Tag: Insanity

Sports Illustrated Attempts to Defend the Roundtable that Asked if UFC 162 Was Fixed, Fails Miserably


(SPOILER: No apology is made at any point in the video, which is actually worse than you’re assuming it is.)

In yesterday’s link dump, we shared a video of Dana White’s appearance on ESPN2’s “Highly Questionable” on Wednesday, where he had some harsh things to say about Sports Illustrated. To refresh your memory: Following UFC 162, SI.com published a roundtable discussion that implied that the main event may have been fixed. Watching legitimate, informed journalists debate whether or not a fight was fixed simply because the underdog won would have been cringe-worthy enough, but they took things to a whole new extreme by making it painfully obvious that two out of the three participants in the discussion didn’t even watch the fight. Needless to say, Dana White was not amused, and it showed during his segment on “Highly Questionable.”

There was absolutely no way that Sports Illustrated was going to let one of their biggest rivals trash them like that, so they immediately set out to create the perfect rebuttal. What they came up with was a phone conversation between Maggie Gray and Dana White, and words cannot describe how awkward it was to listen to.

You really have to feel bad for Maggie here. She was asked to defend what was arguably the worst piece of mainstream sports journalism this side of “The Patriots should have known Aaron Hernandez would turn out to be a murderer,” despite the fact that she wasn’t even involved in the discussion. It’s not exactly an enviable position to be in, especially when you’re against one of the most outspoken men in sports.

A quick apology and follow-up interview about the rematch between Weidman and Silva would have been a safe play, but don’t worry, that doesn’t even come close to happening. Instead, Maggie uses the most condescending tone possible while discussing the roundtable that was totally just about combat sports in general (it wasn’t), yet somehow managed to offend Dana White (maybe all that fight fixing stuff). Any remaining doubts that the upcoming interview would be a total clusterfuck are erased when Maggie concludes her opening statement with the MMA-ish non-sequitur “After sparring a few rounds – no one tapped out! -we moved on discussing the rematch between Weidman and Silva.”

Yeah, we’ll be offering play-by play for this one after the jump…


(SPOILER: No apology is made at any point in the video, which is actually worse than you’re assuming it is.)

In yesterday’s link dump, we shared a video of Dana White’s appearance on ESPN2′s “Highly Questionable” on Wednesday, where he had some harsh things to say about Sports Illustrated. To refresh your memory: Following UFC 162, SI.com published a roundtable discussion that implied that the main event may have been fixed. Watching legitimate, informed journalists debate whether or not a fight was fixed simply because the underdog won would have been cringe-worthy enough, but they took things to a whole new extreme by making it painfully obvious that two out of the three participants in the discussion didn’t even watch the fight. Needless to say, Dana White was not amused, and it showed during his segment on “Highly Questionable.”

There was absolutely no way that Sports Illustrated was going to let one of their biggest rivals trash them like that, so they immediately set out to create the perfect rebuttal. What they came up with was a phone conversation between Maggie Gray and Dana White, and words cannot describe how awkward it was to listen to.

You really have to feel bad for Maggie here. She was asked to defend what was arguably the worst piece of mainstream sports journalism this side of “The Patriots should have known Aaron Hernandez would turn out to be a murderer,” despite the fact that she wasn’t even involved in the discussion. It’s not exactly an enviable position to be in, especially when you’re against one of the most outspoken men in sports.

A quick apology and follow-up interview about the rematch between Weidman and Silva would have been a safe play, but don’t worry, that doesn’t even come close to happening. Instead, Maggie uses the most condescending tone possible while discussing the roundtable that was totally just about combat sports in general (it wasn’t), yet somehow managed to offend Dana White (maybe all that fight fixing stuff). Any remaining doubts that the upcoming interview would be a total clusterfuck are erased when Maggie concludes her opening statement with the MMA-ish non-sequitur “After sparring a few rounds – no one tapped out! -we moved on discussing the rematch between Weidman and Silva.”

Yeah, we’ll be offering play-by play for this one after the jump…

MG: *Long-winded opening rant that I won’t even try to type out that tries to justify why Weidman vs. Silva could have been fixed* …Can you explain why so many people – not just us – had these questions about that specific fight [being fixed]?

Right off the bat we’re given a question worthy of being included in our “Questions You Should Never Ask in an MMA Interview” list. Starting an interview off with such a defensive, passive-aggressive question is pretty much guaranteed to produce a hostile response from the person you’re talking to. Dana doesn’t disappoint.

