PDA

View Full Version : UFC institutes new rules after GSP greasing controversy


que
02-07-2009, 03:05 AM
Following a week of controversy after the Georges St. Pierre and B.J. Penn fight in which Vaseline was applied to the Canadian by one of his cornermen in between rounds, the UFC has instituted new policies regarding cut men and how the corners are allowed to enter during the breaks in between rounds for this weekend's Fight Night show in Tampa, Fla.

According to sources close to the situation, the UFC has now instructed that cornermen associated with the fighters will no longer be allowed to handle the Vaseline used in between rounds to treat and prevent cuts.

The UFC will now provide one cut man for each corner for the fight. Only 2 people are allowed to enter the Octagon between rounds so if a cut man is necessary to apply Vaseline or work on a cut, one of the other cornermen working with the fighter must exit the cage to allow the cut man to work.

This is all following the controversy surrounding St. Pierre cornerman, Phil Nurse, applying Vaseline to his fighter's face in between rounds and then moving his hands to the Canadian's chest and back to help with a breathing technique. Because his hands may have still had minuscule amounts of Vaseline left on them, Penn's camp was compelled to file a letter with the Nevada State Athletic Commission asking for an investigation into the matter.

Though there has been no official word from the UFC if this ruling will be instituted in other states or if Florida previously approved the matter, several MMAWeekly.com sources indicated that the new rules regarding Vaseline use have been presented as permanent.

Stay tuned to MMAWeekly.com for more on this story as it develops.

http://www.mmaweekly.com/absolutenm/templates/dailynews.asp?articleid=8139&zoneid=2

Hughes_GOAT
02-07-2009, 03:06 AM
good

VCURamFan
02-07-2009, 03:24 AM
Following a week of controversy after the Georges St. Pierre and B.J. Penn fight in which Vaseline was applied to the Canadian by one of his cornermen in between rounds, the UFC has instituted new policies regarding cut men and how the corners are allowed to enter during the breaks in between rounds for this weekend's Fight Night show in Tampa, Fla.

According to sources close to the situation, the UFC has now instructed that cornermen associated with the fighters will no longer be allowed to handle the Vaseline used in between rounds to treat and prevent cuts.

The UFC will now provide one cut man for each corner for the fight. Only 2 people are allowed to enter the Octagon between rounds so if a cut man is necessary to apply Vaseline or work on a cut, one of the other cornermen working with the fighter must exit the cage to allow the cut man to work.

This is all following the controversy surrounding St. Pierre cornerman, Phil Nurse, applying Vaseline to his fighter's face in between rounds and then moving his hands to the Canadian's chest and back to help with a breathing technique. Because his hands may have still had minuscule amounts of Vaseline left on them, Penn's camp was compelled to file a letter with the Nevada State Athletic Commission asking for an investigation into the matter.

Though there has been no official word from the UFC if this ruling will be instituted in other states or if Florida previously approved the matter, several MMAWeekly.com sources indicated that the new rules regarding Vaseline use have been presented as permanent.

Stay tuned to MMAWeekly.com for more on this story as it develops.

http://www.mmaweekly.com/absolutenm/templates/dailynews.asp?articleid=8139&zoneid=2Hallelujah! I wonder if Dana's every going to come out & make a statement.

rearnakedchoke
02-07-2009, 03:26 AM
seems reasonable

MattHughesRocks
02-07-2009, 03:34 AM
I know I posted pretty much the same thing here the other day. The UFC musta been reading :cool:

Hughes_GOAT
02-07-2009, 03:44 AM
I know I posted pretty much the same thing here the other day. The UFC musta been reading :cool:

Dana hired me to come here and report back

VCURamFan
02-07-2009, 03:49 AM
I know I posted pretty much the same thing here the other day. The UFC musta been reading :cool:Then why haven't they said anything about my new scoring system?:angry:

Hughes_GOAT
02-07-2009, 04:09 AM
what new scoring system?

CHITOWNHUGHESFAN
02-07-2009, 04:15 AM
Great news!! But is this the down fall of GSP now?

