Any guesses on how quickly this one ends? 10-15 seconds... She said on the radio she wanted this victory to be "thorough"... And she will dedicate this one to Rowdy Roddy Piper who sadly passed away...
the contrarian position is to be admired...but in this case you are acting like a fucking donkey.
To sum up, you believe that unless women can compete with men in sports, they shouldn't get to play?
Good grief
Right. Why should they get special leagues just because they don't have penises? Should there be an NBA league for people under 6'3" with verticals less than 32"? Do those of us born like that deserve it just like women do? What other criteria besides lacking a penis merit an opportunity to compete against similarly inferior athletes?
is that a lot of us say a lot of stupid things. A lot of us can come across as moronic or down right stupid. We get into fights, we get into battles. We laugh, we cry. We sign, we dance.
But at the end of the day, Radar continues to be the most worthless poster on this board. There is not a single thing I ever read from his and said, you know what... he has a point.
If that ugly broad said that about Ronda's father than fuck her. I'm glad she was humiliated. And SHO, you can just catch the whole fight as an Instagram clip right now.
Is there seriously a contender, who can even come close to
If that ugly broad said that about Ronda's father than fuck her. I'm glad she was humiliated. And SHO, you can just catch the whole fight as an Instagram clip right now.
what's your thought on the Paralympics or the Special Olympics? Why should these disabled and special needs people have their own Olympic games if they can't compete with true Olympians, amirite?
I actually think she caught her with a punch to the mastoid
what's your thought on the Paralympics or the Special Olympics? Why should these disabled and special needs people have their own Olympic games if they can't compete with true Olympians, amirite?
Comparing women to those with physical disabilities? Women must love you on their side!
The major difference is that's a single event that is every 4 years. Fine. Lets have a woman's Olympics every four years. No objections.
Various groups have their own level of competition. Not everyone has to be measured by a single set of standards, in your case physically superior males. Whether it's females competing within their own level, special needs people within their own group, disabled people...so on and so forth.
But keep playing stupid to deflect the idiotic posts you made by intentionally playing the obtuse fool that you are.
Osi, there are plenty of women as big as men. I have no problem with women competing with men in their same weight classes. Mayweather fights the best people on earth of his size (including unfortunately untrained women).
People complained a bit when she beat Serena for the female athlete of the year award at the ESPYs. If I had to vote, I probably would've given it to Serena. She just completed her 2nd "Serena Slam" which is just an incredible achievement, especially given her age.
But after watching Rousey destroy yet another opponent, I'm starting to second guess whether ESPN got it right or not. Serena is just unbelievable, but sometimes she looks mortal and has to turn it up a notch to blow her opponent out of the water. I've yet to seen Rousey look mortal in the octagon. In terms of dominance they're both as good as it gets, but Rousey is more consistently dominant and I think I might go with her over Serena at this point despite the Serena Slam. Both are amazing.
RE: Of course you would miss the point, you ingrate.
Various groups have their own level of competition. Not everyone has to be measured by a single set of standards, in your case physically superior males. Whether it's females competing within their own level, special needs people within their own group, disabled people...so on and so forth.
But keep playing stupid to deflect the idiotic posts you made by intentionally playing the obtuse fool that you are.
Ronnie, the point is that there are all kinds of subcategories of people who are inferior athletes who don't get have the right to compete against similarly inferior athletes. Why is it just women then? Why not other groups of inferior athletes?
I don't think the handicapped comparison is valid. There are limited events for handicapped competitors and given the obstacles they have to overcome I think the opportunities are proportionate. But again comparing women to the handicapped seems a bit patronizing.
Osi, there are plenty of women as big as men. I have no problem with women competing with men in their same weight classes. Mayweather fights the best people on earth of his size (including unfortunately untrained women).
But Mayweather doesn't fight the best people on Earth. He fits the best people on Earth AT HIS SIZE. That's a qualifier. Just like Rousey fighting the best people on Earth the same gender as her is.
You can't just pick and choose which qualifiers you want to take a stand on. 140lb guys don't fight 200lb guys for a reason, and guys don't fight girls for a reason.
And no shit men are better athletes than women. It's called genetics and you can thank evolution for that. You're not breaking any new ground by pointing it out.
Brutal even for radar's standards. Openly sexist, too! What a look... must get laid all the time.
Arc please demonstrate how anything I've said is sexist. Its a fact: Woman can't compete at the highest levels athletically. Otherwise they would, right?
Literally, why should you give 2 fucks what radar says?
Tonight, Rousey's per fight average time went from 3:29 to 2:08. I know they flashed a graphic that 3:29 was the 4th shortest in UFC history. Wonder where it ranks now.
Ronnie, the point is that there are all kinds of subcategories of people who are inferior athletes who don't get have the right to compete against similarly inferior athletes. Why is it just women then? Why not other groups of inferior athletes?