DW: Not just you guys? First of all, you guys are Sports Illustrated, number one, okay? I want to know did anyone on that panel even watch that fight?

Huh, turns out that Dana White doesn’t accept “Trolls on the Internet thought the fight was fixed, so why should a legitimate news website be held to higher standards?” as a valid argument. *Writes this down for future reference*

Your move, Maggie.

MG: After hearing what you said on ESPN yesterday I have to ask you, did you watch our segment? Did you actually see what kind of conversation we had?

DW: Oh yeah, well how about this: “My first thought when I read the results on Sunday morning, yeah, that made me nervous, but I would have thought they would have fixed the Anderson Silva fight for Silva. If they fixed the fight, I thought they would have fixed it for Silva. UFC – and correct me if I”m wrong – is even less regulated than boxing, right?” WRONG! You guys are talking about a sport that you know nothing about. We’re regulated by the same exact people who regulate boxing.

Well, that backfired tremendously. Turns out that Dana White actually watched the segment he’s commenting on, so wherever you were going with the “Did you even watch our show?” question is now off the table.

But even the best interviewers make mistakes, so let’s see how she rebounds from this.

MG: We weren’t the only people who were asking you about this. After the fight the people who were in Vegas covering the fight were asking you about this.

DW: No no no no no. The guy who asked me the question, that was covering the fight, said “people on Twitter are saying” and “people on the Internet.” There’s a big difference between people on the Internet and Sports Illustrated. I would hope so at least.

MG: Well our show’s on the Internet, so we consider ourselves all part of one brand.

Honey, forget the ballpark. You’re not even in the same fucking city by addressing his comment about how there should be a difference between random people on Twitter and Sports Illustrated’s trusted analysts by saying “Sports Illustrated’s website is considered the same brand as the actual magazine.” You could have asked 1,000 different contestants from 1,000 different beauty pageants to respond to Dana’s statement, and none of them would have come up with something this tragically hilarious.

There’s blood in the water. Your move, Dana White.

DW: You know what? I was hoping you were calling to apologize, that’s what I was hoping you were calling me for.

MG: We were having a general conversation and the likelihood in combat sports…

DW: About something you know nothing about! If you don’t know anything about what you’re talking about you probably shouldn’t talk about it. That sounds like a really good idea. That’s why you’ve been getting smashed by fans and why I smacked you yesterday on ESPN. Because if you’re going to talk about something you might want to do your homework and know what you’re talking about. Or at least you might want to have at least seen the fight, so somebody on that panel would have had half a brain to say “You know what, I saw that fight. The guy was viciously knocked out. How could that be fixed?”

The conclusion of your roundtable should be that you guys should do your homework and understand exactly what it is you’re talking about. And if nobody watched the fight that day, then you should at least know the sport is regulated, at least know some general things about the sport. At least do your homework. I honestly thought you were calling to apologize because you guys were so embarrassed by how ridiculous your show was. Now as I sit here and talk to you, you’re even more ridiculous and I’ll bet you this whole interview doesn’t see the light of day.

Checkmate.

MG: Unfortunately that’s not up to me it’ll be up to our producers...

DW: Yeah, well if he’s smart he’ll take this tape out and throw it right in the garbage, so that the world can’t hear what I’m saying to you right now.

The day that we got the cover of Sports Illustrated I walked around with it for two days to show you I was so pumped to be on the cover of Sports Illustrated. What happened the other day, when you guys did that piece… I’m saying Sports Illustrated, you guys did not represent what Sports Illustrated is supposed to be about.

MG: We did not have an MMA expert on our panel that day, which is why we tried to take the conversation into a general space and make it something about the likelihood of fight fixing, and the panel came to the conclusion at the end that it was unlikely, that this did not happen, we do not think that there was anything happening in that fight. And that’s where we left it.

Translation: “We did not have an MMA expert on our panel that day, which is why we sent out a few clueless reporters to argue that the fight they didn’t watch was fixed. Why is this so upsetting to you?”

DW: My point is that some of the things that were said were totally incorrect and you don’t have to be an MMA expert to do some homework.

It’s at this point where Maggie Gray finally recognizes that the interview is going absolutely nowhere, and actually asks Dana White some questions about Weidman vs. Silva II. It’s also at this point where the interview becomes a total waste of time, since Dana already answered all of her questions on “Highly Questionable.”

But at least Sports Illustrated got to attempt to defend their honor, so…mission accomplished?

@SethFalvo

[VIDEO] MMA in The Wild: Most Technical Street Brawl Ever?