Chuck
02-07-2009, 04:19 AM
I know I"m a little late on the subject but I'm curious...

I know the pretty small amout of Vaseline on GSP could have made a difference in the fight... but do any of you actually think it did??

I just dont' see it... GSP was faster, better conditioned, had better strikes and basically dominated the entire fight.... if BJ was half of what his fans say I wouldn't have thought a little Vaseline would have been the difference in the fight............

VCURamFan
02-07-2009, 04:21 AM
what new scoring system?It was something we were discussing on the old forums. I said that we should get rid of the 10-point must system. I came up with a rough "15-point possible" system. Here's the scoring sheet I came up with:
http://i179.photobucket.com/albums/w291/westcottbd/Random%20MHF%20Photoshops/NewScoreCard.jpg

It's based on the fact that UFC contests are (supposedly) judged on effective Striking, Grappling, Aggression & Octagon Control. I tried to break up each category into easily understandable & decipherable sections.

Hughes_GOAT
02-07-2009, 04:23 AM
yeah, it makes no sense using the boxing scoring system. Pride had the best scoring system IMO

atomdanger
02-07-2009, 04:24 AM
Thank you Dana and company

atomdanger
02-07-2009, 04:24 AM
yeah, it makes no sense using the boxing scoring system. Pride had the best scoring system IMO

None existent ones? lol

Pride didn't really have a system, so sometimes it was a little strange.

Hughes_GOAT
02-07-2009, 04:33 AM
None existent ones? lol

Pride didn't really have a system, so sometimes it was a little strange.

this is why i liked theirs better:

Differences from the Unified Rules of Combat


Pride's rules differed from the Unified Rules of Combat in the following ways:

Pride allows kicking and kneeing the head of a downed opponent who is on his back. This is considered a foul in the Unified Rules, which only allows kicks and knees to the head of a standing opponent.

Pride allows a fighter to stomp the head of a downed opponent. This is considered a foul in the Unified Rules.

Pride allows a fighter to Spike (piledriver) an opponent. This is considered a foul in the Unified Rules.

Pride does not allow elbow strikes to the head of an opponent. The Unified rules allows elbows provided they are not striking directly down with the point of the elbow.

Pride's matches include a ten minute first round, with two minute rest periods. The Unified rules allow rounds no longer than five minutes, with rest periods not exceeding one minute.

Pride's matches are not judged on the ten point must system, rather judges score the whole fight. The Unified rules call for all matches to be judged using the ten point must system.

Spiritwalker
02-07-2009, 04:36 AM
http://i179.photobucket.com/albums/w291/westcottbd/Random%20MHF%20Photoshops/NewScoreCard.jpg

It's based on the fact that UFC contests are (supposedly) judged on effective Striking, Grappling, Aggression & Octagon Control. I tried to break up each category into easily understandable & decipherable sections.

A problem with that is that backing up can be effective strategy. Look at Chuck and Lyoto for example..

Granted you could say that is a chance you take if it goes to the judges..

Hughes_GOAT
02-07-2009, 04:36 AM
Disqualification

A "warning" will be given in the form of a yellow card or a green card (The green card gives a 10% deduction of a fighters purse) when a fighter commits an illegal action or does not follow the referee's instruction. Three warnings will result in a disqualification.

A fighter will be disqualified if a match is stopped on advice of the ring doctor as a result of his deliberate illegal actions.

The application of oil, ointment, spray, Vaseline, massaging cream, hair cream, or any other substances to any part of the fighter's body before and during the fights is prohibited. The discovery of any of these substances will result in a disqualification

VCURamFan
02-07-2009, 04:40 AM
A problem with that is that backing up can be effective strategy. Look at Chuck and Lyoto for example..

Granted you could say that is a chance you take if it goes to the judges..Yeah, I realized that as I posted the sheet. Like I said, I made it awhile ago (early in my education!:wink:), so I wasn't as familiar with countering, etc.

matthughesfan21
02-07-2009, 04:44 AM
I know I"m a little late on the subject but I'm curious...

