with swastika and cockroach beard with women who are bleeding from the crotch and is armed. When asked about the Nazi comparison, he stated that he couldn't find an image of Muhammad as Satan and had to settle for Hitler. In another blog, he stated Islam is a "7th Century Death Cult coughed up by a psychotic pedophile." First, Islam and Christianity have the same God. Second, all religion is essentially a cult. Jesus was a charismatic carpenter of dubious birth origins who had a devoted legion of followers. Second, Islam is the most popular religion in the world and only a small percentage of Muslims could be considered terrorists. And is it a monkey-god because brown skinned people are predominantly Muslims? Third, how come he hasn't ever spoken about fringe Christian terrorists like Tim McVeigh or Eric Robert Rudolph? I'm gonna say because they were far right, religious white men and they were just fighting against the liberals and big government socialism and people who perform abortions and fighting the good fight (in his eyes). The fact that this lunatic is the leader of a group that gets mainstream media coverage and isn't treated like a bunch of fringe wackos anywhere except MSNBC troubles me. This guy is breeding hate in the same way that Republicans always state that Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton (both black, what a shocker) do. It is more troubling because he is race baiting to incite middle class and lower class white people to attack and go after a large segment of the population. If the Tea Party was really inclusive and not a bunch of idiot white people, they would disavow Mark Williams immediately. They won't though, because he's their kind of guy.
Rand Paul: Rand is the son of everyone's favorite libertarian, Ron Paul. He has entered the political fray now as the Republican nominee for US Senate in the state of Kentucky. Rand is also a Tea Partier and super conservative. How conservative, you ask? Let's take a gander at his political views. He wants to remove US military bases from overseas. Every single base. He also wants a constitutional amendment banning abortion. That's ironic, a self-proclaimed libertarian wants government to pass a law restricting people's rights. It is even more ironic when you consider that he doesn't like the Civil Rights Act. On Rachel Maddow's show, he stated that he would have opposed parts of the 1964 legislation, specifically the parts that forced businesses to serve white and black people and do so equally and without exclusion. He stated that it is the free speech right of a business or person to choose to be segregated and not the role of the government to interfere. He also said the same thing about the Americans with Disabilities Act. Companies shouldn't have to be handicap accessible. It restricts the free speech of a company to have to comply these things if it doesn't want to. Don't believe me? Watch it for yourself. I'll even include his rebuttal that blames Rachel Maddow and not himself for being a racist dick. Even if he feels that the states should make these rules or leave it up to businesses to do right for themselves, the fact is that they wouldn't and haven't throughout history without the federal government forcing it upon them. Also, an amendment banning abortion? What happened to let the people and the states decide? It is 2010 and abortion is not an issue, get over it. No one is pro-abortion. No one walks around saying, "Goddamn I love abortions. They are so awesome." Abortion is a women's health issue and the right wing needs to stop trying to force their morality on women. I got off track there, but Rand is a total hypocrite. No to federal involvement in civil rights enforcement but yes to it when it involves stopping abortions? Also, Rand believes in abolishing the Departments of Education, Energy and Commerce, as well as aboloshing the income tax. No cohesive national education standards and funding, no ensuring that we have clean and healthy energy source, no stopping monopolies and illegal trade, but the government should abolish abortion constitutionally? Fuck you Rand. I could go on about how he doesn't support amnesty and wants to limit the amount of Visas eligible to foreigners and thinks money should go to parents to home school their kids instead of having them go to school (since that breeds normal, well-adjusted kids), but I think I made it clear before that he is a racist and a dick.
These people in the Tea Party make me so disappointed in being an American. They are lunatics who preach hate and pull a Chicken Little routine over everything the Democrats do. Meanwhile they said nothing about how Bush launched two failed wars that cost trillions, restricted civil liberties via the Patriot Act, supervised the destruction of New Orleans, and started the recession with his laissez-faire attitude but they don't. Instead the recession is blamed on handouts to the poor and health care. Instead it was handouts to Bush's rich buddies through tax breaks while increasing spending at the same time. You can't increase spending and cut taxes at the same time. It just doesn't work. If it was about what's right and what's wrong, these people would have called Bush out for his fuckups. But its not about whats wrong and whats right, its about who is black and who is white.
Since I first started using this blog last August and September and updated it periodically over the last two months, I've somehow managed to remain curiously silent on the Tea Party movement. I didn't specifically mention them in my August 21, 2009 entry on health care obstructionists, but that was really the beginning of the Tea Party movement. For some reason that escapes me, I also somehow managed to ignore writing about them in the beginning of the year when they were sending death threats to people who voted in favor of health care reform, a move that calls to mind the memories and reform of the kristallnacht period. In my first installment of the Hall of Shame, I referred to Sean Hannity and the state of Arizona, two bastions of Tea Party support. I even managed to stay silent when my uncle joined a Tea Party group in our hometown and brought his ten year old son with him and had him carry a sign that read "In God We Trust, Not Obama." This week, however, I decided that I couldn't really stay quiet about them any longer.
The Tea Party movement managed to corrall enough angry, Jesus lovin', racist, white people to gain some primary victories and set the national agenda for the Republican Party. This agenda is simple: not having to pay taxes, calling Obama a socialist, not helping the less fortunate, ending government spending on medicare and social security, and advancing a message of states' rights/social Darwinism/hating people who aren't middle class (at least) and white/blaming the "other" for every problem in America. The irony of not wanting government programs escapes them since forty percent of them are over 55 and 22 percent are under age 35, so they will be eligible for Social Security payments, which I would be willing to bet they aren't going to return to the government in protest. Also, 70 percent of them want the federal government to foster job creation and to limit the abuses of Wall Street. They are either hypocritical, stupid, or both. Before anyone says I'm generalizing the movement, 79 percent of them are white, and 44 percent of them are born again Christian.
Now some of you might still be saying, "Shahen, the Tea Party movement doesn't condone racism and ignorance. Just because they are white, Christian, and include an inordinate amount of Birthers doesn't make them racist. It's about the size of government, not that the President is black. Besides, the leadership of the movement can't control the masses who protest, as that would be anathema to the purpose of the movement and free speech. It's a grassroots movement and doesn't express any cohesive ideology besides lower taxes and less government." After wondering how you were able to tell me this with a straight face, I would then tell you that you're a fucking moron, question how we even know each other, tell you that not only does it condone racism, ignorance, and hatred, but it endorses it and is an explicit part of their platform. Let's have a look at two shining examples of leaders within the Tea Party movement and how fucked up they are: Tea Party Express chairman Mark Williams and Kentucky US Senate nominee Rand Paul.