(Props: FOFOMARTINEZ)

Because we are degenerates, we here at CagePotato love street fights. We watch em, rank ’em and just all-around appreciate them. Especially when they take place in a pool and there’s fucking dolphins involved or when a mom scores the KO shot.

But we never really expect to see beautiful, evenly-matched displays of sustained technique in one of these Youtube messes. That’s why we were pleasantly shocked to find perhaps the most technical street fight ever recorded and published on YouTube yesterday.

Ok, “street fight” may be stretching it, as these two guys did not fight on an actual paved road, but rather on what looked to be a Eurasian dirt patch. But dang, they could fight.


(Props: FOFOMARTINEZ)

Because we are degenerates, we here at CagePotato love street fights. We watch em, rank ‘em and just all-around appreciate them. Especially when they take place in a pool and there’s fucking dolphins involved or when a mom scores the KO shot.

But we never really expect to see beautiful, evenly-matched displays of sustained technique in one of these Youtube messes. That’s why we were pleasantly shocked to find perhaps the most technical street fight ever recorded and published on YouTube yesterday.

Ok, “street fight” may be stretching it, as these two guys did not fight on an actual paved road, but rather on what looked to be a Eurasian dirt patch. But dang, they could fight.

Boxing lovers beware: There isn’t a whole lot of slipping and crisp jabs on the feet. But the grappling — from honest to goodness belly-to-back suplexes to triangle choke attempts — looks more like a professional MMA fight than a pick-up brawl.

All that really begs the question, according to CP Chieftan Ben Goldstein, is this really a street fight or actually a “way-off-Broadway unsanctioned yard-MMA match run by the Dagestani version of DaDa5000?”

Presumably such a man would go by “DaDagestani5000.” In any case, enjoy the beautiful destruction above, and we dare you to find and send us any better street fights than this one.

– Elias Cepeda

Tim Sylvia Explains the Delicate Intricacies of Racial Prejudice in the United States


(He also explained why Sour Patch Kids were a better snack than Skittles, but apparently that rant was completely unrelated.)

By now there’s a good chance that virtually everyone reading this has heard that George Zimmerman has been found not guilty for his role in the death of Trayvon Martin. There’s also a good chance that most of you reading this first saw the verdict not on your television, but rather, on one of your social media accounts. The mix of shock, anger, distrust and disappointment – not to mention debate over racial prejudice in the United States – brought on by this case has caused pretty much everyone on Twitter to try to make sense of it, to the point that no matter who you follow, you have a vague idea of what happened, and are still scrambling to make sense out of it.

Fortunately for us, Tim Sylvia took a break from his intense workouts to address the Twitterverse with his reactions to the story. I know that we like to poke fun at Tim Sylvia on occasion around here, but believe it or not, he offered some very insightful opinions, tasteful humor, and observations that no other pundits were bold enough to address. For example…


“Not guilty oh shit here comes the riots.”


(He also explained why Sour Patch Kids were a better snack than Skittles, but apparently that rant was completely unrelated.)

By now there’s a good chance that virtually everyone reading this has heard that George Zimmerman has been found not guilty for his role in the death of Trayvon Martin. There’s also a good chance that most of you reading this first saw the verdict not on your television, but rather, on one of your social media accounts. The mix of shock, anger, distrust and disappointment – not to mention debate over racial prejudice in the United States – brought on by this case has caused pretty much everyone on Twitter to try to make sense of it, to the point that no matter who you follow, you have a vague idea of what happened, and are still scrambling to make sense out of it.

Fortunately for us, Tim Sylvia took a break from his intense workouts to address the Twitterverse with his reactions to the story. I know that we like to poke fun at Tim Sylvia on occasion around here, but believe it or not, he offered some very insightful opinions, tasteful humor, and observations that no other pundits were bold enough to address. For example…


“Not guilty oh shit here comes the riots.”


“O Shit not guilty now here comes the riots”

See, Tim Sylvia realized that “black people will riot because Zimmerman isn’t going to jail” was such a profound thought that it wouldn’t register with us the first time he posted it. He knew that we weren’t ready to hear about the terrible riots that went on entirely in his mind after the verdict was read, so he gave us two separate tweets for our feeble little brains to absorb his powerful message.

But knowing that we live in an age that doesn’t accept new ideas that aren’t endorsed by at least two minor celebrities, Sylvia goes on to cite the greatest intellectual of our time, Ted Nugent:


“Uncle Ted has spoken.”

In case you still aren’t convinced that “This is Not About Race,” Tim Sylvia provides you with an accurate first-hand account of the history that liberal America doesn’t want you to read about…


“I don’t remember this much up roar when OJ got away with what he did.”

Compelling argument, Maine-iac, but let’s hear what the other side has to say in response.


(Source)


(Source)

Barely any tweets indeed. Advantage: Sylvia, obviously.

Now that this complex social issue has been fully resolved, there’s only one question that remains: Is Sylvia a great philosopher, or the greatest philosopher?

@SethFalvo

Sports Illustrated Asks If UFC 162 Was Fixed, Didn’t Actually Watch UFC 162

(SI debuts its new show, “Internet Commenters: Live!”)

By George Shunick

It was bad enough when conspiracies theories begin to pop up about Chris Weidman’s triumph over Anderson Silva this past weekend at UFC 162. Somehow, some people can’t seem to comprehend that Silva isn’t the reincarnation of some Byzantine deity of violence and as such is susceptible to being knocked out, and they’ll engage in whatever mental gymnastics it takes to absolve their hero of the errors that led to his demise. Still, this is the Internet — a place which was the inspiration for Godwin’s law, which holds that “as an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches.” Point being, stupidity is an unfortunate but invariable norm of the Internet.

However, when Sports Illustrated begins parroting these allegations, something, somewhere has gone terribly wrong.

It’s pointless to bother debunking these conspiracy theories. Sane, rational people will be able to conclude that fighters who throw fights don’t allow themselves to be fully knocked unconscious, that fighters who do stoop to such are desperate for cash as a result of not making an exorbitant amount of money quantified by their own name, and that if Silva did intend to throw the fight, he would have just been submitted by the kneebar/heel-hook attempt Weidman attempted in the first round. If that train of thought doesn’t make sense to you, nothing will.

But surprisingly, none of the participants in this discussion for SI felt the need to bring up any of these points. Contestant number one, senior writer Chris Mannix, defended the allegations by asserting that he’s heard rumors of fight-fixing happening in boxing, but “maybe not at the highest level” though. It’s probably worthwhile to point out that it does not appear Mannix has watched the fight in question, or for that matter is familiar with the UFC or MMA in general. Much like a high school student who is asked to offer an analysis of a book he was supposed to read but clearly hasn’t, Mannix grasped for whatever tangential information he can muster in an effort to sound informed and insightful.

He wasn’t successful. His counter-argument to his own non-existent argument was “why would the UFC want Anderson Silva to lose when the potential for a superfight is right around the corner?” That would be solid logic if he’s referring to a fight with Jon Jones or even Georges St. Pierre, but Mannix was actually referring to a bout with Roy Jones Jr. That bout – despite Dana White’s pre-fight bluster – was unlikely to happen in the first place, would not have happened before a real superfight, and probably would not have drawn as much as a real superfight between UFC champions. To his credit, he seems to conclude Silva did not throw the fight. To his lack of credit, he doesn’t seem to know what he’s talking about.


(SI debuts its new show, “Internet Commenters: Live!”)

By George Shunick

It was bad enough when conspiracies theories begin to pop up about Chris Weidman’s triumph over Anderson Silva this past weekend at UFC 162. Somehow, some people can’t seem to comprehend that Silva isn’t the reincarnation of some Byzantine deity of violence and as such is susceptible to being knocked out, and they’ll engage in whatever mental gymnastics it takes to absolve their hero of the errors that led to his demise. Still, this is the Internet — a place which was the inspiration for Godwin’s law, which holds that “as an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches.” Point being, stupidity is an unfortunate but invariable norm of the Internet.

However, when Sports Illustrated begins parroting these allegations, something, somewhere has gone terribly wrong.

It’s pointless to bother debunking these conspiracy theories. Sane, rational people will be able to conclude that fighters who throw fights don’t allow themselves to be fully knocked unconscious, that fighters who do stoop to such are desperate for cash as a result of not making an exorbitant amount of money quantified by their own name, and that if Silva did intend to throw the fight, he would have just been submitted by the kneebar/heel-hook attempt Weidman attempted in the first round. If that train of thought doesn’t make sense to you, nothing will.

But surprisingly, none of the participants in this discussion for SI felt the need to bring up any of these points. Contestant number one, senior writer Chris Mannix, defended the allegations by asserting that he’s heard rumors of fight-fixing happening in boxing, but “maybe not at the highest level” though. It’s probably worthwhile to point out that it does not appear Mannix has watched the fight in question, or for that matter is familiar with the UFC or MMA in general. Much like a high school student who is asked to offer an analysis of a book he was supposed to read but clearly hasn’t, Mannix grasped for whatever tangential information he can muster in an effort to sound informed and insightful.

