Hi Guys & Girls,
Let’s start with MMA this week. I said I would rewatch UFC 195 and I did. I’m afraid I’m going to have to jump on the bandwagon. Carlos Condit won the fight in my opinion, I gave Round 1 to Condit. 2 to Lawler. 4 to Condit and 5 to Lawler. I have to agree with Dana White and say that the point of contention is Round 3. Personally I felt that Carlos edged it. There was a higher volume of strikes from Condit in that round and throughout the fight.
Someone on Twitter said no one lost that fight and that the fans won. I agree with the first part, both warriors deserve immense credit for that fight. The second part I also agree with to an extent. The two guys gave everything and that is nothing but good for the fans to watch. The problem is Carlos is considering retirement. If he goes through with it, the fans have lost.
Let’s briefly talk judging. Since the fight people have been criticising MMA judging. I have heard many arguments from, why are we using Boxing’s 10 point system to more judges and so forth. Ok this was a poor decision in my opinion and many others, but are more judges really going to help? The argument is that it’s less likely that 3 of 5 will make a wrong decision than 2 of 3. I get that, but the problem is the subjective nature of fighting. I could have scored round 3 completely different to you. There’s nothing to say that each of the 5 judges would score it differently. For example, Carlos threw the higher amount of strikes, but Robbie did more damage with his strikes. Throw on takedowns, submission attempts, etc and it leaves it completely open to interpretation. As for the boxing 10 point system, it’s been working and has been adaptated. What is the alternative? I agree that more needs to be done, MMA after all is a young sport and one that is in a perpetual state of evolution, but I’m not sure what would be the solutions. If you have an answer, feel free to let me know, I love talking MMA and will never belittle someone ’cause they think differently to me!
I’m gonna briefly discuss a gentleman who won’t be making too many appearances in my blog, Floyd Mayweather Jr. Let me start by saying I cannot stand the man and in the interests of the point of this section, it’s not because of his skin colour. I will categorically state, I am not racist and have no problem if (in the words of the great Big Willie, Will Smith) you are “black, white, Cuban or Asian”. It makes zero difference. You are human, not your skin colour. Anyway Floyd has said that, Conor McGregor’s fans are proof that racism exists in sports because people vilify him for the same attitude.
Now I’m not saying racism doesn’t exist. Again I don’t mention soccer or football a lot, but the disparity between the number of black players and coaches is ridiculous. My issue is that he is using McGregor as the example. As I stated I am not a fan of Floyd, though I recognise that he is a phenomenal athlete and most definitely one of the best of his generation. I dislike him because of his illiteracy and his domestic abuse against women.
But let’s analyse comments. Conor is loved because he is white, arrogant and backs it up. I’m not going to discuss backing it up because Conor and Floyd have both done that. Let’s start with arrogance. Some fans love an arrogant bastard. I for one am all for it, some of my favourite fighters have been arrogant. Chael Sonnen, Nick Diaz, Nate Diaz, Jon Jones, etc.
Even if we venture into Floyd’s world, Mike Tyson and Ali were both arrogant, and I love them both. For some fans they will buy into that arrogance and stick around through thick and thin. Others will get disheartened and abandon ship. So, arrogance is a double edged sword. The reality is, it’s probably better to be arrogant than not.
So, is it because Conor is white? Well, I reeled off a couple of fighters that were black and a couple who weren’t. But let’s start with good ole Cassius Clay, regarded by some as the greatest boxer who ever lived. Loved by millions. Adored by pretty much every fan of the sweet science. He wasn’t a white man. Neither was Iron Mike Tyson. Mike despite biting off another man’s ear in the ring and with his conviction, is a man who has become a pop culture icon. Starring in meme’s, the Hangover film franchise and various other things. Mike again is not white. Neither are Chris Eubank, Lennox Lewis, Evander Holyfield or stepping into MMA neither are Jon Jones, Mighty Mouse Johnson, Rampage, etc. Using another example from Floyd’s world, the current Heavyweight champion in Boxing, Tyson Fury is white, arrogant and is regarded by a fair few as “a bit of a dick” (used by someone on Twitter to me).
I’m not stupid enough to say racism doesn’t exist. It does and it stinks. In the US we have seen people questioning Barack Obama’s heritage because his middle name is Hussein. In the UK we have seen people bombing Sikh’s temples in “retaliation” for Muslim terrorism (great knowledge of different religions). We have seen people (substitute “people” for “cretins” – works better in my opinion) videoed on a train yelling to Sikh’s to “go home”. Incidentally the Sikh who responded with “I am, that’s why I’m on the train” is an absolute hero.
My long drawn out point is, people latch onto athletes for a variety of reasons, talent, the way the play the game, success, looks, aesthetic, the team they play for or a combination of things. Conor’s fans do not prove racism. Idiot minorities prove that on a daily basis. Perhaps, people haven’t latched onto Floyd because he is arrogant, whilst being irritating. He can’t read and whilst I understand not being able to read hasn’t held him back (and as he says his “family don’t need” him to read) it’s hardly a good advert. Maybe people, much like myself, find him boring and defensive to watch in a boxing ring? Or perhaps people don’t like “women beaters” (and yes I am fully aware Mike Tyson’s conviction is worse)? Or maybe it’s a combination of these factors and more that ensure Mayweather, despite his obvious talent, doesn’t receive the same adulation as Ali or that Conor currently receives?
And now… onto the obligatory gaming section. My wife and I decided to pause Assassins Creed Syndicate and start playing Fallout 4. We are about 8 hours in and I genuinely feel like we haven’t scratched the surface. The map is vast. I haven’t played a game with a map this big since Skyrim. Still can’t shake my idea of buying a PS3 or XBOX360 to get Skyrim again. I want to be an Argonian Dovakhin.
Anyway it’s no surprise that the map is comparable to Skyrim as both are made by Bethesda. The general plot so far involves killing raiders, building your base and gathering supporters. Each are difficult in their own ways. Killing raiders seems next to impossible without your mechanised suit. They seem ridiculously overpowered at the moment. Maybe that will change as I go up the levels. My advice to anyone starting the game is to find the point you on the map you need to get to, fast travel back to base, pick up your suit and then fast travel back to where you need to be. Gathering supporters is usually based upon the proviso of killing more raiders.
Building the base up is difficult because of the fact that most of the requirements is to scavenge. That means finding fruit which is less difficult than it seems. Find Abernathy Farm which isn’t far from base and harvest their fruit. Other things are not so easy, crystals and gears you need to pick up random things amongst the world. I have to say it’s quite an addictive game. I really want to get more settlers. When it first went from 5 settlers to 7, I was extremely happy! I will continue playing and let you guys know how it goes.
Carpe Diem Guys