I know the pretty small amout of Vaseline on GSP could have made a difference in the fight... but do any of you actually think it did??

I just dont' see it... GSP was faster, better conditioned, had better strikes and basically dominated the entire fight.... if BJ was half of what his fans say I wouldn't have thought a little Vaseline would have been the difference in the fight............
this has already been discussed, Ch8uck...It doesn't matyter if it made that much difference in the fight, the point is, ist happened anyways, it is wrong, and either intentional or accidnental, it shouldn't be happening, PERIOD!!!!

Chuck
02-07-2009, 04:47 AM
this has already been discussed, Ch8uck...It doesn't matyter if it made that much difference in the fight, the point is, ist happened anyways, it is wrong, and either intentional or accidnental, it shouldn't be happening, PERIOD!!!!

You drinking tonight bro??? :laugh:

VCURamFan
02-07-2009, 04:49 AM
You drinking tonight bro??? :laugh:No, he's just finally sobered up!:laugh:

Hughes_GOAT
02-07-2009, 04:53 AM
this is what BJ said about the greasing:

To the untrained eye the grease might not look like much, but every grappler knows the effect that it has. Being able to apply your submissions and sweeps or just being able to hold on to your opponent to defend yourself from being hit is absolutely critical! There is a reason why you are not allowed to put grease anywhere on your body except for the area around your eyes. Because of the grease applied to St.Pierre’s Body the Nevada State Athletic Commission’s executive director, Keith Kizer has stated that the Penn-St. Pierre fight “definitely wasn’t fair.”

matthughesfan21
02-07-2009, 05:30 AM
You drinking tonight bro??? :laugh:
:unsure-1: :guilty: :drunk: :dizzy:

matthughesfan21
02-07-2009, 05:31 AM
No, he's just finally sobered up!:laugh::laugh:

VCURamFan
02-07-2009, 05:34 AM
:unsure-1: :guilty: :drunk: :dizzy:Dern college kids!!

matthughesfan21
02-07-2009, 05:35 AM
Dern college kids!!:cry: ....so what were we talking about again:laugh:

VCURamFan
02-07-2009, 05:36 AM
:cry: ....so what were we talking about again:laugh:...since when do people count on me to pay attention????:blink:

matthughesfan21
02-07-2009, 05:38 AM
...since when do people count on me to pay attention????:blink:
well heck, it seems like your on drunk watch, so I figured you paid attention to the thread too instead of just my typing errors haha

rockdawg21
02-07-2009, 12:52 PM
Oh no! How is GSP ever going to win now? :frantics:

Krupp
02-07-2009, 02:13 PM
GSP can win through hard work and improving technique, like he's supposedly been doing. There's nothing wrong with that; after all, despite the greasing, he was hanlding fairly easy standing up without even clinching. The guy's good, but I am happy to see that they've implemented rules now to make it completely fair for everyone.

Edit: We'll know for sure GSP's been greasing is when he fight's Thiago he has trouble getting out of submissions or can't get takedowns as easily....

Preach
02-07-2009, 03:29 PM
Dana hired me to come here and report back


I am Dana

VCURamFan
02-07-2009, 03:40 PM
Y'all remember when "Dana" logged on here & posted?

bradwright
02-07-2009, 03:45 PM
Great news!! But is this the down fall of GSP now?
wow,,lol,,

Bonnie
02-07-2009, 04:36 PM
Y'all remember when "Dana" logged on here & posted?