He wasn’t successful. His counter-argument to his own non-existent argument was “why would the UFC want Anderson Silva to lose when the potential for a superfight is right around the corner?” That would be solid logic if he’s referring to a fight with Jon Jones or even Georges St. Pierre, but Mannix was actually referring to a bout with Roy Jones Jr. That bout – despite Dana White’s pre-fight bluster – was unlikely to happen in the first place, would not have happened before a real superfight, and probably would not have drawn as much as a real superfight between UFC champions. To his credit, he seems to conclude Silva did not throw the fight. To his lack of credit, he doesn’t seem to know what he’s talking about.

Contestant number two didn’t fare much better. Number two – presumably producer Ted Keith – responded that “when [he] read the results on Sunday morning,” he suspected the fix was in. Again, he didn’t watch the fight. He was just surprised by the result, and came to the conclusion that it was most likely fixed, before thinking that if it was fixed, Silva would have won. He went on to say that because the UFC is more loosely regulated than boxing – which is not true, if only because boxing is poorly regulated as well – it was entirely plausible for fights to be thrown as a means to build its brand.

Fortunately, contestant number three – presumably senior producer Andrew Perloff – astutely notes that if the UFC desired to build its brand, why would it jeopardize its momentum by fixing fights? The risk-reward ratio is far too imbalanced for a company still on the rise; any benefit from having the “right” guy win would be vastly overshadowed by the potential pitfalls if the entire legitimacy of the organization came into question. See, this is why Perloff is the senior producer – he actually has some semblance of a brain.

All in all, this is an extraordinarily disappointing segment from Sports Illustrated. For one of the major sports news organizations to lend credence to baseless conspiracy theories that do damage the brand of the UFC and the legitimacy of the sport of MMA is bad enough. But to debate these issues with a panel that hasn’t even watched the event in question and is barely familiar with the sport is not only insulting but poor journalism. As SI continues to cover the UFC going forward, hopefully it will do so with people who actually know what they’re talking about.

Bold Statement of the Day: Miesha Tate Will Shoot Herself in the Face if Ronda Rousey Armbars Her Again


(What a tragedy. And she was such a pretty girl, too. / Miesha Tate ‘Body Issue’ photo by Ben Watts for ESPN The Magazine)

To say that Miesha Tate is still haunted by her gnarly armbar loss to Ronda Rousey last year would be an understatement. In a recent interview with MMAFightCorner (via BleacherReport), Tate explains that suffering a second armbar loss to Ronda at their rematch at UFC 168 in December would be a suicide-worthy scenario. Figuratively speaking. Maybe.

“It’s never too early to train and practice that gameplan over and over and over, I’m going to beat it into my skull if I have to,” Tate said. “Swear to God, she’s not going to armbar me if it’s the last thing I do. I will seriously shoot myself in the face before I leave that cage if she armbars me again. It can’t happen.”

Two things…

1) I wasn’t aware that fighters were allowed to bring guns into the Octagon, following the Diaz-Cerrone Peace Accords of 2011.

2) I have no problem with this.

Tate went on to give her own explanation of why she fell prey to Rousey’s signature move, and described the Rondabar in terms that make it even more mysterious and scary:


(What a tragedy. And she was such a pretty girl, too. / Miesha Tate ‘Body Issue’ photo by Ben Watts for ESPN The Magazine)

To say that Miesha Tate is still haunted by her gnarly armbar loss to Ronda Rousey last year would be an understatement. In a recent interview with MMAFightCorner (via BleacherReport), Tate explains that suffering a second armbar loss to Ronda at their rematch at UFC 168 in December would be a suicide-worthy scenario. Figuratively speaking. Maybe.

“It’s never too early to train and practice that gameplan over and over and over, I’m going to beat it into my skull if I have to,” Tate said. “Swear to God, she’s not going to armbar me if it’s the last thing I do. I will seriously shoot myself in the face before I leave that cage if she armbars me again. It can’t happen.”

Two things…

1) I wasn’t aware that fighters were allowed to bring guns into the Octagon, following the Diaz-Cerrone Peace Accords of 2011.

2) I have no problem with this.