Mark Williams: Mark Williams is evidently a radio host and blogger, as well as the leader of the Tea Party Express, which I guess is some kind of deal where Williams and some other asshats are going countrywide in a bus to spread their message. Kind of like the Partridge Family but the Tea Partiers are even bigger douchebags. They enlist noted intellectuals like Sarah Palin to give policy speech and provoke meaningful dialogue and understanding. Just kidding, they make up a bunch of stories about "death panels" and taking back democracy for the (white) people. Don't believe me? Well, Mr. Williams makes it clear exactly where he stands and where his followers should stand. For starters, Mr. Williams is a birther and has referred to Obama as an "Indonesian thug turned welfare fraud," a "half-white racist," a "half black racist," and a "Nazi." I'll point it out, although it isn't necessary, but the Dixie Chicks were mauled in the media for saying they were embarrassed to be from the same state as Presidfent Bush. This idiot says the above things and he is considered a viable voice for political change. He shouldn't even be asked to be on television. The birther movement is bullshit and his refusal to recognize Obama as even a human being is appalling and disgusting. Not as disgusting as the shit he pulled this week. In a blog on his website this week he wrote about a planned 15 story community center being built by a Muslim group that will feature a mosque, performing arts center, a gym and a swimming pool that will be put up near Ground Zero in NYC as a monument to celebrate terrorism. His exact words were, "The monument would consist of a mosque for the worship of the terrorists' monkey-god." The blog also featured an illustration called "Nazi Muhmmad" that featured Muhammad with swastika and cockroach beard with women who are bleeding from the crotch and is armed. When asked about the Nazi comparison, he stated that he couldn't find an image of Muhammad as Satan and had to settle for Hitler. In another blog, he stated Islam is a "7th Century Death Cult coughed up by a psychotic pedophile." First, Islam and Christianity have the same God. Second, all religion is essentially a cult. Jesus was a charismatic carpenter of dubious birth origins who had a devoted legion of followers. Second, Islam is the most popular religion in the world and only a small percentage of Muslims could be considered terrorists. And is it a monkey-god because brown skinned people are predominantly Muslims? Third, how come he hasn't ever spoken about fringe Christian terrorists like Tim McVeigh or Eric Robert Rudolph? I'm gonna say because they were far right, religious white men and they were just fighting against the liberals and big government socialism and people who perform abortions and fighting the good fight (in his eyes). The fact that this lunatic is the leader of a group that gets mainstream media coverage and isn't treated like a bunch of fringe wackos anywhere except MSNBC troubles me. This guy is breeding hate in the same way that Republicans always state that Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton (both black, what a shocker) do. It is more troubling because he is race baiting to incite middle class and lower class white people to attack and go after a large segment of the population. If the Tea Party was really inclusive and not a bunch of idiot white people, they would disavow Mark Williams immediately. They won't though, because he's their kind of guy.
Rand Paul: Rand is the son of everyone's favorite libertarian, Ron Paul. He has entered the political fray now as the Republican nominee for US Senate in the state of Kentucky. Rand is also a Tea Partier and super conservative. How conservative, you ask? Let's take a gander at his political views. He wants to remove US military bases from overseas. Every single base. He also wants a constitutional amendment banning abortion. That's ironic, a self-proclaimed libertarian wants government to pass a law restricting people's rights. It is even more ironic when you consider that he doesn't like the Civil Rights Act. On Rachel Maddow's show, he stated that he would have opposed parts of the 1964 legislation, specifically the parts that forced businesses to serve white and black people and do so equally and without exclusion. He stated that it is the free speech right of a business or person to choose to be segregated and not the role of the government to interfere. He also said the same thing about the Americans with Disabilities Act. Companies shouldn't have to be handicap accessible. It restricts the free speech of a company to have to comply these things if it doesn't want to. Don't believe me? Watch it for yourself. I'll even include his rebuttal that blames Rachel Maddow and not himself for being a racist dick. Even if he feels that the states should make these rules or leave it up to businesses to do right for themselves, the fact is that they wouldn't and haven't throughout history without the federal government forcing it upon them. Also, an amendment banning abortion? What happened to let the people and the states decide? It is 2010 and abortion is not an issue, get over it. No one is pro-abortion. No one walks around saying, "Goddamn I love abortions. They are so awesome." Abortion is a women's health issue and the right wing needs to stop trying to force their morality on women. I got off track there, but Rand is a total hypocrite. No to federal involvement in civil rights enforcement but yes to it when it involves stopping abortions? Also, Rand believes in abolishing the Departments of Education, Energy and Commerce, as well as aboloshing the income tax. No cohesive national education standards and funding, no ensuring that we have clean and healthy energy source, no stopping monopolies and illegal trade, but the government should abolish abortion constitutionally? Fuck you Rand. I could go on about how he doesn't support amnesty and wants to limit the amount of Visas eligible to foreigners and thinks money should go to parents to home school their kids instead of having them go to school (since that breeds normal, well-adjusted kids), but I think I made it clear before that he is a racist and a dick.
These people in the Tea Party make me so disappointed in being an American. They are lunatics who preach hate and pull a Chicken Little routine over everything the Democrats do. Meanwhile they said nothing about how Bush launched two failed wars that cost trillions, restricted civil liberties via the Patriot Act, supervised the destruction of New Orleans, and started the recession with his laissez-faire attitude but they don't. Instead the recession is blamed on handouts to the poor and health care. Instead it was handouts to Bush's rich buddies through tax breaks while increasing spending at the same time. You can't increase spending and cut taxes at the same time. It just doesn't work. If it was about what's right and what's wrong, these people would have called Bush out for his fuckups. But its not about whats wrong and whats right, its about who is black and who is white.
Monday, May 17, 2010
2010 NBA Playoffs Conference Finals Predictions
As I type this, the next round of the NBA Playoffs began yesterday with the Celtics beating the Orlando Magic in Game 1 of the Eastern Conference Finals. Before that series gets any further and before the Western Conference Finals start tonite, I figured I would get my predicitons in before it is too late.
Eastern Conference Finals
2. Orlando Magic vs. 4. Boston Celtics
Orlando swept/kicked the shit out of the Atlanta Hawks in four games last round and until yesterday's game, had yet to lose in the playoffs. Boston upset Cleveland in six games and began the "Where in the World is LeBron James Going?" stories a solid month earlier than pundits (and I predicted). Right now Boston's defense is firing on all cylinders, Kevin Garnett is playing well and looking healthy, and Rajon Rondo was the best player in the playoffs last round. Boston has been playing like a team possessed and if their defense continues to stymie Orlando's three point shooting and Dwight Howard's limited post game, they should win the series. I think that Orlando is the better, deeper team and can win this series if Jameer Nelson, Vince Carter and Rashard Lewis can make up for the fact that Dwight Howard is going to have little to no success against the three headed beast of Kendrick Perkins/Rasheed Wallace/Big Baby Davis unless he suddenly learns some new moves down low and can keep his cool. Carter played hard in game one, but Nelson didn't do much of anything. I think that this series should be a long, close one and that should favor the younger and better rested Orlando since Boston only had a two day rest before this series and they have been banged up all year. I want Boston to win this series, but I think it is going to be Orlando in seven.
Western Conference
1.) Los Angeles Lakers vs. 3.) Phoenix Suns
Both teams in this series are coming off sweeps of their last opponents, with the Lakers disposing of the upstart Utah Jazz and the Suns avenging years of heartache by beating the San Antonio Spurs. Phoenix's team chemistry has been the best of any team thie postseason. This is a team that genuinely enjoys playing basketball with each other. Steve Nash has been outstanding, Amar'e Stoudemire and Jason Richardson have been killing teams, and the Phoenix bench has played out of their minds. Kobe Bryant played incredibly against Utah and Pau Gasol has been solid this postseason. I think that Phoenix has the better bench, but the Lakers have too much size up front with Gasol, Andrew Bynum, and Lamar Odom. Artest can probably shut down Richardson, but Nash is going to light up Derek Fisher and Kobe will dominate against Grant Hill and Jared Dudley. I will be cheering for Phoenix, as they really deserve a run at a title, but I think Los Angeles will outmuscle them. There is always a chance Kobe starts hogging the ball like he is wont to do from time to time and if that happens and they don't take advantage of their superior low post game, the Suns can win the series. I would love to see Phoenix in five or six, but I think it is going to be Lakers in six.
Thats it for this installment. I'll put up Finals predictions when that time comes near. Also, look for something about the closing of Thacher Park soon.
