Diaz........OUT!!!!

MMAPlayground.com » MMA General » Spoilers Forum » Diaz........OUT!!!!
Next Page »
BustedKnuckle
2/5/12 12:57:52AM
In typical Nick Diaz fashion he blames everyone else for his loss and says that it's MMA's fault he couldn't keep pace with Condit! I say good ridance to bad rubish!!
sbulldavid
2/5/12 1:00:36AM
At least he spoke his opinion. I don't really like the direction of MMA judging anymore either.
prophecy033
2/5/12 1:04:22AM
I can't really believe Diaz lost. I'm not saying Condit isn't a top fighter, I.just assumed Diaz's style would be hard to handle. I figured it would take 2-3 rounds to figure out but he won and I'm happy as hell that he did. Condit winning prevented me from my 1st perfect card but I'm glad he won
Budgellism
2/5/12 1:04:23AM
If running away and throwing leg kicks wins you a title then I've lost all faith in the judges and a ton of faith in the sport.
MiniMan
2/5/12 1:06:29AM
Carlos clearly won that fight, Half way through the 1st, I said that he wasn't fighting himself and was fighting very safe, 1 strike, out of there... This IS smart...

Boxer's fight smart.

But, Even though Diaz lost, I prey that MMA don't turn out to be a point sport, Which tonight main event was. I love getting UFC PPV's, But I would spot quickly if it was 5 decisions every PPV. This is where its heading. Congrat's to Carlos, But I can see where Diaz got pissed off.
Twenty20Dollars
2/5/12 1:11:12AM
He can go back to SF.
Kpro
2/5/12 1:24:25AM

Posted by sbulldavid

At least he spoke his opinion. I don't really like the direction of MMA judging anymore either.



Aether
2/5/12 1:26:32AM
I think a lot of people are confusing being boring with losing. Granted, Condit didn't land much of significance, but neither did Diaz, and if neither guy really lands anything significant, the guy with a bunch of leg kicks gets the round, I just don't see how anyone can find 3 rounds in there to give to Diaz.
jae_1833
2/5/12 1:29:17AM
He got out worked and lost a decision....if you don't like how he did it then how could you ever support Machida.
hashyandy4
2/5/12 1:57:56AM
I scored it 48-47 for Carlos. Really close fight tho. Good event numbers wise, 10-1 with 101 points.
Kpro
2/5/12 1:59:22AM

Posted by Aether

I think a lot of people are confusing being boring with losing. Granted, Condit didn't land much of significance, but neither did Diaz, and if neither guy really lands anything significant, the guy with a bunch of leg kicks gets the round, I just don't see how anyone can find 3 rounds in there to give to Diaz.



Dana at the presser that "Diaz won the first two rounds without a doubt" and the judges gave Diaz the 5th. That qualifies as 3 rounds that people with more qualified opinions than yours gave Diaz I don't see any way you could think 'there's no way anyone can find 3 rounds to give Diaz'. That shows a very poor understanding of MMA judging on your part. And if it's not the understanding of MMA judging then I always thought you were a less biased poster than this to not be able to see others opinions.
FastKnockout
2/5/12 2:01:20AM
It's bullshit. Everyone's turning on Condit. He's usually a very exciting fighter but he's never been a dumb one. He came in with a gameplan and instead of brawling with Diaz he kept on his feet and never gave Diaz the chance to get in the groove.

I think a lot of the love for Diaz is getting in the way of some fan's perspective of the fight.
Kpro
2/5/12 2:05:26AM

Posted by FastKnockout

I think a lot of the love for Diaz is getting in the way of some fan's perspective of the fight.



I agree, but also for any fan to say there's no way they could understand that anyone could see Diaz winning is just as bad.

It was a close fight and it could've gone either way. To completely ignore that the opposite result is possible is biased for either side.
Bubbles
2/5/12 2:06:57AM

Posted by Aether

I think a lot of people are confusing being boring with losing. Granted, Condit didn't land much of significance, but neither did Diaz, and if neither guy really lands anything significant, the guy with a bunch of leg kicks gets the round, I just don't see how anyone can find 3 rounds in there to give to Diaz.



aggression and octagon control are scoring criteria. Diaz dominated that for 25 minutes
tcunningham
2/5/12 2:34:07AM
theres a huge difference between running away and what condit was doing. he was being elusive all thw while landing more harder and cleaner shots than diaz. if diaz couldnt figure it out thats his problem. condit looked great
Aether
2/5/12 3:09:21AM

Posted by Kpro


Posted by Aether

I think a lot of people are confusing being boring with losing. Granted, Condit didn't land much of significance, but neither did Diaz, and if neither guy really lands anything significant, the guy with a bunch of leg kicks gets the round, I just don't see how anyone can find 3 rounds in there to give to Diaz.



Dana at the presser that "Diaz won the first two rounds without a doubt" and the judges gave Diaz the 5th. That qualifies as 3 rounds that people with more qualified opinions than yours gave Diaz I don't see any way you could think 'there's no way anyone can find 3 rounds to give Diaz'. That shows a very poor understanding of MMA judging on your part. And if it's not the understanding of MMA judging then I always thought you were a less biased poster than this to not be able to see others opinions.



Go ahead and read your quoted line from me and tell me if you actually see those words written in my post. Do you? That's because they're not there, you made them up.

My exact words were "----->I just don't see<------ how anyone can find 3 rounds..." not "there's no way anyone can find 3 rounds" These are remarkably different statements. One is stating that it is impossible (there is no way) for anyone to give him 3 rounds, the other is stating that I DON'T SEE how someone gave him 3 rounds, the people who gave him those 3 rounds are perfectly free to explain why they gave him the rounds.

These are not even remotely close to the same thing, if you're going to criticize someone for saying something, try criticizing the thing that they actually said, instead of inventing your own version of it and then criticizing your own made-up statement.

That shows a very poor understanding of the english language and basic logic on your part
Kpro
2/5/12 3:11:37AM
How exactly do you just not see it being possible?

Everything said below still applies.

"That shows a very poor understanding of MMA judging on your part. And if it's not the understanding of MMA judging then I always thought you were a less biased poster than this to not be able to see others opinions."
Aether
2/5/12 3:17:45AM
once again, not possible and "I don't see the explanation" are completely different things, if someone can offer an actual break down of why they scored X round in Diaz's favour instead of just screaming "bullshit" and "he ran away" then I might easily see how they came to the conclusion that Diaz won 3 rounds, but currently I don't see a convincing argument for Diaz winning round 1 based on what I saw, if someone presents it and I actually think it's coherent logical then I would see how they scored the fight that way, but so far it's just a bunch of people screaming that Condit was running and that judges are terrible, basically no one is actually presenting a logical argument for their scores, and as a result, I do not see what those arguments are, I personally can not mount a convincing case for Diaz winning round 1, and so I don't see the argument.

Never once did I say "it's impossible" or "there's no way" these are definitive blanket statements, which I would pretty much never make, and didn't make, they are clearly different from saying that you don't see what the argument for X case is.
Kpro
2/5/12 3:25:13AM
I thought we were already past the semantics of the words, but anyways. Dana White said at the presser that "Nick Diaz without a doubt won round 1". I don't have the fight DVR'd to watch a second time but those are pretty strong words from someone more qualified than us to have an opinion on it.
Aether
2/5/12 3:32:56AM
yeah, it's semantics when you completely re-word what I said and then argue against a made up quote and I correct it.

Words mean something for a reason, there's a really obvious difference between saying "X argument DOES NOT EXIST or IS IMPOSSIBLE" and saying "I do not SEE what X argument is"

The first one is a refutation that the argument exists, the second one is a statement saying that you are unaware of what the argument is, if someone presented an argument for their scoring, maybe I would say "oh yeah, you know what, I see where you're coming from" but until someone presents that argument, I can't see what it is.

Do you not see the difference here?

