THE OFFICIAL Matt Rempe Fight Club

[Jersey Fresh]

Congratulations to him!

Got his first coach fired.

Even for you this is a pathetic reach

 

[GG96]

I'm not sure where you delcared you had the authority to speak for "hockey fight enthusiasts" across the globe, but I'm one and have always taken takedowns into account at the end of a fight. If you physically overpower someone and unwillingly take them off their feet, plant them on their back that is absolutely something that should be taken into account when judging a fight.

Your link doesn't work but based on the description is a terrible analogy for a fight where both opponents had a relatively even exchange on the feet for around 1 minute before Rempe gassed, was hit and then wrestled to the ground to end the fight.

When all things are even, you give it to the guy who scored the takedown, point blank.

An even exchange on their feet as evidenced that Des looked like Gorbachev? Let the bias and hate wash over you.

Do you see Rangers fans saying he won the Olivier fight? He’s 2-1-1 under any objective measure.

 

[BigKing]

I'm not sure where you delcared you had the authority to speak for "hockey fight enthusiasts" across the globe, but I'm one and have always taken takedowns into account at the end of a fight. If you physically overpower someone and unwillingly take them off their feet, plant them on their back that is absolutely something that should be taken into account when judging a fight.

Your link doesn't work but based on the description is a terrible analogy for a fight where both opponents had a relatively even exchange on the feet for around 1 minute before Rempe gassed, was hit and then wrestled to the ground to end the fight.

When all things are even, you give it to the guy who scored the takedown, point blank.

Well, as someone who was part of the VHS fight tape trade in the 90s and has been posting about hockey fights since that time, I can say with confidence that takedowns are not used to determine the winner of a hockey fight.

If Deslauriers doesn't take his legs out for the takedown, maybe Rempe summons enough energy and lands one more flush shot. This takedown is the same as Reaves/Rempe agreeing to stop while standing: Deslauriers decided to stop throwing or potentially receive punches. To use your own analogy: this isn't wrestling.

Takedowns look cool and get the home crowd going. Purposely going for one is a decision to not throw or take anymore punches: why do you give this credit for determining the winner of a punching contest?

 

[GG96]

The board is trying to be gaslit that the above pugilist won the fight because he swept the leg after getting rocked.

Get ‘em a body bag. Yeahhhhh.

I think Todd Fedoruk won that fight against Colton Orr because Orr sort of stumbled after he knocked Fedoruk cold

 

[TimeZone]

An even exchange on their feet as evidenced that Des looked like Gorbachev? Let the bias and hate wash over you.

Do you see Rangers fans saying he won the Olivier fight? He’s 2-1-1 under any objective measure.

He literally lost the hfboards poll on who won the fight, Rangers fans seem to point to polls as evidence that somebody won a fight, yet Delauriers soundly beat him in a hf poll voted on by over 100 posters.

The Oliver fight was a mauling, Rempe landed zero offense and was out on his feet sporting a face that would make Delauriers look like Brad Pitt in the 90's by comparison.

 

[TimeZone]

Well, as someone who was part of the VHS fight tape trade in the 90s and has been posting about hockey fights since that time, I can say with confidence that takedowns are not used to determine the winner of a hockey fight.

If Deslauriers doesn't take his legs out for the takedown, maybe Rempe summons enough energy and lands one more flush shot. This takedown is the same as Reaves/Rempe agreeing to stop while standing: Deslauriers decided to stop throwing or potentially receive punches. To use your own analogy: this isn't wrestling.

Takedowns look cool and get the home crowd going. Purposely going for one is a decision to not throw or take anymore punches: why do you give this credit for determining the winner of a punching contest?

As somebody who grew up in the 90's I say it doesn't, unless you've got anything other than anecdotes like the above to bring to the table this is essentially worthless and going nowhere. You don't score takedowns? Fine, I think that's idiotic and I most certainly disagree with you, and I assure you I'm not alone despite your insistence otherwise, though it's not surprising people interested in tape trading for bloody blows would be disappointed in a fight ending premately with a TD, it's certainly not entertaining, that doesn't mean you pretend it doesn't matter.

Except this isn't wrestling or boxing, handfighting is fighting and takedowns are part of the game, whether you like it or not. Rempe called the refs in because he was tired and eating unanswered counter right hands from Reaves, Delauriers and Rempe were both gassed at the end of the fight and Delauriers had the strength to pull off a takedown and end the battle with the advantage. Rempe was outlasted and on the losing end of both scraps for different reasons.

