- Joined
- Jun 1, 2002
- Messages
- 19,809
- Reaction score
- 9,237
I discussed this on a different thread, but thought it makes a point worth making again.
A prevalent narrative is that GSP knowingly and willingly cherry picked the Bisping fight because he knew it was low risk, high reward, and that he avoided defending the title or challenging for it earlier precisely to avoid a higher risk fight. This already is to engage in a fair bit of revisionary history, since the odds for the Bisping fight were extremely even, with many parlors favoring Bisping, who was bigger, had reach, good td defense, and who was going against GSP after a three year hiatus, after a second ACL tear, and fighting for the first time at MW. So, to say it was an 'easy' fight is nothing but retroactive historical surgery.
But that's not the biggest point.
Firras, Danaher and GSP himself have all said they made the decision to return to challenge for the MW belt before Bisping was champion. Danaher expressly said he gave the idea to GSP as part of a strategy to address the major objections to his career: that he didn't move up in weight, that he didn't finish fights, and was not exciting. This is on record on the Rogan show. Now, you can claim that this is false, and that had it not been Bisping he would not have taken the risk. But this is speculation, with nothing to base itself on, and anybody who claims it is false has the burden of proof.
Yes, GSP didn't defend the belt after he won it with Whitaker, and relinquished it, even though he was contractually bound and said he would. However, he contracted colitis. This might seem like a 'convenient' scapegoat according to the low-risk narrative, but to suggest this was another fabrication to avoid a risky fight requires showing that he did in fact not have colitis and that he avoided MW even though he was well capable of competing in it.
But there is no concrete evidence for this either: he was diagnosed, visibly lost a lot of weight very quickly, to a point beneath even his WW days. He was reportedly very sick and vomiting blood the morning of the Bisping fight, and this condition was likely related to trying to gain weight forcefully for MW. He even mentioned he couldn't retain the weight as he had planned for that fight, and that he didn't feel his body react well to MW. Firras and Danaher also mentioned they even considered pulling the plug two weeks before the fight, because GSP was completely off. So much for avoiding risk taking.
So the testimony and evidence seems to show GSP simply did not react well to the MW adjustment and it compromised his health. To think GSP and everyone again invented all of this seems maliciously speculative to me. And to imply he relinquished the title or avoided fighting other MWs before Bisping was champion to avoid riskier fights is to put a distorting spin on the facts we know of the story, and to again engage in a lot of speculation. Anyone who disagrees would have to offer some morsel of evidence to show that GSP and his trainers are lying.
A prevalent narrative is that GSP knowingly and willingly cherry picked the Bisping fight because he knew it was low risk, high reward, and that he avoided defending the title or challenging for it earlier precisely to avoid a higher risk fight. This already is to engage in a fair bit of revisionary history, since the odds for the Bisping fight were extremely even, with many parlors favoring Bisping, who was bigger, had reach, good td defense, and who was going against GSP after a three year hiatus, after a second ACL tear, and fighting for the first time at MW. So, to say it was an 'easy' fight is nothing but retroactive historical surgery.
But that's not the biggest point.
Firras, Danaher and GSP himself have all said they made the decision to return to challenge for the MW belt before Bisping was champion. Danaher expressly said he gave the idea to GSP as part of a strategy to address the major objections to his career: that he didn't move up in weight, that he didn't finish fights, and was not exciting. This is on record on the Rogan show. Now, you can claim that this is false, and that had it not been Bisping he would not have taken the risk. But this is speculation, with nothing to base itself on, and anybody who claims it is false has the burden of proof.
Yes, GSP didn't defend the belt after he won it with Whitaker, and relinquished it, even though he was contractually bound and said he would. However, he contracted colitis. This might seem like a 'convenient' scapegoat according to the low-risk narrative, but to suggest this was another fabrication to avoid a risky fight requires showing that he did in fact not have colitis and that he avoided MW even though he was well capable of competing in it.
But there is no concrete evidence for this either: he was diagnosed, visibly lost a lot of weight very quickly, to a point beneath even his WW days. He was reportedly very sick and vomiting blood the morning of the Bisping fight, and this condition was likely related to trying to gain weight forcefully for MW. He even mentioned he couldn't retain the weight as he had planned for that fight, and that he didn't feel his body react well to MW. Firras and Danaher also mentioned they even considered pulling the plug two weeks before the fight, because GSP was completely off. So much for avoiding risk taking.
So the testimony and evidence seems to show GSP simply did not react well to the MW adjustment and it compromised his health. To think GSP and everyone again invented all of this seems maliciously speculative to me. And to imply he relinquished the title or avoided fighting other MWs before Bisping was champion to avoid riskier fights is to put a distorting spin on the facts we know of the story, and to again engage in a lot of speculation. Anyone who disagrees would have to offer some morsel of evidence to show that GSP and his trainers are lying.
Last edited: