UFC 130 Fight Card Preview: Can Rampage Jackson Knock Matt Hamill Out?
In the UFC's "Countdown" show for UFC 130, Quinton "Rampage" Jackson stated that he feels like Matt Hamill is a fighter he can knock out, and that that's what he'll be trying to do when the two fighters do battle in the main event tonight at the MGM Grand Garden Arena in Las Vegas.
Whether that will turn out to be the case remains to be seen, but it'd be interesting to know what the former UFC Light Heavyweight Champion is basing his analysis on, since the former NCAA Division III wrestling champion hasn't shown himself to be especially susceptible to knockouts since his days on The Ultimate Fighter.
Hamill has just two official losses in his UFC career: a controversial decision loss to TUF 3 teammate Michael Bisping at UFC 75, and a TKO loss to good friend Rich Franklin at UFC 88. He was on his way to losing to current 205 pound titleholder Jon Jones when they met at the TUF 10 season finale before Jones was disqualified for illegal 12-6 elbows, but Jones had not yet succeeded in knocking Hamill out. Even in the loss to Franklin, "Ace" delivered the winning blow with a kick to the body, which really isn't Jackson's style.
For Jackson, meanwhile, it's been some two and a half years since he last knocked out an opponent, as Rampage has gone to three straight decisions since knocking out Wanderlei Silva at UFC 92. A convincing victory over "The Hammer" is certainly a must if Rampage hopes to move into title contention against Jones, but to secure the knockout, he'll have to succeed where the vast majority of Hamill's opponents have failed.
Rampage is certainly the most dangerous strike that Hamill has faced, as Hamill's best career wins are against a fighter no longer in the UFC (Keith Jardine), a fighter who now competes at middleweight (Mark Munoz) and a fighter who is well past his prime (Tito Ortiz). However, when it comes to Rampage's ability to put the Hammer down, he'll have to prove it.
Most recent updates:
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?