Seeing Is Believing: Rampage Jackson's Performance at UFC 96 Was Very Good

A lot of people including myself expected Rampage Jackson to knock Keith Jardine out. Because the fight was close and he wasn't able to, people have been down on Jackson's performance. In my view, this was partially colored by the announcing and partially by false notions about Keith Jardine.
To start, Keith Jardine is an excellent fighter. Despite a few slips, he holds notable wins over Brandon Vera, Forrest Griffin, and Chuck Liddell. He has proven to be very effective at grinding out long decisions and frustrating opponents that have trouble finding him with their hands. Even I bought into the idea that he had no chin, but he took two of the same hooks that demolished Wanderlei Silva and survived them. He also took a great number of punches throughout the rest of the fight, and despite being rocked was able to survive each time.
Instead of rushing Jardine (as was supposedly the gameplan), Jackson fought a patient fight. He fought the kind of fight Jardine is great at, and he beat him at it. He's the first to do that in the UFC (don't get me started on Bonnar). Jardine's style throws a lot of guys off, and many have found him hard to hit. All that being said, Jackson found Jardine's chin far more times than Jardine found Jackson's. Jackson's boxing defense is extremely underrated, and outside of a flurry set up by a Ric Flair style low blow, Jardine spent most of the fight whiffing punches or getting punches blocked.
The primary offense Jardine landed consisted of leg kicks. However, these were nothing like the kicks Forrest landed on Rampage (and Rashad). He never really committed to them due to understandable concern over Jackson's power, and mostly used them as an annoyance to force Jackson to reset rather than as a damaging tool. None of these kicks hurt Jackson, whose injuries now ironically come from his own punching in the fight.
The idea that he would have lost if not for the final knockdown is really irrelevant, every second of a fight counts and he landed a very good combination that sealed his win. Similarly, Jardine probably would have lost the decision to Liddell if he didn't score a knockdown in the second round. The fact that it happened at the end of the fight doesn't really mean anything.
The criticism that he didn't mix it up doesn't really hold water either. He threw more kicks than I've seen him go for in years, tried to work the clinch for a slam (Jardine defended well), and got two takedowns. Jardine was able to get up, but he's also known in his camp as someone very hard to keep down. Rashad even mentioned this in the third round of the fight. He also did an excellent job stuffing a deep Jardine takedown attempt.
There's a consensus coming out of this fight that Rashad is somehow a level above Jackson, but I am not quite buying it yet. His standup is much improved, but it still remains true that he lost recent standing battles to both Michael Bisping and Forrest Griffin. Every judge in the Griffin fight gave Forrest the two standing rounds. This isn't to take away that victory from Rashad, it was a great win. But the idea that he is too fast to be hit on his feet when Bisping and Griffin found him all night is hyperbole that doesn't mesh with history. Liddell couldn't find him, but he couldn't find Jackson either. It's my view that Rampage is just as hard or harder to punch than Rashad, and I don't expect to see Rashad change his game to focus on leg kicks for their fight. A change like that would frankly be detrimental to Rashad.
Rampage vs. Rashad is a very close fight. The wrestling is probably a wash in MMA, and it'll be Rashad's footwork against Rampage's power. I don't think either guy is really a lock in that fight, though as of now I think I would lean slightly in Rampage's favor, just because I think he is more likely to finish Rashad than vice versa.
Whereas Jardine was scheduled for this card for months, Jackson took the fight on short notice coming off the hardest camp of his career. He looked tired and a bit drawn, but those are the circumstances he was in. He got back in there and clearly beat a perpetual top 10 fighter. Acting like this performance proves anything negative about him is unfair.
3 recs |
23 comments
|
Comments
i love watching jackson’s boxing defense. even though he’s on bitter terms with ibarra, i doubt he ever regrets the skills he’s taken from his time with him.
by rickards on Mar 11, 2009 6:58 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
He threw more kicks than I’ve seen him go for in years
ya, rampage threw kicks, but they were hella ugly.. and he threw what? 2 or 3 kicks in the fight? and that’s the most you’ve seen in years.. i think that’s a wrong example to say that he does mix it up..