 

[GG96]

He literally lost the hfboards poll on who won the fight, Rangers fans seem to point to polls as evidence that somebody won a fight, yet Delauriers soundly beat him in a hf poll voted on by over 100 posters.

The Oliver fight was a mauling, Rempe landed zero offense and was out on his feet sporting a face that would make Delauriers look like Brad Pitt in the 90's by comparison.

This is just great hfboards stuff. You are trying to convince the board that the Flyer won the fight because of a leg sweep and an hfboards poll (lololololol) and not the evidence below.

 

[TimeZone]

This is just great hfboards stuff. You are trying to convince the board that the Flyer won the fight because of a leg sweep and an hfboards poll (lololololol) and not the evidence below.View attachment 829307View attachment 829308

Good thing we actually watch the fights instead of just blindly judging who won the fight based on curts and bruises without context.

Someone quickly alert this guy that he's been stripped of his world title

If you're making up your mind on who wins a fight via who has a black eye, a mark on their head, you aren't very informed on the topic.

Polls have been shared numerous time by Rangers fans, I agree they don't decide anything, I'm merely utilizing the same tactics to prove a point, one that clearly went over your head.

He won the fight because he outlasted Rempe and landed plenty of offense of his own, attempting to play it off as some sort of one sided beating is painfully cringe and misguided.

 

[MXD]

I mean, at this point, can the Rangers really send him down?

 

[BigKing]

As somebody who grew up in the 90's I say it doesn't, unless you've got anything other than anecdotes like the above to bring to the table this is essentially worthless and going nowhere. You don't score takedowns? Fine, I think that's idiotic and I most certainly disagree with you, and I assure you I'm not alone despite your insistence otherwise, though it's not surprising people interested in tape trading for bloody blows would be disappointed in a fight ending premately with a TD, it's certainly not entertaining, that doesn't mean you pretend it doesn't matter.

Except this isn't wrestling or boxing, handfighting is fighting and takedowns are part of the game, whether you like it or not. Rempe called the refs in because he was tired and eating unanswered counter right hands from Reaves, Delauriers and Rempe were both gassed at the end of the fight and Delauriers had the strength to pull off a takedown and end the battle with the advantage. Rempe was outlasted and on the losing end of both scraps for different reasons.

Since you grew up in the 90s, you would remember that YouTube wasn't available so you would need someone from a home team's market to record said market's fights if you wanted to see it. Those that are actively seeing all of the fights and not just hearing about them could then more properly debate who was the current champ, who won or lost a fight etc. That's the world I found myself in and I was amateur hour compared to these dudes that had been super hardcore about this stuff for years.

As someone who obviously cares a lot about fighting and has strong opinions, it is funny that you would try to paint me as some sort of caveman fan of hockey fights while you are the opposite since you account for takedowns in judging the winner or loser of a hockey fight. There is no disappointment with fighters going for a takedown after trading them: especially after the performance Deslauriers put in. But you're logic would have a fighter who throws two punches, lands one, and then purposely does a hip throw or something silly like that be awarded a W when the whole point of the hip throw was because said fighter did not want to trade shots at all. "Wrestlers" have always been derided in the fight community.

I'm not even saying you would be wrong if you want to give the nod to Deslauriers: I had him as the winner without factoring in the takedown but then you do have to account for the damage. With how good of a back-and-forth fight that was, it is very easy to award a draw and move on unless one has an agenda, be it pro or anti-Rempe.

Hopefully this fight clip isn't age restricted as well, but this fight was a big discussion over who won or lost at the time it happened: Parker v. Flinn. This has a TKO so it is a little more clear than the Rempe/Deslauriers fight but it is one of those fights where the guy that looks worse after isn't the loser. Parker leaves the fight with a broken nose but Parker winds up dropping Flinn with a punch, so he gets the TKO and wins the fight. There are those that will argue Flinn wins because he broke the other guy's nose.



Another classic here. Ewen/Twist. Ewen drops Twist so he is the winner of the fight. They continue to throw punches on the ground though and Twist winds up opening a nice cut on Ewen. Ewen is a bloody mess but is still the winner of the fight but some might argue he is the loser because he looks the worst, like Deslauriers. Twist trash talks the cut and you can read Ewen's lips say "on the ground". Why is that important? Because like I'm trying to tell you: the winner/loser of a hockey fight is determined by punches while upright and not via takedowns and groundwork.