Tate went on to give her own explanation of why she fell prey to Rousey’s signature move, and described the Rondabar in terms that make it even more mysterious and scary:

“For one, not being too emotional. I think that was the biggest problem last time was she got inside my head and she made me really, really angry,” Tate said. “I just don’t think I feed well off of negative energy. I’d rather just be positive about it and just be happy. I love the sport, I love fighting and that to me is definitely the key to victory. Other than that I think I possess all the skills to beat her, I think I just need to calm down a little bit and not go grabbing a hold of her and letting her just launch me into an armbar again. It was just really stupid.”

As far as the gameplan, Miesha explained that Rousey’s judo and trademark move that’s stopped all seven women that she’s faced requires special training. That’s something she’s planning on focusing in on right away.

“Everyone thinks it’s an armbar, it’s not. It’s like a move of it’s own,” said Tate.

“I also need to stop the judo. I mean that’s another part of it. If she goes out there and throws me and she can’t armbar me, that’s a big part of the fight too,” said Tate. “That’s what I’m going to do from now until December 28, it’s going to be an anti-judo camp.”

Stop the judo? Dang, why hasn’t anyone ever thought of that before!

Tate is clearly fired up for revenge, but there’s a reason why Rousey is nearly a 10-1 favorite in this rematch, which was only booked out of convenience. Are you guys seeing another first-round armbar victory for the champ?

Pro-Wrestling-Inspired MMA Move of The Day: Cambodian Fight Ends Via Boston Crab

Because every country needs to have its own MMA promotion these days, Cambodia’s Khmer Warrior Championship put on an event in Phnom Penh on Sunday, headlined by Soung Sovantha (never heard of him) vs. Bun Heang (never heard of him). You can check out the fights on the khmersexystars YouTube channel…or just watch our favorite one above, which pits Von Savy against Bun Mang. Yep, two dudes named Bun were on the same card. It is what it is.

The fight itself is pretty uneventful, up until the finish. The two fighters appear to have Muay Thai backgrounds from their stances, but neither Savy (red trunks) nor Mang (blue trunks) engaged much for the first couple of minutes. There is a lot of feeling out, a tiny bit of clinch work and two effective leg kicks from Savy.

Then, it happens.

Mang throws a left leg kick to the body that is caught by Savy, who sweeps his opponent off of his feet, grabs both of Mang’s feet by the ankles and locks on a freaking Boston Crab.

Anyone who has first-hand experience with high school locker room wrestling matches knows that the Boston Crab hold, popularized by Professional Wrestling, hurts a whole lot if you’re bad enough to let your opponent apply it.

Because every country needs to have its own MMA promotion these days, Cambodia’s Khmer Warrior Championship put on an event in Phnom Penh on Sunday, headlined by Soung Sovantha (never heard of him) vs. Bun Heang (never heard of him). You can check out all the fights on the khmersexystars YouTube channel…or just watch our favorite one above, which pits Von Savy against Bun Mang. Yep, two dudes named Bun were on the same card. It is what it is.

The fight itself is pretty uneventful, up until the finish. The two fighters appear to have Muay Thai backgrounds from their stances, but neither Savy (red trunks) nor Mang (blue trunks) engaged much for the first couple of minutes. There is a lot of feeling out, a tiny bit of clinch work and two effective leg kicks from Savy.

Then, it happens.

Mang throws a left leg kick to the body that is caught by Savy, who sweeps his opponent off of his feet, grabs both of Mang’s feet by the ankles and locks on a freaking Boston Crab.

Anyone who has first-hand experience with high school locker room wrestling matches knows that the Boston Crab hold, popularized by Professional Wrestling, hurts a whole lot if you’re bad enough to let your opponent apply it.

There is no reason a Boston Crab should happen in professional MMA match. I mean, some catch wrestler types like Dan “The Wolfman” Theodore pretend that variations of it can happen in fights but that guy’s a nut-job and so are most catch wrestlers, so we were totally caught by surprise here.

For it to work, the guy on the bottom has to be much worse/weaker on the ground than his opponent, and the guy on top has to be equal parts clueless and bad ass for even thinking he can get away with it.

In this Cambodian MMA bout, Savy was indeed bad ass enough and earned a tap-out via Boston Crab. Not to get too technical here but if we had to guess, we’d say that this modified Crab was probably putting more pressure on the ankles and knee than the back of the eventual loser, given the angle.

But really, who cares. Because, BOSTON CRAB IN MMA.

Now watch the above video, then find your buddies and do some stupid stuff.

– Elias Cepeda

Previously: What a Rush! The 14 Greatest (and 3 Worst) Pro-Wrestling Moves Used in MMA