UFC Live 4: Charles Oliveiras Outstanding Performance Shrouded in Controversy
The Brazilian jiu-jitsu brilliance of Charles “Do Bronx” Oliveira was on display this evening at UFC Live 4. Mesmerizing with his transitions, Oliveira’s ground game is of the highest caliber within the lightweight division.
Constantly moving his hips and shifting positions during the entire matchup, Oliveira is an amazing BJJ practitioner.
Developing an evolution of stand-up skills not yet exhibited in the UFC by “Do Bronx,” Lentz had no answer on his feet nor on the ground for the offensive arsenal of Oliveira.
Delivering savage knees to the body from the clinch, damaging elbows from the mount and a variety of leg kicks from the outside during the stand-up exchanges, Oliveira has improved drastically in his overall fight game.
Unfortunately, an illegal knee that was not caught by the referee changed the momentum inside the cage in Oliveira’s favor.
Even though Lentz was thoroughly dominated in all aspects of the exchanges, his continued push and heart kept him in this fight.
During the post-fight interview, Joe Rogan stated that the commission will review the fight and make a decision regarding the illegal knee to a downed Lentz.
Now shrouded in controversy, Oliveira’s performance at UFC Live 4 was outstanding but will be overshadowed by the illegal strike to a downed opponent.
In his previous UFC matchup, Oliveira succumbed to his first defeat of his professional career at UFC 124 in December of 2010.
“Do Bronx” has taken that loss to Jim Miller as a learning experience to develop into an all-around mixed martial artist.
A tremendously gifted MMA practitioner, Oliveira has improved on his weaknesses and continually enhanced his strengths.
A future rematch with Jim Miller would be the next subsequent step for Oliveira. Additional matchups should include WEC veterans Donald Cerrone or Ben Henderson.
I welcome your comments.
"Like" me on Facebook
Follow me on Twitter @toddseyler
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?