Fletch, I'm not hiding under a rock and I don't have an agenda... and I'll be glad to zip it about the Gracie legend. There are too many "true believers" out there.

As for the rules thing, if Shamrock agreed that knee strikes to the head were illegal, then he was rightly DQ'd. I don't have any missions built for any of the players involved. I personally thought the Silva fight was a better one.

As for me not knowing "the game", you might be surprised who and what I know. Just because we disagree on something doesn't make my observations invalid, and just because you have an opinion, it doesn't necessarily make it right either.

My observation of the match in question was that Renzo switched positions and put his head in the target zone for those knee strikes... and after seeing the match at least three times on Showtime, I still think that's what happened. He was getting hammered in the ribs and moved to get them out of the line of fire, and by doing so put his head there. If the knee strikes to the head were illegal, then they were illegal... but it's pretty clear to me that he basically did it to himself by changing position... but I seem to remember one of the other matches being won after a jumped knee strike to the head by one of the other players that was followed up by some punches. Why wasn't that one illegal?.. because they weren't in the clinch? Seems a little like splitting hairs to me.

Anyway, don't get pi$$ed at me. I told you up front I don't follow MMA. I just know what I saw... all three times.

It wasnt illegal because it was from a stand up position. Just like kicking to the head. You can do it standing, but not if the opponent is on the ground.

There's nothing wrong with putting yourself in a position that exposes you to something that's illegal. Especially when your opponent was exposed to something illegal for the whole fight going up to it.

Considering how wide spread unified rules now are in the US, it would be worth the time for you to read up on them. They're not going to change much from event to event so you'll at least be dealing with a number of events you can watch and actually know the rules.

Maybe it's just my self-defense DNA, but I don't want to expose myself to any kind of head kicks or strikes regardless of what the rules say. It's just good self-defense not to...

I fought a Marine recruit one time in our school, and the only punch he landed was one after time was called and I was walking off the floor with my back turned... so I've been there with "illegal strikes".

My take on that rule is that both fighters were "on the ground", so I don't see the difference in a standing kick to the head and one from the ground position. If the rule is that they're illegal on the ground, then, so be it... but it's a little inconsistent and a great advantage to the fighter on top.

One of my master instructors, Billy Hong, hated one of the kicks I used because he couldn't stop it, so when we did kumite, it suddenly became "an illegal kick". I started with a front kick and then spun sideways and did a hook kick off it, and I could nail him with it every time... so it was suddenly an "illegal move".

Makes me wonder who was getting beat to get this rule in place about knees to the head in groundwork? I'll bet that wouldn't take Sherlock Holmes to figure out...

If it didn't prove anything else, it shows the validity of the technique for self-defense. Wonder why they don't have a rule against sitting on the guy's chest and pummeling his head with punches? If they're protecting someone who's helpless, where's the thought process of that?

I was just commenting on what I saw, and didn't mean to get everybody's pants in a wad about it.

JMHO, but if you're fighting full contact and not practicing self-defense, you're going to get hurt.

I've already said that if the knee strikes were "illegal" then Shamrock should have been DQ'ed. I do find it interesting that the thread I did on striking the thoracic spine had everybody saying it wasn't a viable target, but somehow it's an illegal strike in full contact MMA because of the damage it can cause. That is interesting...

WT said"I wonder why they dont have a rule about sitting on a guys chest and pummelling his head."

Well, when that happens, the guy doing the sitting beatdown is usually declared the winner. And its because of safety. The guy on the bottom isnt always ko'd, but the fight still gets called to protect his precious gray matter.

Other than that, the rule isnt designed to protect one fighter over another. The simple fact is, Renzo had the same opportunities Shamrock had to use moves that were deemed by both to be illegal and he chose not to. Shamrock chose a different path, and he lost, in more ways than one.