Also, I find it highly ironic and hypocritical that you accuse me of making a blanket statement (which I didn't actually make) call me a biased poster unwilling to see others' opinions and then you quote a blanket statement from Dana White as your counter argument "WITHOUT A DOUBT won rounds 1 and 2". Interesting how your logic works one way but not the other.
Aether
2/5/12 3:35:44AM
especially since 2 of the judges score the fight 49-46, so I guess there is some doubt from the people certified and paid to judge fights, if we want to talk about experience invalidating people's opinions. We can use your own logic here to make Dana's statement worthless on multiple levels.
Kpro
2/5/12 3:35:45AM
You're a piece of work. Do you not understand that extremes are thrown out as intentionally ironic to show someone that they are at the other extreme?

If you continue with trying to have a discussion on something that was over 5 posts ago, you're wasting both of our time.

Answer me this and this alone, what round or rounds could you see Diaz having won?
Aether
2/5/12 3:37:33AM
any more poorly thought out, hypocrisy you want to throw out? Want to re-write anything I said to make it much easier to argue with or are you done now?
Aether
2/5/12 3:39:22AM
2 and 5 as I've said many times, and I see a clear argument for either fighter winning round 5.
Aether
2/5/12 3:41:26AM

Posted by Kpro

You're a piece of work. Do you not understand that extremes are thrown out as intentionally ironic to show someone that they are at the other extreme?

If you continue with trying to have a discussion on something that was over 5 posts ago, you're wasting both of our time.

Answer me this and this alone, what round or rounds could you see Diaz having won?



Do you not understand that the argument is based off of you misquoting me, and as a result a discussion about something I NEVER SAID is wasting both our times?
Kpro
2/5/12 3:44:41AM

Posted by Aether

2 and 5 as I've said many times, and I see a clear argument for either fighter winning round 5.



3 was the only round that more than one judge gave to Diaz and they're professionally trained. So there's your argument for a different round and here's an actual picture of the scorecards for proof.

Diaz/Condit - Official Scorecard Picture

And no, this isn't misquoting you. Your exact words were "I just don't see how anyone can find 3 rounds in there to give to Diaz.". You then said "2 and 5 as I've said many times" and then I linked you to the actual scorecard where the only round that more than one judge gave Diaz 10 was the third. Professionally trained MMA judges should be enough for your to now be able to see how someone can find 3 rounds to give Diaz.


/thread
Aether
2/5/12 3:45:34AM

Posted by Kpro


Posted by Aether

2 and 5 as I've said many times, and I see a clear argument for either fighter winning round 5.



3 was the only round that more than one judge gave to Diaz and they're professionally trained. So there's your argument for a different round and here's an actual picture of the scorecards for proof.

Diaz/Condit - Official Scorecard Picture


/thread



You need to go back to grade 4 and learn how to read, because your understanding of basic English is pretty poor.
Kpro
2/5/12 3:50:43AM
Re-read the post above as there is no misquoting. You're a waste of my time.
Aether
2/5/12 3:54:23AM
You're being a little baby, grow up a little bit, it's sad. I've said pretty clearly many times that while I don't see the argument for 3 rounds for Diaz, I could easily be made to see the reasoning if someone presented it to me, it's a pretty simple statement, you're raging like a little infant, and it's completely pathetic.
Bubbles
2/5/12 4:02:07AM

Posted by Kpro


Posted by Aether

2 and 5 as I've said many times, and I see a clear argument for either fighter winning round 5.



3 was the only round that more than one judge gave to Diaz and they're professionally trained. So there's your argument for a different round and here's an actual picture of the scorecards for proof.

Diaz/Condit - Official Scorecard Picture

And no, this isn't misquoting you. Your exact words were "I just don't see how anyone can find 3 rounds in there to give to Diaz.". You then said "2 and 5 as I've said many times" and then I linked you to the actual scorecard where the only round that more than one judge gave Diaz 10 was the third. Professionally trained MMA judges should be enough for your to now be able to see how someone can find 3 rounds to give Diaz.


/thread



Pages: [1] 2
Related Topics