I don't think the handicapped comparison is valid. There are limited events for handicapped competitors and given the obstacles they have to overcome I think the opportunities are proportionate. But again comparing women to the handicapped seems a bit patronizing.
Actually, there are many subcategories of competition with differing levels of athleticism, whether they are women competitors, amateur competitors, junior competitors, senior competitors, disabled competitors, special needs competitors, and they are all athletes deserving of their own levels of competitions. And their inability to compete at the same level as their fully-abled and in-their-prime-age male counterparts doesn't make them inferior as you keep saying. Competition at an appropriate level in these subcategories is still competition.
And as far as the disabled and special needs competitors go, they compete in numerous similar events as their fully-abled counterparts. They're athletes just like their fully-abled counterparts. And like their fully-abled counterparts, they have and deserve their own level of competition.
RE: RE: Literally, why should you give 2 fucks what radar says?
the contrarian position is to be admired...but in this case you are acting like a fucking donkey.
To sum up, you believe that unless women can compete with men in sports, they shouldn't get to play?
Good grief
Right. Why should they get special leagues just because they don't have penises? Should there be an NBA league for people under 6'3" with verticals less than 32"? Do those of us born like that deserve it just like women do? What other criteria besides lacking a penis merit an opportunity to compete against similarly inferior athletes?
Addressing the complete idiocy of your point:
So then why should there be weight classes for boxing? It's not a heavyweights fault that a bantam weight is inferior in size and strength. Why should there be weight classes? Just have one champion of boxing.
the contrarian position is to be admired...but in this case you are acting like a fucking donkey.
To sum up, you believe that unless women can compete with men in sports, they shouldn't get to play?
Good grief
Right. Why should they get special leagues just because they don't have penises? Should there be an NBA league for people under 6'3" with verticals less than 32"? Do those of us born like that deserve it just like women do? What other criteria besides lacking a penis merit an opportunity to compete against similarly inferior athletes?
Addressing the complete idiocy of your point:
So then why should there be weight classes for boxing? It's not a heavyweights fault that a bantam weight is inferior in size and strength. Why should there be weight classes? Just have one champion of boxing.
Moreover, why root for any college basketball or football teams, when they'd be crushed in the pro leagues.
Brutal even for radar's standards. Openly sexist, too! What a look... must get laid all the time.
Arc please demonstrate how anything I've said is sexist. Its a fact: Woman can't compete at the highest levels athletically. Otherwise they would, right?
Apparently you've got quite a bit to learn about genetics and the reasons why they are "inferior" athletically.
Your assertion that women's sports shouldn't exist because you "don't like" them and find them inferior is yes, sexist.
for UFC as far as PPV buys? I didn't purchase the fight last night because there was nothing else of interest on the card, and as much as I wanted to see the Rousey fight, I couldn't justify forking over the money for what I figured would be less than 60 seconds of fight time.
Going forward is she going to be able to carry a PPV card on her own, or do you think if her fights continue to be this one sided are they going to have to start attaching her to more exciting cards?
Quote:
the contrarian position is to be admired...but in this case you are acting like a fucking donkey.
To sum up, you believe that unless women can compete with men in sports, they shouldn't get to play?
Good grief
Right. Why should they get special leagues just because they don't have penises? Should there be an NBA league for people under 6'3" with verticals less than 32"? Do those of us born like that deserve it just like women do? What other criteria besides lacking a penis merit an opportunity to compete against similarly inferior athletes?
Still won't respond to Osi's question, hilarious.
But at the end of the day, Radar continues to be the most worthless poster on this board. There is not a single thing I ever read from his and said, you know what... he has a point.
UFC is out of hand
Insane.
Crazy
Might even be a good Vine clip...haha
Comparing women to those with physical disabilities? Women must love you on their side!
The major difference is that's a single event that is every 4 years. Fine. Lets have a woman's Olympics every four years. No objections.
But keep playing stupid to deflect the idiotic posts you made by intentionally playing the obtuse fool that you are.
Osi, there are plenty of women as big as men. I have no problem with women competing with men in their same weight classes. Mayweather fights the best people on earth of his size (including unfortunately untrained women).
But after watching Rousey destroy yet another opponent, I'm starting to second guess whether ESPN got it right or not. Serena is just unbelievable, but sometimes she looks mortal and has to turn it up a notch to blow her opponent out of the water. I've yet to seen Rousey look mortal in the octagon. In terms of dominance they're both as good as it gets, but Rousey is more consistently dominant and I think I might go with her over Serena at this point despite the Serena Slam. Both are amazing.
But keep playing stupid to deflect the idiotic posts you made by intentionally playing the obtuse fool that you are.
