I could probably argue against every point you just made(although they make since), but it just seems better to “agree to disagree”.

“Bas got his ass beat in that fight, and was awarded a garbage win”
Like Couture against Rizzo (first fight). I still think that Bas landed more strikes and they were more powerfull (the elbows from the bottom, like Anderson did with Chael but less often). Anyway, i have no problem admiting that you are right on this one.
My main point is that UFC (and many other mma organizations) rules favour wrestlers and takedowns.

“You just come off as Pride fanboy a little bit”
Yes, i liked Pride more. The cards events were much better and the average levelwas higher. And the rules. Beside allowing knees and kicks to the head of a down opponent (no north-south resting positions…), the fight scoring rules were better. It counted the entire fight and not just round by round.

” Sure they might have been stood up more in Pride”
Its not a problem of standing up but actually fight – standing up or on the ground (they even resumed the fights on the ground, back to the center of the ring). Tito just blocked the fight on the ground.

“, but Tito would have been able to get to side control and rain down knees”
And why didnt he (elbows and punches, not knees)??? He spend most part of the fight in the ground, on top of Wanderlei, right? Were were those elbows? The G&P? Tito’s only concern was to grab Wanderlei and avoid fighing – either on the ground or standing.
What i mean is if it was on Pride, he would get a yellow card for stalling.

“Also if your so shore Tito would’ve gotten beat in Pride why did Wanderlei lose to Arona there?”
After 20 or so strait devastating wins? Come on, were probably talking about the most dominating fihgter of that time. The guy that destroyed Rampage, whom have destroyed Lidell, whom have destroyed Tito (whom, by the way, was avoiding fighting Lidell for years…)! Everyone looses at some point.

Anyway, these are just remarks and small points of view. My main point, i repeat, is that UFC rules favours wrestlers and takedowns.

That makes absolutely no since. Chael was bleeding more, but it was clear he dominated the fight. Bas landed nothing significant in the fight. He was never close to a sub, and although he landed some good strikes from his back he was manhandled.

Bas got his ass beat in that fight, and was awarded a garbage win.

I do understand where you are coming from with the Ortiz Wanderlei argument though. You just come off as Pride fanboy a little bit. Sure they might have been stood up more in Pride, but Tito would have been able to get to side control and rain down knees.

Also if your so shore Tito would’ve gotten beat in Pride why did Wanderlei lose to Arona there?

But ok, i wont insist on that – it was just an example to illustrate my point – the rules favours wrestlers.

I can give you another example of what i mean: i hate to see fights (and fighters) like the Ortiz x Wanderlei, on UFC 25. Ortiz only concern was avoiding fighting. Grab the opponent, go to the ground and trying to hold him. With no time limit, a guy like that would eventually get hited at some point and defeated. The rules allow for that kind of stalling. Or, instead of no time limit, with different rules and approaches, like Pride.
If that fight was held at Pride, i’m sure that Tito Ortiz would have got the same destiny of the other Wanderlei “victims” like Rampage; Sakuraba; Henderson; Mezger; Ivel; Kondo… The referee would not allow that kind of “fight”.

It’s also one of the biggest robberies in MMA history IMO. Randleman manhandled Bas and beat his ass that entire fight. Bas was never close to a sub or landing anything significant, and he face was bleeding something fierce at the end.

It was about as bad as the Big Nog-Ricco decision.