2,3 or even 4 total kicks (and ugly ones at that) seems to back up the claim that that you are trying to disprove.. Well I’d give him points for at least trying to be more well rounded though.
you seem to be posting a lot of rampage articles lately.. Have you been seeing too much rampage criticisms on the interwebs? or is it because there hasn’t been much news since 96? :)
by Anton Tabuena on Mar 11, 2009 7:27 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I agree. It feels like the article is reaching in order to defend Rampage. You don’t have to defend him, and nothing is unfair, the man is an entertainer after all as his chosen profession.
I agree that his performance was very good, but I don’t think that anyone can argue against that. No one could or should minimize a win over Jardine, who has proven to be a top-notch skilled fighter. But just watching the man fight, trying to argue that offensively his game is multi-dimensional doesn’t really work to me. You argue against Jardine’s weak leg-kicks, but for Rampage’s take-downs (which also inflicted no damage).
But take out the knockdown at the end, Rampage clearly won that fight. He very clearly inflicted more damage, and he’s a great fighter. I really badly want to see a healthy and rested Rampage fight Rashad. I’d never be able to pick a winner, but if I had to it would be Page.
by Dooda on Mar 11, 2009 2:05 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Nice analysis although I do think Jackson really needs to vary his offense more.
by Benicio on Mar 11, 2009 7:50 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, when he shot for a takedown I think I squee-ed a little. SLAMPAGE, MAN! SLAM-PAGE!
You know? Why don’t we see more of that?
Don't believe a word I say, I don't train BJJ. -- TangleBones
by jemaleddin on Mar 11, 2009 9:11 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I honestly felt that Rampage did not look bad also. I think that Rampage gets a lot of flack for not KOing Jardine. If anything, Rampage was multi-dimensional by trying kicks, going for takedowns and getting them, defending a takedown, and blocking kicks. In his fight against Forrest, he was a one-dimensional counter-puncher. Rampage fought a much smarter fight against Jardine than he did against Forrest.
by chrisbboy82 on Mar 11, 2009 1:22 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I saw the fight again after wk yesterday
Rampages footwork was excellent. He was focused and he looked great IMO. The announcing was really biased and that really pissed me off. When Jardine did the “tweak”, Rashad said “this is gonna be a good night” and all 3 of them laughed. I was like WTF? Anyway I’m not worried about Rampage like he sais no one can break him. He has A TON of heart and I would like to see Rashad take him to the ground just so Rampage can slam his ass through the cage.
Mike Goldberg: "You know Joe, When Matt and his brother Mark Hughes were growing up, they would pound each other behind the barn."
by xFenixKnightx on Mar 11, 2009 8:19 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
“The idea that he would have lost if not for the final knockdown is really irrelevant,”
Also, it isn’t true. Supposedly one of the judges said this to Keith, but the scores were 30-27, 29-28, 29-28 and all for Rampage. If one judge had changed the score for the last round , the fight would have still gone to Rampage.
And having rewatched the fight several times with and without sound, I’d have scored it 30-27 Rampage. He was dominant for more of every round, did more damage in every round and did more overall to win the fight.
Don't believe a word I say, I don't train BJJ. -- TangleBones
by jemaleddin on Mar 11, 2009 9:09 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Ostensibly if not for the knockdown, the two judges scoring 29-28 Rampage would have had the same scores but favouring Jardine. Thus, it is quite possibly true.
I am the bastard love child of Junie Browning and Diamond Dave Kaplan.
by The_Gaijin on Mar 11, 2009 9:39 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I feel the same way – Quinton did more effective striking and grappling. Also; it was surprising, to say the least, when there seemed to be a consensus among the the commentators that Jardine was somehow eeking it out via “aggression” and “octagon control”. That I just didn’t see.
by ununkvadrium on Mar 11, 2009 6:37 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Jackson’s “B” game was better than Jardine’s “A” game(not my words, but my sentiment) that makes this win even more impressive. As far as Jackson/Evans, if they fight in May, Evans has a huge advantage, if they fight in July, I put it at about 50/50. Last time I checked, bodog had Evans at -130
by Josh H. on Mar 11, 2009 10:29 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I think Jackson was very respectful of Jardine’s game. He didn’t get reckless and open himself up or really take any damage. I personally had it 30-27, but I can see how people put stock in ineffective leg kicks and give Jardine round one, just not me. Jardine was not as effective with the kicks as he was vs Chuck and it basically shut his game down, imo.