 

[TimeZone]

Since you grew up in the 90s, you would remember that YouTube wasn't available so you would need someone from a home team's market to record said market's fights if you wanted to see it. Those that are actively seeing all of the fights and not just hearing about them could then more properly debate who was the current champ, who won or lost a fight etc. That's the world I found myself in and I was amateur hour compared to these dudes that had been super hardcore about this stuff for years.

As someone who obviously cares a lot about fighting and has strong opinions, it is funny that you would try to paint me as some sort of caveman fan of hockey fights while you are the opposite since you account for takedowns in judging the winner or loser of a hockey fight. There is no disappointment with fighters going for a takedown after trading them: especially after the performance Deslauriers put in. But you're logic would have a fighter who throws two punches, lands one, and then purposely does a hip throw or something silly like that be awarded a W when the whole point of the hip throw was because said fighter did not want to trade shots at all. "Wrestlers" have always been derided in the fight community.

I'm not even saying you would be wrong if you want to give the nod to Deslauriers: I had him as the winner without factoring in the takedown but then you do have to account for the damage. With how good of a back-and-forth fight that was, it is very easy to award a draw and move on unless one has an agenda, be it pro or anti-Rempe.

Hopefully this fight clip isn't age restricted as well, but this fight was a big discussion over who won or lost at the time it happened: Parker v. Flinn. This has a TKO so it is a little more clear than the Rempe/Deslauriers fight but it is one of those fights where the guy that looks worse after isn't the loser. Parker leaves the fight with a broken nose but Parker winds up dropping Flinn with a punch, so he gets the TKO and wins the fight. There are those that will argue Flinn wins because he broke the other guy's nose.



Another classic here. Ewen/Twist. Ewen drops Twist so he is the winner of the fight. They continue to throw punches on the ground though and Twist winds up opening a nice cut on Ewen. Ewen is a bloody mess but is still the winner of the fight but some might argue he is the loser because he looks the worst, like Deslauriers. Twist trash talks the cut and you can read Ewen's lips say "on the ground". Why is that important? Because like I'm trying to tell you: the winner/loser of a hockey fight is determined by punches while upright and not via takedowns and groundwork.

1. I understand YouTube didn't exist in the 90's, I like to think that's common knowledge.

2. You're creating hypothetical fights in your head and attempting to paint a picture of my stance on these non-existent fights. My stance has never been this simple, how flush was the shot, did it rock his opponent, was it glancing? How many strikes did this imginary opponent land? Please don't try to oversimplify my stance and speak for me, we can continue this discussion without needless fallacies that do no favors for anyone.

3. You could call it a draw, that would be fine as well. When it comes to scoring fights I generally lean with who comes on strong on the end of a highly competitive fight, Delauriers landed some solid volume near the end while the body language from Rempe was that of a gassed fighter, I put stock into these things as well.

4. The thing is, takedowns don't involve striking, you can't legally strike your opponent on the ground in a wrestling tournament either, that doesn't change the fact that takedowns and grappling positions earn you points. With all of that heavy equipment, blasded on their stepping in when players hit the ice is the logical thing to do. At the end of the day we've seen fighters knocked unconscious from takedowns, it's part of fighting whether you value it or not. We've seen AA look for a single leg against Erne, Bieksa do a full blown superman punch several times, these martial arts techniques were far less common 30 years ago as opposed to today.

 

[BigKing]

1. I understand YouTube didn't exist in the 90's, I like to think that's common knowledge.

2. You're creating hypothetical fights in your head and attempting to paint a picture of my stance on these non-existent fights. My stance has never been this simple, how flush was the shot, did it rock his opponent, was it glancing? How many strikes did this imginary opponent land? Please don't try to oversimplify my stance and speak for me, we can continue this discussion without needless fallacies that do no favors for anyone.

3. You could call it a draw, that would be fine as well. When it comes to scoring fights I generally lean with who comes on strong on the end of a highly competitive fight, Delauriers landed some solid volume near the end while the body language from Rempe was that of a gassed fighter, I put stock into these things as well.

4. The thing is, takedowns don't involve striking, you can't legally strike your opponent on the ground in a wrestling tournament either, that doesn't change the fact that takedowns and grappling positions earn you points. With all of that heavy equipment, blasded on their stepping in when players hit the ice is the logical thing to do. At the end of the day we've seen fighters knocked unconscious from takedowns, it's part of fighting whether you value it or not.