No, I don't remember that...but then...I wasn't HERE yet! :laugh:

Okay, Ben, what did Dana have to say--do you remember and was it really "Dana"? :)

VCURamFan
02-07-2009, 04:43 PM
No, I don't remember that...but then...I wasn't HERE yet! :laugh:

Okay, Ben, what did Dana have to say--do you remember and was it really "Dana"? :)Haha, that's the thing: I can't even remember!! We were having a mild argument about something & "Dana" logged on & gave pro-Matt opinion. We all agreed with him, but we never could quite get a straight answer as to whether or not it really was Dana.

matthughesfan21
02-07-2009, 04:45 PM
Haha, that's the thing: I can't even remember!! We were having a mild argument about something & "Dana" logged on & gave pro-Matt opinion. We all agreed with him, but we never could quite get a straight answer as to whether or not it really was Dana.
I would have to see it was most likely this funny fella that also goes by Mark:Whistle:

Jason 16
02-07-2009, 04:47 PM
Haha, that's the thing: I can't even remember!! We were having a mild argument about something & "Dana" logged on & gave pro-Matt opinion. We all agreed with him, but we never could quite get a straight answer as to whether or not it really was Dana.

It was most likely jojo he did the same thing with joe rogan when we were calling him a tool for haveing eddie bravo tell him what to say. this was about a year to a year and a half ago

VCURamFan
02-07-2009, 04:56 PM
Yeah, I had kinda assumed it was a duplicate account, but like I said, we never got a straight answer on who it was.

rockdawg21
02-07-2009, 05:21 PM
Haha, that's the thing: I can't even remember!! We were having a mild argument about something & "Dana" logged on & gave pro-Matt opinion. We all agreed with him, but we never could quite get a straight answer as to whether or not it really was Dana.
Well, was there a lot of "f***'s" and "s****'s" in the quote?

cubsfan47
02-08-2009, 12:47 PM
Dana hired me to come here and report back

Hey that was supposed to be me!:cry:

Tyburn
02-08-2009, 10:21 PM
I think they should go further, and allow Judges to deduct their own points based on illegal moves or low blows without the need of the Refs Command. I think that if a match cant go on after an accidental blow they should rule it a no-contest and deduct half the purse of the perp and give the winners bonus to the guy who was hurt.

That would SOON stop people from doing accidents...and I think it might reduce the hope of winning a decision by fighters who dont wish to finish fights.

Extreme...maybe, but its in the interests of fighter safety, and its related to the idea ultimatley of cheating, or having an unfair advantage, accident or not.:ninja:

Hughes_GOAT
02-12-2009, 12:39 AM
I am Dana

where's my money :rolleyes:

Hughes_GOAT
02-12-2009, 12:41 AM
Hey that was supposed to be me!:cry:

he still hasn't paid

Preach
02-12-2009, 12:47 AM
where's my money :rolleyes:

I am waiting on my stimilus check from Crocop

Hughes_GOAT
02-12-2009, 02:55 AM
I am waiting on my stimilus check from Crocop

:wink:

hizo64
02-12-2009, 09:26 PM
I agree with HUGHES_GOAT, I think the UFC should start allowing knees to the head even when theyre on the ground. I know Wandy WOULD LOVE THAT!

Tyburn
02-12-2009, 09:51 PM
I agree with HUGHES_GOAT,
:laugh: shouldnt everyone :ninja:

hizo64
02-12-2009, 09:59 PM
:laugh: shouldnt everyone :ninja:

WORD!! LOL

TDPARKASH
02-18-2009, 08:34 PM
Really good post on www.bjpenn.com by one of the members. So good, that I thought i would post here to our community.

What a furor has been raised by the events of UFC 94. As the sport of mixed martial arts continues its trek towards mainstream legitimacy, one of the markers of its true arrival will be when it is covered with the same depth and attention to detail as other sports. In the wake of events such as this, or the violent Lindland knockout at Affliction, it is important that the MMA community has strong central voices to turn to and rely on for information that is both timely, but moreover probing and accurate.

It is in the light of these above considerations that I felt compelled to write. A digital letter to the editor, as it were. The key to this entire controversy is that very few people seem to have actually considered the rules in question. Allegations of "cheating" are being bandied about, and official proclamations of impropriety dispensed without a reference to what codes have actually been violated. In this context without law, the discussions have been reduced to vitriol and speculation. These kinds of discussions even now overrunning popular fan-based discussion forums are I think, harmful to the community. They are polarizing. Where instead there could be healthy debate about the relative merits of the rules and their importance to the success and ascendancy of MMA, we have bickering and misinformed hysteria. I think the MMA press is an essential ingredient in the future success of the sport, and can have a role in crystallizing its fanbase into a positive mouthpiece for the sport and advocate for its success. That it be well-informed is key to this.

