clock menu more-arrow no yes

Filed under:

Gonzaga vs. Couture: Another Look

New, comment

Everyone has their own views on the potential outcome of this fight, so here's another look at it from the vantage point of Michael DiSanto over at Basically he reiterates what rationality already tells us - Gonzaga has all the makings to give Randy trouble, but Randy is always counted out. He did, however, make this interesting point:

One interesting statistic that most fans probably fail to realize is that while Couture is viewed as one of the most successful fighters in UFC history, he is far from the most dominant. As evidence, the reigning champion has not won three consecutive fights in more than six years. And he hasn't won back-to-back fights since defeating Liddell and Ortiz in 2003. For all his greatness, some could argue that he has been inconsistent since first losing the heavyweight title to Barnett at UFC 36. Will that inconsistency continue? Are there other explanations for his 5-5 record in his last 10 fights? In all fairness to Couture, he has faced nothing but the absolute best in the sport during that time, Mike Van Arsdale being the lone exception. He is a guy that runs from nobody, and so losses will happen. But that doesn't change the fact that he is 5-5 in his last 10.
On paper there's no doubt Gonzaga is the clear winner of this fight. But it's those Randy Couture intangibles - intagibles that are enormously difficult to quantify - that make all of his fights so interesting.