Eastern Conference Finals
2. Orlando Magic vs. 4. Boston Celtics
Orlando swept/kicked the shit out of the Atlanta Hawks in four games last round and until yesterday's game, had yet to lose in the playoffs. Boston upset Cleveland in six games and began the "Where in the World is LeBron James Going?" stories a solid month earlier than pundits (and I predicted). Right now Boston's defense is firing on all cylinders, Kevin Garnett is playing well and looking healthy, and Rajon Rondo was the best player in the playoffs last round. Boston has been playing like a team possessed and if their defense continues to stymie Orlando's three point shooting and Dwight Howard's limited post game, they should win the series. I think that Orlando is the better, deeper team and can win this series if Jameer Nelson, Vince Carter and Rashard Lewis can make up for the fact that Dwight Howard is going to have little to no success against the three headed beast of Kendrick Perkins/Rasheed Wallace/Big Baby Davis unless he suddenly learns some new moves down low and can keep his cool. Carter played hard in game one, but Nelson didn't do much of anything. I think that this series should be a long, close one and that should favor the younger and better rested Orlando since Boston only had a two day rest before this series and they have been banged up all year. I want Boston to win this series, but I think it is going to be Orlando in seven.
Western Conference
1.) Los Angeles Lakers vs. 3.) Phoenix Suns
Both teams in this series are coming off sweeps of their last opponents, with the Lakers disposing of the upstart Utah Jazz and the Suns avenging years of heartache by beating the San Antonio Spurs. Phoenix's team chemistry has been the best of any team thie postseason. This is a team that genuinely enjoys playing basketball with each other. Steve Nash has been outstanding, Amar'e Stoudemire and Jason Richardson have been killing teams, and the Phoenix bench has played out of their minds. Kobe Bryant played incredibly against Utah and Pau Gasol has been solid this postseason. I think that Phoenix has the better bench, but the Lakers have too much size up front with Gasol, Andrew Bynum, and Lamar Odom. Artest can probably shut down Richardson, but Nash is going to light up Derek Fisher and Kobe will dominate against Grant Hill and Jared Dudley. I will be cheering for Phoenix, as they really deserve a run at a title, but I think Los Angeles will outmuscle them. There is always a chance Kobe starts hogging the ball like he is wont to do from time to time and if that happens and they don't take advantage of their superior low post game, the Suns can win the series. I would love to see Phoenix in five or six, but I think it is going to be Lakers in six.
Thats it for this installment. I'll put up Finals predictions when that time comes near. Also, look for something about the closing of Thacher Park soon.
Thursday, May 13, 2010
Greatness in Sports, Part I: What is greatness?
As I write this piece, game 6 of the Eastern Conference Semifinals between the Cleveland Cavaliers and the Boston Celtics is about to begin. Currently, the fourth seeded Celtics lead the top seeded Cavaliers three games to two. Right now, the talk is about whether or not LeBron James can lift the Cavaliers to victory and what his major malfunction was in games 2 and 5 of this series. If Cleveland loses tonite, they are eliminated from the playoffs and LeBron's status as the best player in the NBA will be (rightfully) questioned.
I, over the course of several entries, am going to discuss greatness or at least what I feel constitutes greatness in sports. This, the first entry, will delve into the criteria I am going to use to establish what a truly "great" athlete is. For the most part, these will be reflective of both team and individual sports. Where there is a difference, I will make that clear.
After establishing what I feel defines "greatness" I am going to delve into LeBron James and whether or not he can be considered a truly great player. This is something I've been wondering about over the past few years between his grandstanding about being a free agent two full seasons before that happens, his celebrations and antics during games, and his lack of playoff success thus far. Of particular note will be the aforementioned games 2 and 5 performances. If the Celtics manage to defeat the Cavaliers tonight or in this round, I will discuss what that means for LeBron and his legacy thus far. If Cleveland manages to somehow win this series, that too will be looked at.
Once I finish discussing LeBron, I will point out some current and past athletes who I consider great, why they are great, and compare what (if any) differences they have with LeBron. The primary focus of that will be the NBA and combat sports (boxing and MMA), as those are the athletic endeavors I am most comfortable and interested in discussing. With all that being said, it's time to get down to brass tacks and break down what makes a competitor great.
What is greatness?
Greatness is defined as being remarkable or exceptionally outstanding. In sports, the word great or words comprised of it, the word great is bandied about without any real thought to iset. There are several, to be exteremly modest, athletes who could be considered amazing or very talented, but greatness is something that transcends just pure talent or unique physical gifts, although both of these items are essential to greatness.
Greatness is a combination of talent and physical gifts that makes an athlete perform well. One cannot be a successful athlete without having some kind of combination of the two. If you look through the annals of sports, every successful athlete has these attributes. Babe Ruth, a truly great baseball player with no easily definable physical gifts, had an incredible ability to hit a baseball like no other. Of course, Babe Ruth was great for more reasons than just hitting a baseball. Babe Ruth was a larger than life personality.
If one was to take a look at all the iconic athletes of the last century, it would be apparent that nearly all of them had a personality that transcended their sport. Truly great athletes transcend, or as I'll discuss later have the ability to transcend, the sport they compete in and become a global icon. In order to do that, the person needs to have more than just an ability to play be good at his or her sport. Patrick Ewing was a very good center in the NBA, but he would never be considered an icon or be familiar to anyone with more than a passing interest in basketball. Babe Ruth was a national icon because of his cartoonish appearance and lifestyle. Muhammad Ali changed what an athlete could do or be. Michael Jordan became a global icon that the world had never seen before due to a combination of his ability as a basketball player and his charisma both on and off the court. With those two elements in place, there are still two more that are vital to an athlete to be considered truly great. Without them, someone like Michael Jordan would be no better than Allen Iverson, someone with great natural talent and a large personality.
The first is intelligence/mental toughness/mental edge. For someone to be truly great, they need to be smarter than the vast majority of their peers. An athlete that is great is pretty much always one step ahead of whoever is guarding them, fighting them, playing against them, etc. They also can't be psyched out or toyed with or thrown off their game mentally, but possess that ability to do it to their foes. Anderson Silva dances and pulls Matrix moves on his opponents before he destroys them. When Michael Jordan got the ball against the Utah Jazz in game 6 of the 1998 NBA finals with the Bulls down one and 17 seconds left, the Utah crowd lets out an "OOOOOOOOO," like they were punched in the gut. Everyone in that building knew what was going to happen once Michael got the chance to put up a shot. That's the kind of mental edge that only someone who is great could have. When put in the same situation, one that would test their own mental toughness, they do not let it defeat them. No one could name a time when Magic Johnson or Michael Jordan was beaten mentally. Even in defeat, their mind does not wilt. They could be beat up physically, like the 1990 Detroit Pistons did to Michael Jordan and the Bulls, but their mental toughness would not abate. A weaker mental competitor than Jordan would have wilted after the beating he endured from the likes of Bill Laimbeer and the rest of the Bad Boys. Even after a brutal defeat, Jordan was able to come back the next season and lead the Bulls to a championship.
This leads to another essential tool for the great athlete, one that links heavily with the prior paragraph: an overwhelming desire to win. A winner does not crumble mentally and after a defeat is able to come back and successfully compete at the highest level. If one was to look at the greatest players or performers in each sport, they are all champions of some level. Michael Jordan was the ultimate winner, Muhammad Ali was the greatest heavyweight champion of all time. Randy Couture has managed to beat back Father Time over the years and win championships in his 40s when most men should not be able to compete in a combat sport. These men all had a desire to win and a mental toughness that pushed them past just being exciting performers or talented athletes and turned them into icons in their respective sports. Winning a championship doesn't automatically make you great of course, and conversely not winning one doesn't make you less than great. Dan Marino is one of the greatest quarterbacks of all time, but he never even sniffed a Super Bowl. In team sports in particular, a great player is at the mercy of those around him. Kevin Garnett was superb in his prime, but he had vastly inferior teammates for the bulk of his career. A basketball or football or baseball player needs to have competent teammates who do not wilt under pressure and are at least competent in order to win a championship. Despite not winning a title, the ability to raise your teammates above a level they would be incapable without you and at least compete for a championship is a sign of greatness. I mentioned Allen Iverson before and during his prime, he led the 76ers to the NBA Finals and made them better for years. He however, wanted to win in a fashion that made him a star, even at the expense of his team's success. Kobe Bryant was guilty of the same thing for the bulk of the last decade. A great player is able to make a team succeed by making them better without having to be the center of attention at all times. In combat sports, winning a title is essential since it is the ultimate sign of greatness in an individual sport to achieve championship status.