The Nevada Athletic Commission regulations are in fact readily accessible online, and I query why more hasn't been said of them in the MMA press? We've seen Mr. Kizer quoted on several MMA reporting sites, and perhaps most disturbingly, even the NSAC executive director seems unclear about the actual content of the Commission regulations.

He appears to have been confirming that there has been impropriety on the part of the fighter's corner, without specifying the basis for this claim, thereby fueling rampant speculation that somehow, merely the application of a greasing agent to any area but the face is in and of itself a punishable violation. Whether or not this is an accurate reading of the regs should not be left to speculation.

The regulation in question, at NAC 467.598(2) prohibits the "excessive use of grease [...] on the face or body." The remedy for a breach of this requirement, which is incorporated under the "physical appearance" heading of the regulations, is the removal of the excess grease.

In this whole controversy so far, it seems to have been lost the apparent fact that the actions of the fighter's corner are not in and of themselves prohibited. Reading the reg it seems a cornerman can put vaseline anywhere he wants. There is only a violation if it constitutes "excessive use." What constitutes excessive use? Actually an interesting journalistic question. A comparative analysis of other in-ring fouls and their relative consequences to this violation of "appearance" standards. Interesting journalistic question. These are the questions that need to be addressed by a respected voice in the community.

At any rate, as this mini-controversy has exploded over the course of the day, I've been shocked about the lack of clarity on what the rules actually are. As a fan of the sport, and someone who appreciates quality journalism, I just wanted to drop a note to commend you for the job already being done, and to say that indeed fans have a hunger for coverage with even more depth. Some fans are just in it for the clobbering, but some of us want to see in depth analysis of the rules, crediting the sophistication of the sport. What the community needs is less speculation, and more concrete commentary on what the rules are, and what violations of them actually mean. I would implore you to take up this torch.

Tyburn
02-18-2009, 09:05 PM
:ninja: I wonder who wrote that :huh:

its extremely elloquent isnt it :laugh:

Chuck
02-19-2009, 01:38 AM
Oh the Penn huggers are't going to like that!!!! There is no room for logic or fact in the "grease" debate.....

BJ was a victim and GSP is a big 'ol cheater!!!!

And a much better fighter but hey... that's irrelevant.

Hughes_GOAT
02-20-2009, 04:39 AM
Really good post on www.bjpenn.com by one of the members. So good, that I thought i would post here to our community.

What a furor has been raised by the events of UFC 94. As the sport of mixed martial arts continues its trek towards mainstream legitimacy, one of the markers of its true arrival will be when it is covered with the same depth and attention to detail as other sports. In the wake of events such as this, or the violent Lindland knockout at Affliction, it is important that the MMA community has strong central voices to turn to and rely on for information that is both timely, but moreover probing and accurate.

It is in the light of these above considerations that I felt compelled to write. A digital letter to the editor, as it were. The key to this entire controversy is that very few people seem to have actually considered the rules in question. Allegations of "cheating" are being bandied about, and official proclamations of impropriety dispensed without a reference to what codes have actually been violated. In this context without law, the discussions have been reduced to vitriol and speculation. These kinds of discussions even now overrunning popular fan-based discussion forums are I think, harmful to the community. They are polarizing. Where instead there could be healthy debate about the relative merits of the rules and their importance to the success and ascendancy of MMA, we have bickering and misinformed hysteria. I think the MMA press is an essential ingredient in the future success of the sport, and can have a role in crystallizing its fanbase into a positive mouthpiece for the sport and advocate for its success. That it be well-informed is key to this.

The Nevada Athletic Commission regulations are in fact readily accessible online, and I query why more hasn't been said of them in the MMA press? We've seen Mr. Kizer quoted on several MMA reporting sites, and perhaps most disturbingly, even the NSAC executive director seems unclear about the actual content of the Commission regulations.