Are you saying you would give someone a win in a fight because the takedown caused a helmetless opponent to be KO'd?

Anyways, we will agree to disagree. Wrestling and takedowns are a part of a hockey fight, sure, but that doesn't mean that people have historically put much--if any--credence in either when determining the true winner/loser of a hockey fight. In the ND/Rempe fight, ND did so much and the fight went for so long that purposely pulling a guys leg out from under him for a takedown is fine but, in most cases, that is usually a bitch move and is done by the guy who doesn't want to actually fight and/or is the tired one.

I feel you are leaning too in to this takedown thing since you are using it in your argument to award ND the win. From an outsider's perspective who doesn't care about Rangers, Flyers or any other team out that way, this is an easy draw and raise of the glass to both guys for trading them. If someone has bias towards/against one of these guys, it is pretty easy to argue a decision one way or the other based on damage to ND's face or Deslauriers "controlling" things more. In the end, I'm sure the two of us are happy that HW hockey fights are having one last moment in the sun.

I mean, having this discussion with you on HF in 2024 is wild. Makes me feel like I'm arguing about a Matt Johnson fight on Fried Chicken's Hockey Fight site back in 1998.

 

[TimeZone]

Are you saying you would give someone a win in a fight because the takedown caused a helmetless opponent to be KO'd?

Anyways, we will agree to disagree. Wrestling and takedowns are a part of a hockey fight, sure, but that doesn't mean that people have historically put much--if any--credence in either when determining the true winner/loser of a hockey fight. In the ND/Rempe fight, ND did so much and the fight went for so long that purposely pulling a guys leg out from under him for a takedown is fine but, in most cases, that is usually a bitch move and is done by the guy who doesn't want to actually fight and/or is the tired one.

I feel you are leaning too in to this takedown thing since you are using it in your argument to award ND the win. From an outsider's perspective who doesn't care about Rangers, Flyers or any other team out that way, this is an easy draw and raise of the glass to both guys for trading them. If someone has bias towards/against one of these guys, it is pretty easy to argue a decision one way or the other based on damage to ND's face or Deslauriers "controlling" things more. In the end, I'm sure the two of us are happy that HW hockey fights are having one last moment in the sun.

I mean, having this discussion with you on HF in 2024 is wild. Makes me feel like I'm arguing about a Matt Johnson fight on Fried Chicken's Hockey Fight site back in 1998.

I suppose it depends on the situation, but surely we won't be scoring the fight for the unconscious guy on the ice either way.

We would quite literally need to poll the masses to determine how much stock is placed into takedowns by hockey fight enthusiasts, we certainly don't all score the same way as you and I are evidence to that.

I totally agree with you in regards to the last part, it's extremely refreshing to be having this discussion in general in 2024. While I have my doubts this will be anything but a short term thing, a man cam dream right? I like Rempe, not so much his biased fanboys who scoff at the notion of him losing a highly competitive fight in someones view.

Enjoy your night man.

 

[GG96]

This is just pure desperation and bias from a disgruntled rival. The Rangers are one of the most popular teams and they get outsized hate. Comparing UFC results to a 30 second NHL fight is all evidence you need

All the 1000 word posts doesn’t change Des got rocked. Martin lost. Reaves was a tie and Rempe lost to Olivier

 

[Lindberg Cheese]

What the hell did we just debate?

 

[The Crypto Guy]

“Rempe!” chants at the Garden!

 

[featherhawk]

They hardly call that a charge, no matter the player. In this scenario, if the player was 6'1, nobody looks twice at this and yells for a charge. Rempe is big and his strides are long. It looks like a tank coming at you. He's the nearest player attaching a player trying to get possession of a puck coming to him at the boards. They aren't calling this. Just like they don't call players hustling down the entire rink and railing somebody in the boards when attacking a player in pursuit of the puck. With that said, as a NYR fan with this kid on the team I root for, I still did not like the hit. Feet on the ground before the hit, sure, but there wasn't a need for the explosive upward movement from a player near 6'8.

It is charging for sure!

That said, if the NHL is not going to call that charging then they need to remove the charging rule from the rulebook

 

[WhiskeyYerTheDevils]

I mean, at this point, can the Rangers really send him down?

He's playing very little and keeps taking bad penalties. Just tonight he took one that led to a Panthers goal.

 

[FoxyClean]

He's playing very little and keeps taking bad penalties. Just tonight he took one that led to a Panthers goal.

People pay to watch him play

 

[EdJovanovski]

 

[WhiskeyYerTheDevils]

People pay to watch him play

Are the rangers having a hard time selling tickets?

 

[BigKing]

I suppose it depends on the situation, but surely we won't be scoring the fight for the unconscious guy on the ice either way.

We would quite literally need to poll the masses to determine how much stock is placed into takedowns by hockey fight enthusiasts, we certainly don't all score the same way as you and I are evidence to that.

I totally agree with you in regards to the last part, it's extremely refreshing to be having this discussion in general in 2024. While I have my doubts this will be anything but a short term thing, a man cam dream right? I like Rempe, not so much his biased fanboys who scoff at the notion of him losing a highly competitive fight in someones view.

Enjoy your night man.

It's all hypothetical, but I would score a win in a hockey fight to an unconscious guy from a takedown if said unconscious guy is the only one that threw and landed punches: I'd just prefer to be the guy that wasn't carried off on a stretcher. It's like the Flinn/Parker fight I embedded but is age restricted for some reason: I'd rather be Flinn skating to the penalty box looking fine v. being Parker with the broken nose but Parker won the fight. Same with that Ewen/Twist scrap. Guess these type of things boil down to a "win the fight, lose the war" type thing. That said, how to score damage in a fight has always been a sticking point since a little nick can bleed a lot and make things look worse but it is such a visual thing that people assume the bloody guy lost.

Regarding Rempe, I watched the first two periods of the Leafs/Rangers game Saturday 100% because of him and the potential Reaves fight. Season ticket holder to the Kings since 2001 and used to watch whatever hockey game was on tv and then whatever was the best one that night via Center Ice. Now it is almost only Kings games. Saturday, I made sure all my shit was done so I could be sitting in front of the TV for puck drop. It wasn't Probert/Domi or anything, but there hasn't been something like this since Rangers/Caps after Wilson ruined their team and I don't know what there was prior to that.

It's awesome so anyone that enjoys physical hockey has to be onboard the Rempe train but, yeah, he isn't a great fighter yet. I've got him at 1-1-2 overall but he isn't a wrestler and likes to trade them, which is awesome. The Deslauriers fight is one of the best fights this decade when you take into account HWs actually tossing them for a good amount of time. Reminds me of early Grimson when he didn't necessarily have the balance thing down.

All the talk of win/loss record doesn't matter as long as he keeps taking runs and doesn't get himself KO'd. Bob Probert got dropped on more than once occasion. I mean, Chris Tamer dropped him. It happens to all of them eventually if they fight to win decisively v. defensively. I'm biased since he was a King, but I feel MacDermid was underrated and hated how Reaves ducked him the entire time Kurtis was in LA. Next Monday is Rangers/Devils: let's hope they are both in the lineup. Expecting a MacDermid win but it should be a good one if they go.

 

[Ezekial]

View attachment 829298

The board is trying to be gaslit that the above pugilist won the fight because he swept the leg after getting rocked.

Get ‘em a body bag. Yeahhhhh.

I think Todd Fedoruk won that fight against Colton Orr because Orr sort of stumbled after he knocked Fedoruk cold

Everyone knows redheads turn red easily

 

[OysterForever]

Ban hitting first. The low hanging fruit is fighting but is much overstated with what fighting is in 2024.

So you do really think that banning hits before fights gives us customers more hockey entertainment? What the F*** lol

 

[The Expert]

He lost, you don't ignore takedowns in a hockey fight either, this isn't MMA, but it certainly isn't a kickboxing match either, it's a fight.

If your opponent overpowers you and takes you to the ice, that isn't a negative on him, that scores points. Delauriers outlasted Rempe, landed some solid shots and then landed the takedown, I give him the nod.

It's hard to take you seriously when you're talking about scoring points. It's a hockey fight, Rempe won. It's really not rocket science, it's funny how you seem to be the only one struggling to understand.

He literally lost the hfboards poll on who won the fight, Rangers fans seem to point to polls as evidence that somebody won a fight, yet Delauriers soundly beat him in a hf poll voted on by over 100 posters.

Because Hockeyfight users are known for being so objective at choosing winners, didnt they have him winning over Delauriers too?

These two quotes are hilarious next to each other.