To summarize what makes an athlete great, it is a combination of physical gifts, talent, a larger than life personality, mental toughness and intelligence, and a powerful desire to win. In the entries that will follow, I'll delve into some case studies that show particular athletes and how they fit into my greatness criteria. Some people (Michael Jordan, Muhammad Ali) will pop up again and be explained in greater detail, but the very next entry will be about LeBron James and where he currently fits in the greatness debate.
I, over the course of several entries, am going to discuss greatness or at least what I feel constitutes greatness in sports. This, the first entry, will delve into the criteria I am going to use to establish what a truly "great" athlete is. For the most part, these will be reflective of both team and individual sports. Where there is a difference, I will make that clear.
After establishing what I feel defines "greatness" I am going to delve into LeBron James and whether or not he can be considered a truly great player. This is something I've been wondering about over the past few years between his grandstanding about being a free agent two full seasons before that happens, his celebrations and antics during games, and his lack of playoff success thus far. Of particular note will be the aforementioned games 2 and 5 performances. If the Celtics manage to defeat the Cavaliers tonight or in this round, I will discuss what that means for LeBron and his legacy thus far. If Cleveland manages to somehow win this series, that too will be looked at.
Once I finish discussing LeBron, I will point out some current and past athletes who I consider great, why they are great, and compare what (if any) differences they have with LeBron. The primary focus of that will be the NBA and combat sports (boxing and MMA), as those are the athletic endeavors I am most comfortable and interested in discussing. With all that being said, it's time to get down to brass tacks and break down what makes a competitor great.
What is greatness?
Greatness is defined as being remarkable or exceptionally outstanding. In sports, the word great or words comprised of it, the word great is bandied about without any real thought to iset. There are several, to be exteremly modest, athletes who could be considered amazing or very talented, but greatness is something that transcends just pure talent or unique physical gifts, although both of these items are essential to greatness.
Greatness is a combination of talent and physical gifts that makes an athlete perform well. One cannot be a successful athlete without having some kind of combination of the two. If you look through the annals of sports, every successful athlete has these attributes. Babe Ruth, a truly great baseball player with no easily definable physical gifts, had an incredible ability to hit a baseball like no other. Of course, Babe Ruth was great for more reasons than just hitting a baseball. Babe Ruth was a larger than life personality.
If one was to take a look at all the iconic athletes of the last century, it would be apparent that nearly all of them had a personality that transcended their sport. Truly great athletes transcend, or as I'll discuss later have the ability to transcend, the sport they compete in and become a global icon. In order to do that, the person needs to have more than just an ability to play be good at his or her sport. Patrick Ewing was a very good center in the NBA, but he would never be considered an icon or be familiar to anyone with more than a passing interest in basketball. Babe Ruth was a national icon because of his cartoonish appearance and lifestyle. Muhammad Ali changed what an athlete could do or be. Michael Jordan became a global icon that the world had never seen before due to a combination of his ability as a basketball player and his charisma both on and off the court. With those two elements in place, there are still two more that are vital to an athlete to be considered truly great. Without them, someone like Michael Jordan would be no better than Allen Iverson, someone with great natural talent and a large personality.
The first is intelligence/mental toughness/mental edge. For someone to be truly great, they need to be smarter than the vast majority of their peers. An athlete that is great is pretty much always one step ahead of whoever is guarding them, fighting them, playing against them, etc. They also can't be psyched out or toyed with or thrown off their game mentally, but possess that ability to do it to their foes. Anderson Silva dances and pulls Matrix moves on his opponents before he destroys them. When Michael Jordan got the ball against the Utah Jazz in game 6 of the 1998 NBA finals with the Bulls down one and 17 seconds left, the Utah crowd lets out an "OOOOOOOOO," like they were punched in the gut. Everyone in that building knew what was going to happen once Michael got the chance to put up a shot. That's the kind of mental edge that only someone who is great could have. When put in the same situation, one that would test their own mental toughness, they do not let it defeat them. No one could name a time when Magic Johnson or Michael Jordan was beaten mentally. Even in defeat, their mind does not wilt. They could be beat up physically, like the 1990 Detroit Pistons did to Michael Jordan and the Bulls, but their mental toughness would not abate. A weaker mental competitor than Jordan would have wilted after the beating he endured from the likes of Bill Laimbeer and the rest of the Bad Boys. Even after a brutal defeat, Jordan was able to come back the next season and lead the Bulls to a championship.
This leads to another essential tool for the great athlete, one that links heavily with the prior paragraph: an overwhelming desire to win. A winner does not crumble mentally and after a defeat is able to come back and successfully compete at the highest level. If one was to look at the greatest players or performers in each sport, they are all champions of some level. Michael Jordan was the ultimate winner, Muhammad Ali was the greatest heavyweight champion of all time. Randy Couture has managed to beat back Father Time over the years and win championships in his 40s when most men should not be able to compete in a combat sport. These men all had a desire to win and a mental toughness that pushed them past just being exciting performers or talented athletes and turned them into icons in their respective sports. Winning a championship doesn't automatically make you great of course, and conversely not winning one doesn't make you less than great. Dan Marino is one of the greatest quarterbacks of all time, but he never even sniffed a Super Bowl. In team sports in particular, a great player is at the mercy of those around him. Kevin Garnett was superb in his prime, but he had vastly inferior teammates for the bulk of his career. A basketball or football or baseball player needs to have competent teammates who do not wilt under pressure and are at least competent in order to win a championship. Despite not winning a title, the ability to raise your teammates above a level they would be incapable without you and at least compete for a championship is a sign of greatness. I mentioned Allen Iverson before and during his prime, he led the 76ers to the NBA Finals and made them better for years. He however, wanted to win in a fashion that made him a star, even at the expense of his team's success. Kobe Bryant was guilty of the same thing for the bulk of the last decade. A great player is able to make a team succeed by making them better without having to be the center of attention at all times. In combat sports, winning a title is essential since it is the ultimate sign of greatness in an individual sport to achieve championship status.
To summarize what makes an athlete great, it is a combination of physical gifts, talent, a larger than life personality, mental toughness and intelligence, and a powerful desire to win. In the entries that will follow, I'll delve into some case studies that show particular athletes and how they fit into my greatness criteria. Some people (Michael Jordan, Muhammad Ali) will pop up again and be explained in greater detail, but the very next entry will be about LeBron James and where he currently fits in the greatness debate.
Monday, May 10, 2010
I Hate Josh Koscheck and Other UFC 113 Thoughts
I was fortunate enough to watch UFC 113 over the weekend at Wolf's 1-11 in Colonie. For the record, Wolf's 1-11 is a pretty good place to watch the UFC shows, but you need to get there a good hour and a half before the show starts to get a table at the bar area that shows the pay-per-view, as it gets very busy inside. The service is friendly and the food is decent, so Wolf's has that in its favor as well. The crowd is usually pretty into it, but I feel like I'm always near at least one douchebag who likes and dislikes the exact opposite fighters as I do. I would definitely go there again to check out a show. With that out of the way, let's discuss the fights.
The big story coming out of UFC 113 is that there is a new lightheavyweight champion in Mauricio "Shogun" Rua. Shogun completely destroyed my prediction of a five round decision for defending champ Lyoto Machida by brutally knocking him out about three minutes into the fight, handing Machida his first loss ever in his 17 fight career. A lot of people are saying that this is the end of Machida and his karate style being effective, but I disagree. I think Shogun just has his Machida's number. Styles make fights and Shogun's aggressive muay thai matches up too well with Machida's lunging counterstrikes and karate stance. Chuck Liddell was a beast for years, but he couldn't and will never beat Rampage Jackson. I think psychologically that Machida was damaged by Shogun, as he had never even lost a round in his career until their first fight last October. Rua just has Machida's timing and movements down pat and it really set Lyoto off his game. I'm interested to see what the future holds for Machida, as he had an aura of being unhittable and now that has been shattered. Will he still be effective without his mystique? Can he adapt his karate and lose whatever mental blocks he has due to Shogun and still be a top fighter? I think and hope that he can. As for Shogun, I would love to see him fight middleweight champ, pound for pound king, and all around badass Anderson Silva in a title match, but Dana White wants Anderson to finish off whatever cannon fodder is left in his division before that happens. Rua will most likely end up fighting the winner of the fight between Rashad Evans and Rampage Jackson at the end of the month or possibly Antonio Rogerio "Minotauro" Nogueria in a rematch of their epic PRIDE fight from 2005.
The other story is that Josh Koscheck is the new challenger for Georges St. Pierre's welterweight title. He was able to lay and pray his way to victory over Paul Daley. This fight was rather tedious as Daley's ground game was rudimentary enough to keep him from getting choked out, but not enough to keep Koscheck from basically controlling the fight on the ground the whole time. Koscheck was smart enough to keep the fight on the ground, as anytime they stood it looked like Daley was rocking him. The biggest stories to come out of this fight have little to do with GSP having a new challenger; they have to do with something that happened during the fight and something that happened after it ended.
The postfight story is getting the bulk of the attention, so we'll start there. As the fight was winding down, Koscheck had Daley down and was whispering shit into his ear. As they got back up, the fight came to an end and referee Dan Miragliotta separated the two once the bell rang. Daley then went around Miragliotta and punched Koscheck in the face. Daley was immediately restrained and after the show was fired and banned for life by the UFC. While I think that was the right decision and I'm in no way condoning Daley's dangerous and reckless conduct (sucker punching someone is low class), I think that in no way should Josh Koscheck be fighting for the title.
Earlier in the fight, Daley was standing back up after being taken down and launched a knee at Koscheck's head while Kos was still kneeling, which is against the rules. The knee whiffed and Koscheck stopped, looked at the ref, then grabbed his eye and dropped down to the ground like he was shot. Miragliotta was going to dock Koscheck a point until the video replay showed that the best the knee did was skim along his hair. Basically, Koscheck saved himself from getting mauled on his way back up in a move reminiscent of Ric Flair. I know that throwing the knee is illegal and Daley was in the wrong for doing that, but Koscheck still cheated by acting like he was injured. Normally, I would give someone the benefit of the doubt in that situation, but this is the second time I've seen Koscheck do that.
Back in November, Kos was against Anthony "Rumble" Johnson and during the first round of the fight, Johnson threw a knee at Koscheck's head while he was down. Kos grabbed his face like he just went hunting with Dick Cheney and Johnson was deducted a point, even though the replay of the knee was inconclusive in regards to any contact. In the second round, Johnson was the victim of two eye pokes (something that put him out of action for a long time after an earlier fight) from Koscheck, who then submitted him.
That is two straight fights where Koscheck has faked an injury in order to gain an advantage. I wouldn't say that Kos was in danger of losing either of those fights, as he is a strong wrestler and neither Daley nor Johnson are particularly adept on the ground. However, the fact that he has done this twice in a row makes it a pattern. It is total bullshit that he is getting a title shot after pulling that act. There is no place for cheating in sports, especially in a combat sport where there is a risk for injry. Also, smack talking in a fight is considered unsportsmanlike conduct and judging by Kos' smirk after the Daley sucker punch, I think it would be safe to say that he goaded Daley into that shit. That doesn't condone Daley's actions, as he could have seriously injured Koscheck, but Koscheck is a total scumbag. Also, he doesn't really deserve a title shot. In his last three fights (in reverse order) he won a lackluster decision over Daley, submitted a prospect in Rumble Johnson, and knocked out the way over the hill Frank Trigg. Before that, he was knocked out by Paulo Thiago. On top of being a major douchebag, his recent record is not that great. He's a good fighter, but he is a cheating scumbag and I don't plan on ever buying a UFC card with him on it. Josh Koscheck, I'm not impressed by your performance.
In other news coming out of UFC 113, Kimbo Slice lost to Matt Mitrione and was cut afterwards. Good call, as Kimbo seems like a nice guy but is a wretched fighter. If he gets taken down, he lays there like a dead fish. His punching power isn't that great and he can't really take a punch either. Mitrione is a bit of a loser and gasses out after a round, but he has pretty good punching power and was able to withstand some big slams from Kimbo early in their fight. I don't ever see him rising above "prospect" status however and I think any of the decent heavyweights in the division would beat the shit out of him. Alan Belcher had an impressive submission victory over Patrick Cote and now thinks he should be considered a challenger to Anderson Silva. Alan Belcher's an idiot. His chin is suspect and if he tries to strike or take down Silva, the fight will go something like this.
That's about all I have to say about UFC 113. UFC 114 is in a few weeks, so I'll probably write something up about that as fight night approaches. After watching the Silva highlights I linked to above, I may write up something about Anderson, as he is one of the truly transcendent MMA fighters and one of the most dominant athletes of the past decade. Until then, feel free to leave a comment or something about this or any of my other entries.
The big story coming out of UFC 113 is that there is a new lightheavyweight champion in Mauricio "Shogun" Rua. Shogun completely destroyed my prediction of a five round decision for defending champ Lyoto Machida by brutally knocking him out about three minutes into the fight, handing Machida his first loss ever in his 17 fight career. A lot of people are saying that this is the end of Machida and his karate style being effective, but I disagree. I think Shogun just has his Machida's number. Styles make fights and Shogun's aggressive muay thai matches up too well with Machida's lunging counterstrikes and karate stance. Chuck Liddell was a beast for years, but he couldn't and will never beat Rampage Jackson. I think psychologically that Machida was damaged by Shogun, as he had never even lost a round in his career until their first fight last October. Rua just has Machida's timing and movements down pat and it really set Lyoto off his game. I'm interested to see what the future holds for Machida, as he had an aura of being unhittable and now that has been shattered. Will he still be effective without his mystique? Can he adapt his karate and lose whatever mental blocks he has due to Shogun and still be a top fighter? I think and hope that he can. As for Shogun, I would love to see him fight middleweight champ, pound for pound king, and all around badass Anderson Silva in a title match, but Dana White wants Anderson to finish off whatever cannon fodder is left in his division before that happens. Rua will most likely end up fighting the winner of the fight between Rashad Evans and Rampage Jackson at the end of the month or possibly Antonio Rogerio "Minotauro" Nogueria in a rematch of their epic PRIDE fight from 2005.
The other story is that Josh Koscheck is the new challenger for Georges St. Pierre's welterweight title. He was able to lay and pray his way to victory over Paul Daley. This fight was rather tedious as Daley's ground game was rudimentary enough to keep him from getting choked out, but not enough to keep Koscheck from basically controlling the fight on the ground the whole time. Koscheck was smart enough to keep the fight on the ground, as anytime they stood it looked like Daley was rocking him. The biggest stories to come out of this fight have little to do with GSP having a new challenger; they have to do with something that happened during the fight and something that happened after it ended.