Ronnie, the point is that there are all kinds of subcategories of people who are inferior athletes who don't get have the right to compete against similarly inferior athletes. Why is it just women then? Why not other groups of inferior athletes?
I don't think the handicapped comparison is valid. There are limited events for handicapped competitors and given the obstacles they have to overcome I think the opportunities are proportionate. But again comparing women to the handicapped seems a bit patronizing.
Quote:
Weight Classes? Mayweather? Please respond thanks.
Osi, there are plenty of women as big as men. I have no problem with women competing with men in their same weight classes. Mayweather fights the best people on earth of his size (including unfortunately untrained women).
But Mayweather doesn't fight the best people on Earth. He fits the best people on Earth AT HIS SIZE. That's a qualifier. Just like Rousey fighting the best people on Earth the same gender as her is.
You can't just pick and choose which qualifiers you want to take a stand on. 140lb guys don't fight 200lb guys for a reason, and guys don't fight girls for a reason.
And no shit men are better athletes than women. It's called genetics and you can thank evolution for that. You're not breaking any new ground by pointing it out.
Arc please demonstrate how anything I've said is sexist. Its a fact: Woman can't compete at the highest levels athletically. Otherwise they would, right?
Kicker try mounting an argument if you can.
Only annoyance was too many prelim fights.
She has got to be, pound for pound, so much better than pretty much anyone else.
I don't think the handicapped comparison is valid. There are limited events for handicapped competitors and given the obstacles they have to overcome I think the opportunities are proportionate. But again comparing women to the handicapped seems a bit patronizing.
Actually, there are many subcategories of competition with differing levels of athleticism, whether they are women competitors, amateur competitors, junior competitors, senior competitors, disabled competitors, special needs competitors, and they are all athletes deserving of their own levels of competitions. And their inability to compete at the same level as their fully-abled and in-their-prime-age male counterparts doesn't make them inferior as you keep saying. Competition at an appropriate level in these subcategories is still competition.
And as far as the disabled and special needs competitors go, they compete in numerous similar events as their fully-abled counterparts. They're athletes just like their fully-abled counterparts. And like their fully-abled counterparts, they have and deserve their own level of competition.
Quote:
Fuck him, don't read his shit, and improve your life. He will slink away to the hellhole that is his life soon enough.
Kicker try mounting an argument if you can.
Hey Pot! Do you want to meet Kettle?
And Kicker has provided more valid arguments in one discussion than you have during your entirety on BBI. By the way...why are you avoiding Bill2?
Quote:
Fuck him, don't read his shit, and improve your life. He will slink away to the hellhole that is his life soon enough.
Kicker try mounting an argument if you can.
Answer Bill2.
Fight link - ( New Window )
Seeing this makes me regret everything I posted on the other thread. You are just awful.
Quote:
the contrarian position is to be admired...but in this case you are acting like a fucking donkey.
To sum up, you believe that unless women can compete with men in sports, they shouldn't get to play?
Good grief
Right. Why should they get special leagues just because they don't have penises? Should there be an NBA league for people under 6'3" with verticals less than 32"? Do those of us born like that deserve it just like women do? What other criteria besides lacking a penis merit an opportunity to compete against similarly inferior athletes?
Addressing the complete idiocy of your point:
So then why should there be weight classes for boxing? It's not a heavyweights fault that a bantam weight is inferior in size and strength. Why should there be weight classes? Just have one champion of boxing.
Thread is below. Someone asked and I posted it there.
Quote:
In comment 12398187 mfsd said:
Quote:
the contrarian position is to be admired...but in this case you are acting like a fucking donkey.
To sum up, you believe that unless women can compete with men in sports, they shouldn't get to play?
Good grief
Right. Why should they get special leagues just because they don't have penises? Should there be an NBA league for people under 6'3" with verticals less than 32"? Do those of us born like that deserve it just like women do? What other criteria besides lacking a penis merit an opportunity to compete against similarly inferior athletes?
Addressing the complete idiocy of your point:
So then why should there be weight classes for boxing? It's not a heavyweights fault that a bantam weight is inferior in size and strength. Why should there be weight classes? Just have one champion of boxing.
Moreover, why root for any college basketball or football teams, when they'd be crushed in the pro leagues.
Quote:
Brutal even for radar's standards. Openly sexist, too! What a look... must get laid all the time.
Arc please demonstrate how anything I've said is sexist. Its a fact: Woman can't compete at the highest levels athletically. Otherwise they would, right?
Apparently you've got quite a bit to learn about genetics and the reasons why they are "inferior" athletically.
Your assertion that women's sports shouldn't exist because you "don't like" them and find them inferior is yes, sexist.
I can't believe I am even responding to this.
Going forward is she going to be able to carry a PPV card on her own, or do you think if her fights continue to be this one sided are they going to have to start attaching her to more exciting cards?