Were Jackson’s own kicks poor? In one way, yes, they were not strong or technical. However, they did, at least, mix his striking up a bit and keep Jardine honest in defending.
My thought on the fight was, Rampage beat up a pretty tough guy and if it had been a 5 rounder, likely would have finished him in the 4th. good, not great, performance by Jackson. And a win like this over a guy like Jardine, can do nothing but boost Jackson’s confidence and outlook.
If you're not submitting, you're just rolling around with another guy.
by BJJDenver on Mar 11, 2009 11:00 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I watched the fight live but it was 6 in the morning where I live, and at 4 I do not understand English anymore _, meaning I wasn’t aware of the comments and how the fight was perceived. What I saw was a solid jackson, with an overall more complete game beating a brave Jardine, with a lot of heart, but beaten in every aspect of the game. Actually the fight I was expecting. I really don’t see how Jardine could have have won this one, to me it wasn’t even a close fight…maybe I need to watch it again.
by spectaa on Mar 11, 2009 11:01 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Can’t wait to see Rampage in there against Machida after Machida destroys Evans.
by Bigperm on Mar 11, 2009 11:32 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
He did win but...
all he was really good at was taking a beating on that lead leg. I don’t understand how he could be so dominant over a guy like Silva, and give so much respect to Jardine.
by dignan99 on Mar 11, 2009 12:13 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I also scored it 30-27. Good, tough fight but if you look at actual damage in each round, I saw Rampage clearly getting the better of it. Unlike boxing where after several losing rounds judges might “look to score the other way” just on the basis of a better round, MMA doesn’t get judged that way (esp. a 3 rd fight). Therefore, a decent round where Jardine doesn’t get wobbled should score him the round.
by frickshun on Mar 11, 2009 12:19 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Is there really a “consensus” emerging that places Rashad above Rampage? I felt that immediately after the fight, people on this site were favoring Rampage. My position is that it would/will be a very close match. Traditionally, Rashad’s skills seem to be discounted due to his TUF status and his performances against guys like Ortiz and Bisping. Maybe opinions are changing. I would hope so, anyway.
by Cannon Jacques on Mar 11, 2009 1:51 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Well said Michael.
http://www.mmaforreal.com
by Kelvin Hunt on Mar 11, 2009 4:03 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Rampage got the W, but I don’t think he looked very good. His plodding, flat-footed style seems tailor-made for guys like Lyoto and Rashad to exploit.
by smoogy on Mar 11, 2009 4:05 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Rashad is being seriously undervalued at this point – but I will die of shock if you pick him.
by subo on Mar 11, 2009 9:35 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Who says the consensus is that Rashad is a level above Rampage? I think Jkson is definitley the one who is a level above Rashad in most if not all areas (boxing,power,sprawl,mma wrestling,sub defense,cardio,strength) I think the betting line would be like Rampage -180 Rashad +125
If Rahad has any edge at all it is maybe speed and footwork. He wrestled at Michigan State but he never came close to winning a national title and had a record of something like 45-36. It was’nt too long ago that Rashad was regarded by most as a lay and pray artist who was overated and had’nt beat anyone legit nevertheless finish them! All that changed with that resounding Sean Salamon head kick and the brutal KO of Chuck and suddenly he’s overated in my opinion. Bottomline is although Rashad actually matches up alot better against Machida than most do but I still think he gets stopped in that one and if by chance he pulls it out, he’s not getting past Rampage
by irepdaronx on Mar 11, 2009 6:33 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Really? Salmon? I thought he was still considered overrated going in to the Chuck fight. It’s just that he actually looked good there. Not just got the win, but showed real improvement.
by ununkvadrium on Mar 11, 2009 6:54 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Huh? I was NOT impressed with Rampage at all in this fight! Jardine had him running at times.
He BARELY beat Jardine! It was a dead even fight until the last bit of it! Many can even argue that Jardine was winning until the end! A win is a win though.
Personally I think Machida deserves the shot at Rashad Evans. Even though I don’t like Machida.
by MMAJAY on Mar 13, 2009 12:59 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

by 