The postfight story is getting the bulk of the attention, so we'll start there. As the fight was winding down, Koscheck had Daley down and was whispering shit into his ear. As they got back up, the fight came to an end and referee Dan Miragliotta separated the two once the bell rang. Daley then went around Miragliotta and punched Koscheck in the face. Daley was immediately restrained and after the show was fired and banned for life by the UFC. While I think that was the right decision and I'm in no way condoning Daley's dangerous and reckless conduct (sucker punching someone is low class), I think that in no way should Josh Koscheck be fighting for the title.
Earlier in the fight, Daley was standing back up after being taken down and launched a knee at Koscheck's head while Kos was still kneeling, which is against the rules. The knee whiffed and Koscheck stopped, looked at the ref, then grabbed his eye and dropped down to the ground like he was shot. Miragliotta was going to dock Koscheck a point until the video replay showed that the best the knee did was skim along his hair. Basically, Koscheck saved himself from getting mauled on his way back up in a move reminiscent of Ric Flair. I know that throwing the knee is illegal and Daley was in the wrong for doing that, but Koscheck still cheated by acting like he was injured. Normally, I would give someone the benefit of the doubt in that situation, but this is the second time I've seen Koscheck do that.
Back in November, Kos was against Anthony "Rumble" Johnson and during the first round of the fight, Johnson threw a knee at Koscheck's head while he was down. Kos grabbed his face like he just went hunting with Dick Cheney and Johnson was deducted a point, even though the replay of the knee was inconclusive in regards to any contact. In the second round, Johnson was the victim of two eye pokes (something that put him out of action for a long time after an earlier fight) from Koscheck, who then submitted him.
That is two straight fights where Koscheck has faked an injury in order to gain an advantage. I wouldn't say that Kos was in danger of losing either of those fights, as he is a strong wrestler and neither Daley nor Johnson are particularly adept on the ground. However, the fact that he has done this twice in a row makes it a pattern. It is total bullshit that he is getting a title shot after pulling that act. There is no place for cheating in sports, especially in a combat sport where there is a risk for injry. Also, smack talking in a fight is considered unsportsmanlike conduct and judging by Kos' smirk after the Daley sucker punch, I think it would be safe to say that he goaded Daley into that shit. That doesn't condone Daley's actions, as he could have seriously injured Koscheck, but Koscheck is a total scumbag. Also, he doesn't really deserve a title shot. In his last three fights (in reverse order) he won a lackluster decision over Daley, submitted a prospect in Rumble Johnson, and knocked out the way over the hill Frank Trigg. Before that, he was knocked out by Paulo Thiago. On top of being a major douchebag, his recent record is not that great. He's a good fighter, but he is a cheating scumbag and I don't plan on ever buying a UFC card with him on it. Josh Koscheck, I'm not impressed by your performance.
In other news coming out of UFC 113, Kimbo Slice lost to Matt Mitrione and was cut afterwards. Good call, as Kimbo seems like a nice guy but is a wretched fighter. If he gets taken down, he lays there like a dead fish. His punching power isn't that great and he can't really take a punch either. Mitrione is a bit of a loser and gasses out after a round, but he has pretty good punching power and was able to withstand some big slams from Kimbo early in their fight. I don't ever see him rising above "prospect" status however and I think any of the decent heavyweights in the division would beat the shit out of him. Alan Belcher had an impressive submission victory over Patrick Cote and now thinks he should be considered a challenger to Anderson Silva. Alan Belcher's an idiot. His chin is suspect and if he tries to strike or take down Silva, the fight will go something like this.
That's about all I have to say about UFC 113. UFC 114 is in a few weeks, so I'll probably write something up about that as fight night approaches. After watching the Silva highlights I linked to above, I may write up something about Anderson, as he is one of the truly transcendent MMA fighters and one of the most dominant athletes of the past decade. Until then, feel free to leave a comment or something about this or any of my other entries.
Monday, May 3, 2010
Short Reviews of Movies I Watched One the Weekend of May 1st
This past weekend, I was fortunate enough to have the weekend off from work. Instead of taking advantage of the fine weather and going outside, I took the opportunity to watch some movies. One was new, one was newish, and one was not new. I figured that here would be a good place to review them for the benefit of all two people who read this blog. If it is a newer movie, I will try not to spoil it. So, here we go:
A Nightmare on Elm Street (2010): This is the remake/reimagining of the 1984 film of the same name. Jackie Earle Haley (Rorschch from The Watchmen) replaces Robert Englund in the iconic role of Freddy Krueger. The new one is supposed to be darker and more serious in tone than the original horror series. In this one, a group of kids in Springwood are being killed in their sleep by Freddy Krueger. Nancy and Quentin, two of the teens, investigate Freddy and try to figure out why they and some other kids are being terrorized by Freddy. There is a conspiracy at work that links Freddy to the specific teens he is killing, which I won't give away. The Nightmare franchise is probably the weakest of the horror series (as only 1,3, and 7 were any good), so I didn't have my hopes too high. In comparison to the rest of the films, this one was acceptable. Haley was a believable Freddy Krueger, but the script didn't leave him with much to do besides talk like the aforementioned Rorschach and kill dumbass kids. The problem is that even in the original film, Freddy had a sense of humor and creativity and in the new one that creativity and humor isn't there. The colors in the film were very drab, even in the dream sequences and the script was a bit humorless. One or two of the kills were cool, but there was nothing like this in it. Overall, I would say that its worth seeing once if you are a fan of the series, but if you miss it, its not the end of the world. It wasn't terrible, but it wasn't as good as last year's reboot of Friday the 13th. I would give this film an overall score of 5.5 out of 10.
The Imaginarium of Dr. Parnassus (2009): When this film came out, I was surprised it didn't get more attention than it did, as it contains the last work of Heath Ledger. He died during the making of the film and was replaced by (in order of appearance) Johnny Depp, Jude Law, and Colin Farrell. In this film, Christopher Plummer plays the mystical Dr. Parnassus. Parnassus runs a theatre troupe that lets people inside his imaginarium, where he uses his mind to bring the imaginations of the people to life. A long time before, Parnassus made a deal with Mr. Nick, aka the Devil, (played by Tom Waits) that granted him immortality and the love of a beautiful woman. In return, Mr. Nick would gain the soul of Parnassus' beautiful daughter Valentina when she turned sixteen. As her sixteenth birthday approaches, Mr. Nick makes a deal with Parnassus. Mr. Nick and Parnassus make a deal that whoever can successfully seduce five souls inside the imaginarium first wins possession of Valentina's soul. Meanwhile, Parnassus and his group find a man named Tony (Heath Ledger)hanged over a bridge. Tony's past is a mystery and despite that, he ends up joining the group and helping Parnassus in his quest.
Predictions Galore!, NBA and UFC edition
The second round of the NBA Playoffs just started over the weekend. I didn't think they would start until this week since Atlanta and Milwaukee's first round series just ended yesterday, but I was mistaken. Before the playoffs advance any further, I reckon now would be as agood a time as any to get those out of the way. Predictions as follows:
NBA Playoffs, 2nd Round
Eastern Conference
1.) Cleveland Cavaliers vs. 4.) Boston Celtics
Cleveland advanced by beating the Chicago Bulls in five games, which took one game longer than my first round prediction. Boston advanced by beating the Miami Heat in five games, a series I predicted them losing in six games. Boston showed much more life against Miami than they showed all season, with Ray Allen and Rajon Rondo carrying the load. Paul Pierce's offense was on, Kevin Garnett wasn't limping, and Rasheed Wallace didn't play too much. Cleveland beat Chicago, but didn't look all that impressive throughout the series. LeBron played out of this world (surprise surprise) and pretty much beat the scrappy but crappy Bulls by himself. I expect Cleveland to play better as a team against the Celtics and I expect Boston won't be as successful against a team that is more talented and deeper than they are. Boston should be a game opponent and make it a tough series, but Cleveland is going to go to the Eastern Conference Finals again. Based on the score to game 1, it would appear I'm right. CAVS in 6.
2.) Orlando Magic vs 3.) Atlanta Hawks
Orlando beat the Charlotte Bobcats in four games in a series I thought would take them seven. The Hawks dispatched the Milwaukee Bucks in seven, one game longer than I thought. Despite the foul trouble Dwight Howard was in during the Bobcats series, Orlando took care of business pretty easily. Jameer Nelson and Vince Carter played well and the Magic's depth, defense, and long range shooting overwhelmed Charlotte. The Hawks played like they always do: inconsistently. Joe Johnson played terrible, especially terrible for someone who wants to receive a huge contract this summer. They scraped by a Milwaukee squad playing without their best player in Andrew Bogut. If the Bucks hadn't choked hard in game 6 on their own homecourt, this series would be Milwaukee vs. Orlando. Anyways, everyone on Atlanta is like 6'8" and will be no match for Dwight Howard and Orlando has too much depth and talent to fall to a team as inconsistent and poorly coached as Atlanta. MAGIC in 5.
Western Conference
1.) Los Angeles Lakers vs. 5.) Utah Jazz
The Lakers eliminated the upstart Oklahoma City Thunder in six, as I predicted. The Jazz beat the disgruntled Denver Nuggets in six, also as I predicted. People made a bigger deal of the Lakers' first round struggles than necessary. As long as Kobe isn't shooting more than about 20 times a game, the Lakers should win most nights. If he is jacking up shots left and right, that means Pau Gasol and Andrew Bynum aren't getting enough touches and the Lakers will lose. The Jazz are playing pretty gritty right now with like half their team injured. I would really like to see Utah win, as I think Deron Williams is the bee's knees and Carlos Boozer is playing for a contract right now. While the Lakers haven't been too impressive this season, they have health and size working for in their favor. If Utah wasn't so shitty on the road this year (below .500 on the season) and had big men taller than 6'8", I would think they could eek out a series win. Instead, the Jazz should make it a tough and competitive series that should have some very close games. It certainly was close in game 1, but I think Utah missed on their best chance to steal one on the road. LAKERS in 6.
3.) Phoenix Suns vs 7.) San Antonio Spurs
Phoenix sent the FrailBlazers packing in 6, one more than my prediction. The Spurs upset the 2nd seed Dallas Mavericks in 6, which I said could happen even though I picked Dallas in seven games. Phoenix is playing pretty well right now, especially Jason Richardson. San Antonio has come alive after a fairly blah season. Manu Ginobili is running neck and neck Deron Williams for best player in the West this playoffs. San Antonio exists to beat the Suns in the playoffs, much to my brother's dismay. I feel like the Suns could win this series, but that the Spurs would be more likely to beat the Lakers and make it to the NBA Finals. Amar'e Stoudemire should light up the Spurs, but Manu and George Hill will run train on the PHX backcourt. I'm really having a hard time picking this one, as my brain says the Spurs and my heart says the Suns. I should just pull a name out of a hat. Let's go with SUNS in 7.
On another note, UFC 113 is this weekend, featuring a huge rematch between lightheavyweight champ Lyoto Machida and challenger Mauricio "Shogun" Rua. I've never really done fight predictions before, but now seems as good a time as any to start.
MAIN EVENT
Light Heavyweight Championship
Lyoto "The Dragon" Machida (16-0, champ) vs. Mauricio "Shogun" Rua (18-4)
These two faced off in October of 2009 in a fight that everyone expected Machida to dominate. Instead, Shogun seemed to have solved the puzzle of Machida's karate and counterstriking style and in the eyes of nearly everyone, looked to have won the title via decision. I say nearly everyone, as the judges scored the fight unanimously for Machida. One of the big stories going into this rematch is if Machida can figure out how to adapt and change his gameplan after Shogun took him out of his element by utilizing leg kicks. Prior to this fight, Machida had never even lost a round before, so it will be interesting to see if he is able to come up with a new strategy. The other story of importance is whether or not Shogun can come up with another way to beat Machida. In the first fight, it appeared that he came up with the perfect plan and he still lost the decision. What can he do this time to win the fight? I think this will be a close fight again and I don't see either man knocking out or submitting the other. I think that Machida will be able to adapt more than I think Shogun will be able to implement a new strategy. Machida by Unanimous Decision.
The Rest of the Card:
Josh "Kos" Koscheck (16-4) vs. Paul "Semtex" Daley (23-8-2)
This welterweight fight has title implications, as the winner is going to get pummeled by champion Georges St. Pierre. Koscheck would be less likely to get annihilated as badly as Daley, as Daley has absolutely no ground game whatsoever and Koscheck is a very good wrestler and has decent standup. His standup doesn't compare to St. Pierre's and it isn't even close to Daley's, since he was a professional kickboxer. If Kos tries to stand up for more than a minute or two, Daley is going to light him up and knock his ass out. If he takes it to the ground, Daley is done. I think Koscheck is a major douchebag and I would love to see him get wrecked, but I don't want another boring title defense for Georges, as he won't stand up with someone like Daley anymore. It pains me to say it, but Kos is a pretty good all around fighter and unless he gets silly and decides he's a standup master, he should win. Koscheck by Round 2 Submission.
Sam "Hands of Stone" Stout (16-5-1) vs. Jeremy "Lil Heathen" Stephens (17-5)
This is a lightweight bout featuring one guy (Stout) who I've only seen fight Spencer Fisher in two awesome fights, and a guy (Stephens) who I've never seen before. Stout seems to have more momentum right now and has faced stiffer competition. I don't know either guy well enough to make a prediction with any real certainty, but I'll say Stout by Decision.
Kimbo Slice (4-1) vs. Matt Mitrione (1-0)
This is a battle of two contestants from the last season of The Ultimate Fighter. Kimbo comes in with a reputation as some kind of bad ass street brawler, but in terms of mixed martial arts he has decent standup with no proven knockout power, a rudimentary ground game, and an iffy chin. Matt Mitrione is a former football player with very good punching power, less than rudimentary ground game, and appears to have a pretty good chin. Kimbo will be giving up around forty pounds to Mitrione and I doubt that he is skilled enough to overcome that size disadvantage, even if it is to someone with even less experience than him. The only way Kimbo wins is if he takes it to the ground. He may be able to work some ground and pound and possibly a submission attempt. If he keeps it standing, Mitrione knocks him out. I think this is going to happen. Mitrione by Round 1 knockout.
Patrick "The Predator" Cote (14-5) vs. Alan "The Talent" Belcher (14-5)
This is Cote's first fight since he blew out his knee in a loss to middleweight champ Anderson Silva back in the fall of 2008. Belcher comes in having won three out of his last four fights and his one loss was the fight of the night back at UFC 100 last July. Cote is supposed to be a pretty heavy hitter, but he hasn't really knocked out anyone of note. Belcher is a pretty scrappy dude and his fights are usually pretty exciting. It makes up for his shitty Johnny Cash tattoo and horrible nickname. I think he wins this fight due to the fact he has been faring very well lately and Cote is going to have quite a bit of rust. Belcher by Decision.
The prelims, which I am not going to do since there are seven and they might not be televised, feature my boy "Filthy" Tom Lawlor. Hopefully he wins.
That's it for this one. Feel free to leave me a comment if you think my predictions suck or are awesome or whatever.
NBA Playoffs, 2nd Round
Eastern Conference
1.) Cleveland Cavaliers vs. 4.) Boston Celtics
Cleveland advanced by beating the Chicago Bulls in five games, which took one game longer than my first round prediction. Boston advanced by beating the Miami Heat in five games, a series I predicted them losing in six games. Boston showed much more life against Miami than they showed all season, with Ray Allen and Rajon Rondo carrying the load. Paul Pierce's offense was on, Kevin Garnett wasn't limping, and Rasheed Wallace didn't play too much. Cleveland beat Chicago, but didn't look all that impressive throughout the series. LeBron played out of this world (surprise surprise) and pretty much beat the scrappy but crappy Bulls by himself. I expect Cleveland to play better as a team against the Celtics and I expect Boston won't be as successful against a team that is more talented and deeper than they are. Boston should be a game opponent and make it a tough series, but Cleveland is going to go to the Eastern Conference Finals again. Based on the score to game 1, it would appear I'm right. CAVS in 6.
2.) Orlando Magic vs 3.) Atlanta Hawks
Orlando beat the Charlotte Bobcats in four games in a series I thought would take them seven. The Hawks dispatched the Milwaukee Bucks in seven, one game longer than I thought. Despite the foul trouble Dwight Howard was in during the Bobcats series, Orlando took care of business pretty easily. Jameer Nelson and Vince Carter played well and the Magic's depth, defense, and long range shooting overwhelmed Charlotte. The Hawks played like they always do: inconsistently. Joe Johnson played terrible, especially terrible for someone who wants to receive a huge contract this summer. They scraped by a Milwaukee squad playing without their best player in Andrew Bogut. If the Bucks hadn't choked hard in game 6 on their own homecourt, this series would be Milwaukee vs. Orlando. Anyways, everyone on Atlanta is like 6'8" and will be no match for Dwight Howard and Orlando has too much depth and talent to fall to a team as inconsistent and poorly coached as Atlanta. MAGIC in 5.
Western Conference
1.) Los Angeles Lakers vs. 5.) Utah Jazz
The Lakers eliminated the upstart Oklahoma City Thunder in six, as I predicted. The Jazz beat the disgruntled Denver Nuggets in six, also as I predicted. People made a bigger deal of the Lakers' first round struggles than necessary. As long as Kobe isn't shooting more than about 20 times a game, the Lakers should win most nights. If he is jacking up shots left and right, that means Pau Gasol and Andrew Bynum aren't getting enough touches and the Lakers will lose. The Jazz are playing pretty gritty right now with like half their team injured. I would really like to see Utah win, as I think Deron Williams is the bee's knees and Carlos Boozer is playing for a contract right now. While the Lakers haven't been too impressive this season, they have health and size working for in their favor. If Utah wasn't so shitty on the road this year (below .500 on the season) and had big men taller than 6'8", I would think they could eek out a series win. Instead, the Jazz should make it a tough and competitive series that should have some very close games. It certainly was close in game 1, but I think Utah missed on their best chance to steal one on the road. LAKERS in 6.
3.) Phoenix Suns vs 7.) San Antonio Spurs
Phoenix sent the FrailBlazers packing in 6, one more than my prediction. The Spurs upset the 2nd seed Dallas Mavericks in 6, which I said could happen even though I picked Dallas in seven games. Phoenix is playing pretty well right now, especially Jason Richardson. San Antonio has come alive after a fairly blah season. Manu Ginobili is running neck and neck Deron Williams for best player in the West this playoffs. San Antonio exists to beat the Suns in the playoffs, much to my brother's dismay. I feel like the Suns could win this series, but that the Spurs would be more likely to beat the Lakers and make it to the NBA Finals. Amar'e Stoudemire should light up the Spurs, but Manu and George Hill will run train on the PHX backcourt. I'm really having a hard time picking this one, as my brain says the Spurs and my heart says the Suns. I should just pull a name out of a hat. Let's go with SUNS in 7.
On another note, UFC 113 is this weekend, featuring a huge rematch between lightheavyweight champ Lyoto Machida and challenger Mauricio "Shogun" Rua. I've never really done fight predictions before, but now seems as good a time as any to start.
MAIN EVENT
Light Heavyweight Championship
Lyoto "The Dragon" Machida (16-0, champ) vs. Mauricio "Shogun" Rua (18-4)
These two faced off in October of 2009 in a fight that everyone expected Machida to dominate. Instead, Shogun seemed to have solved the puzzle of Machida's karate and counterstriking style and in the eyes of nearly everyone, looked to have won the title via decision. I say nearly everyone, as the judges scored the fight unanimously for Machida. One of the big stories going into this rematch is if Machida can figure out how to adapt and change his gameplan after Shogun took him out of his element by utilizing leg kicks. Prior to this fight, Machida had never even lost a round before, so it will be interesting to see if he is able to come up with a new strategy. The other story of importance is whether or not Shogun can come up with another way to beat Machida. In the first fight, it appeared that he came up with the perfect plan and he still lost the decision. What can he do this time to win the fight? I think this will be a close fight again and I don't see either man knocking out or submitting the other. I think that Machida will be able to adapt more than I think Shogun will be able to implement a new strategy. Machida by Unanimous Decision.
The Rest of the Card:
Josh "Kos" Koscheck (16-4) vs. Paul "Semtex" Daley (23-8-2)
This welterweight fight has title implications, as the winner is going to get pummeled by champion Georges St. Pierre. Koscheck would be less likely to get annihilated as badly as Daley, as Daley has absolutely no ground game whatsoever and Koscheck is a very good wrestler and has decent standup. His standup doesn't compare to St. Pierre's and it isn't even close to Daley's, since he was a professional kickboxer. If Kos tries to stand up for more than a minute or two, Daley is going to light him up and knock his ass out. If he takes it to the ground, Daley is done. I think Koscheck is a major douchebag and I would love to see him get wrecked, but I don't want another boring title defense for Georges, as he won't stand up with someone like Daley anymore. It pains me to say it, but Kos is a pretty good all around fighter and unless he gets silly and decides he's a standup master, he should win. Koscheck by Round 2 Submission.
Sam "Hands of Stone" Stout (16-5-1) vs. Jeremy "Lil Heathen" Stephens (17-5)
This is a lightweight bout featuring one guy (Stout) who I've only seen fight Spencer Fisher in two awesome fights, and a guy (Stephens) who I've never seen before. Stout seems to have more momentum right now and has faced stiffer competition. I don't know either guy well enough to make a prediction with any real certainty, but I'll say Stout by Decision.
Kimbo Slice (4-1) vs. Matt Mitrione (1-0)
This is a battle of two contestants from the last season of The Ultimate Fighter. Kimbo comes in with a reputation as some kind of bad ass street brawler, but in terms of mixed martial arts he has decent standup with no proven knockout power, a rudimentary ground game, and an iffy chin. Matt Mitrione is a former football player with very good punching power, less than rudimentary ground game, and appears to have a pretty good chin. Kimbo will be giving up around forty pounds to Mitrione and I doubt that he is skilled enough to overcome that size disadvantage, even if it is to someone with even less experience than him. The only way Kimbo wins is if he takes it to the ground. He may be able to work some ground and pound and possibly a submission attempt. If he keeps it standing, Mitrione knocks him out. I think this is going to happen. Mitrione by Round 1 knockout.
Patrick "The Predator" Cote (14-5) vs. Alan "The Talent" Belcher (14-5)
This is Cote's first fight since he blew out his knee in a loss to middleweight champ Anderson Silva back in the fall of 2008. Belcher comes in having won three out of his last four fights and his one loss was the fight of the night back at UFC 100 last July. Cote is supposed to be a pretty heavy hitter, but he hasn't really knocked out anyone of note. Belcher is a pretty scrappy dude and his fights are usually pretty exciting. It makes up for his shitty Johnny Cash tattoo and horrible nickname. I think he wins this fight due to the fact he has been faring very well lately and Cote is going to have quite a bit of rust. Belcher by Decision.
The prelims, which I am not going to do since there are seven and they might not be televised, feature my boy "Filthy" Tom Lawlor. Hopefully he wins.
That's it for this one. Feel free to leave me a comment if you think my predictions suck or are awesome or whatever.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)