He appears to have been confirming that there has been impropriety on the part of the fighter's corner, without specifying the basis for this claim, thereby fueling rampant speculation that somehow, merely the application of a greasing agent to any area but the face is in and of itself a punishable violation. Whether or not this is an accurate reading of the regs should not be left to speculation.

The regulation in question, at NAC 467.598(2) prohibits the "excessive use of grease [...] on the face or body." The remedy for a breach of this requirement, which is incorporated under the "physical appearance" heading of the regulations, is the removal of the excess grease.

In this whole controversy so far, it seems to have been lost the apparent fact that the actions of the fighter's corner are not in and of themselves prohibited. Reading the reg it seems a cornerman can put vaseline anywhere he wants. There is only a violation if it constitutes "excessive use." What constitutes excessive use? Actually an interesting journalistic question. A comparative analysis of other in-ring fouls and their relative consequences to this violation of "appearance" standards. Interesting journalistic question. These are the questions that need to be addressed by a respected voice in the community.

At any rate, as this mini-controversy has exploded over the course of the day, I've been shocked about the lack of clarity on what the rules actually are. As a fan of the sport, and someone who appreciates quality journalism, I just wanted to drop a note to commend you for the job already being done, and to say that indeed fans have a hunger for coverage with even more depth. Some fans are just in it for the clobbering, but some of us want to see in depth analysis of the rules, crediting the sophistication of the sport. What the community needs is less speculation, and more concrete commentary on what the rules are, and what violations of them actually mean. I would implore you to take up this torch.

when UFC cutman "Stitch" showed the proper application of vaseline to the face and then how much was left over. any doubts as to how that could be beneficial to the greased fighter should have been answered. it was a lot more than what i thought would be left over.


the NSAC wiped GSP twice because they felt he was doing something illegal, ie, "excessive use" of vaseline. the NSAC better than anyone, should know their rules and be able to determine what is "excessive." the rules have been changed because they felt something like this could happen again, something illegal and adventagious. thus, they changed the rules to prevent this in the future.

so to answer the question of "what constitutes excessive use?" the NSAC decides that.....and has decided it was, in fact, excessive.

Hughes_GOAT
02-20-2009, 06:14 AM
http://www.bjpenn.com/video/greasegate-1

even Frank "Mur" Mir was saying it was illegal.

'NSAC Executive Director Keith Kizer: "It definitely wasn't fair to Mr. Penn"

Tyburn
02-20-2009, 12:20 PM
I want to know how they are going to Punish him:mischievous:

TDPARKASH
02-20-2009, 12:43 PM
Nothing, the corner already admitted that they said it was a mistake.

I feel sorry for all of GSP's next opponents. BJ is not being classy about this at all.

GSP will literally beat him down if they fight again.

I want to know how they are going to Punish him:mischievous:

Tyburn
02-20-2009, 12:53 PM
Nothing, the corner already admitted that they said it was a mistake.

I feel sorry for all of GSP's next opponents. BJ is not being classy about this at all.

GSP will literally beat him down if they fight again.

Admitting youve done wrong, doesnt mean you dont face the consequences for your action.

I aggree that Penn is trying to save face by milking it for all its worth. But this should be between the SAC and GSP

The point is they thought he'd used to much even before Penn complained, so they have the right to lay punative sanctions down regardless of a formal complaint. If the quote above is true they SHOULD do something. :angry:

TDPARKASH
02-20-2009, 02:13 PM
I guess they are going to have to review tape of his old fights to see if this is a reoccuring theme, if there is factual evidence of this in the past, then I will no longer support GSP. As I will find it hard to believe, that he didn't know that they were greasing more then once.

I am sure GSP uses body lotion regularly, aside from other things, to have good skin (don't know if prolonged use can have long term effects on slipperiness of skin). He seems of the type.


"Excessive" is a very subjective word, and can have many intrepretations.


Admitting youve done wrong, doesnt mean you dont face the consequences for your action.

I aggree that Penn is trying to save face by milking it for all its worth. But this should be between the SAC and GSP

The point is they thought he'd used to much even before Penn complained, so they have the right to lay punative sanctions down regardless of a formal complaint. If the quote above is true they SHOULD do something. :angry:

Max
02-20-2009, 02:29 PM
Nothing, the corner already admitted that they said it was a mistake.
so I guess the way to get around cheating is to say it was a mistake.

rearnakedchoke
02-20-2009, 02:37 PM
so I guess the way to get around cheating is to say it was a mistake.

man, these BJ fans still crying ... like it was a mistake when BJ poked GSP and Matt in the eyes (even though he still lost the fight), or when he kneed Joe Daddy's head on the ground ... come on ... jon fitch supposedly had an impassable guard and great high guard and gsp was able to get out of it in the first round ... BJ got tooled plain and simple and he knows he isn't getting a rematch, so he is talking crap as usual ...

TDPARKASH
02-20-2009, 02:46 PM
But i realy really want to see the re-match, i think it will do better then the first one in terms of numbers.

This one should really go to the deaths.


man, these BJ fans still crying ... like it was a mistake when BJ poked GSP and Matt in the eyes (even though he still lost the fight), or when he kneed Joe Daddy's head on the ground ... come on ... jon fitch supposedly had an impassable guard and great high guard and gsp was able to get out of it in the first round ... BJ got tooled plain and simple and he knows he isn't getting a rematch, so he is talking crap as usual ...

rearnakedchoke
02-20-2009, 02:59 PM
But i realy really want to see the re-match, i think it will do better then the first one in terms of numbers.

This one should really go to the deaths.

They should do the rematch in hawaii so that when penn is killed the tears will flow and flood the place .. LOL

Tyburn
02-20-2009, 04:24 PM
I guess they are going to have to review tape of his old fights to see if this is a reoccuring theme, if there is factual evidence of this in the past, then I will no longer support GSP. As I will find it hard to believe, that he didn't know that they were greasing more then once.

I am sure GSP uses body lotion regularly, aside from other things, to have good skin (don't know if prolonged use can have long term effects on slipperiness of skin). He seems of the type.


"Excessive" is a very subjective word, and can have many intrepretations.
The only interpretation that matters, is that applied by the SAC.

Just as the Decision is up to the Judges.

If the Commission intervened, which they did...it doesnt matter what anyone else thinks. The commission found reason to rebuke him, thus he is guilty, thus he should be punished :angry:

bradwright
02-20-2009, 04:32 PM
The only interpretation that matters, is that applied by the SAC.

Just as the Decision is up to the Judges.

If the Commission intervened, which they did...it doesnt matter what anyone else thinks. The commission found reason to rebuke him, thus he is guilty, thus he should be punished :angry:


you keep saying GSP is guilty when the commission is saying the corner man is the one they are looking at,,whose right,,you or the commission?:unsure-1:

Preach
02-20-2009, 04:48 PM
you keep saying GSP is guilty when the commission is saying the corner man is the one they are looking at,,whose right,,you or the commission?:unsure-1:


Dave is ofcourse:laugh:

TDPARKASH
02-20-2009, 04:57 PM
Nobody has come out and said excessive. Infact, I don't think they have had 100% clarity on the rules. My understanding of their comments was that "no vasoline is allowed other then selected areas of the face". I didn't even see them touch GSP, so the only way they can tell is by mere observation which will not hold up in court.

We both know that nothing is going to happen to GSP, but his cornerman may have some ramifications.

He will not be stripped, or have his losses held against him (except for his fans)

I suspect GSP will be at the top of the mountain for a while and when he evenutally hangs up the gloves, people may question his character (or his camps)............but won't accredit his victories to vasoline. I guess the ladder is the difference with using performance enhancing drugs.

The only interpretation that matters, is that applied by the SAC.

Just as the Decision is up to the Judges.

If the Commission intervened, which they did...it doesnt matter what anyone else thinks. The commission found reason to rebuke him, thus he is guilty, thus he should be punished :angry: