I dont understand? Forrest/Rampage- Good decision or bad?

MMAPlayground.com » MMA General » UFC Forum » I dont understand? Forrest/Rampage- Good decision or bad?
Next Page »
chrismithers
7/6/08 2:15:31AM
so i was reading yahoo blog about the decision. they all complained that that decision was bad. i thought it was a good decison. and then they all complained about racism! what is that all about that is bull crap what some people said.
TimW001
7/6/08 2:59:11AM
I thought the judging was completely fair. I completely agree.
holt8081
7/6/08 3:02:55AM
ya I guess it was a good call. I do think that Rampage was just waiting for the one knock out punch the whole fight in stead of going after forrest.
cmill21
7/6/08 3:04:05AM
I didn't agree at all. I thought they were relativly close rounds other then 1 and 2 but I thought Rampage won 3,4, and 5 pretty clearly, with 5 being a bit closer. I thought Rampage was getting the better of the exchanges, he got the only take downs other then in round two and all Forrest landed were small jabs. I thought Rampage won it 4-1 or 3-2. Props for Forrest for making it that close but man I didn't think that was the right call.
ncordless
7/6/08 3:05:03AM
When I fight is that close, and it's not finished by either fighter... how can it not be fair?

For the record I thought that it was a 47-47 draw with rampage winning 3 rounds but Forrest getting a 10-8 in the second. The fifth round was close and I can definitely see it going Forrest's way... and I also could've seen the 2nd being only 10-9 for Forrest. In short, either fighter winning was possible in my eyes and Forrest winning was fine with me.

As for the crowd and commentating... it was pretty freaking biased.

EDIT: As I stated in the Spoilers... this was UFC 86 - Too Close To Call. Makes me yearn for a Liddell overhand right or a Wandy knee/soccer kick/curb stomp combo.
hippysmacker
7/6/08 3:06:48AM
It was kind of bittersweet and anticlimactic for me. They are 2 of my favorite fighters, and I thought both fought hard, but each could have been more aggressive in trying to finish the fighy at various times. Do I believe the judging was fair? Yes, but I will say that it was very close ,and I can understand why someone on either side of the fence would feel either guy won . If I was a judge , and it was a # 1 contender match, i would have definitely given the decision to Forrest, close or not. However, I see title fights differently. I think to take a mans belt you should have to clearly beat him, not squeeze out a close one. So yeah, I think Forrest won, but I don't see the margin of victory as championship winning caliber.
joshryanshepherd
7/6/08 3:14:00AM
well im pretty happy forrest won, but if rampage or anyone else thinks its a bad decision well rampage should have finished it like he said he was. dont complain!!
bullettdodger
7/6/08 3:15:54AM
Forrest took a hard fought fight im glad he took it!
beerman77
7/6/08 3:16:42AM
I had the fight a split decision for Rampage, with it being a good close fight. That being said I wanted Forrest to win, but I don't think he did. I see why they gave Forrest the belt though, it's more profitable for the UFC for the so called "fan favorite" to be champ. I think the crowd booing after the decision came down told the whole story. Sad to say it but the UFC is turning a dangerous corner to being similar to the WWE.
cmill21
7/6/08 3:20:03AM

Posted by beerman77

I had the fight a split decision for Rampage, with it being a good close fight. That being said I wanted Forrest to win, but I don't think he did. I see why they gave Forrest the belt though, it's more profitable for the UFC for the so called "fan favorite" to be champ. I think the crowd booing after the decision came down told the whole story. Sad to say it but the UFC is turning a dangerous corner to being similar to the WWE.



Ohhh bold statement...but to be honest my first thought was, well of course they would give a close decision to Forrest. Not saying it's true but man it does work out better this way, money wise.
beerman77
7/6/08 3:28:19AM

Posted by cmill21


Posted by beerman77

I had the fight a split decision for Rampage, with it being a good close fight. That being said I wanted Forrest to win, but I don't think he did. I see why they gave Forrest the belt though, it's more profitable for the UFC for the so called "fan favorite" to be champ. I think the crowd booing after the decision came down told the whole story. Sad to say it but the UFC is turning a dangerous corner to being similar to the WWE.



Ohhh bold statement...but to be honest my first thought was, well of course they would give a close decision to Forrest. Not saying it's true but man it does work out better this way, money wise.



my point exactly, afterall UFC is a business and Griffin being the so called "Fan Favorite" and beign champ is almost too good to be true. I thought the fans showed tremendous intelligence by booing the decision.
GrizzlyChadams
7/6/08 3:33:19AM
Anyone who thinks Rampage won was watching another fight. I think it was much closer then the judges scored it but Rampage definitely lost.

I think round 1 was very close, Rampage rocked Forrest but at the sametime Forrest landed all those leg kicks which clearly did the most significant damage of the match. Round 2 wen't to Forrest without a doubt, possibly a 10- 8 round. Rounds 3 and 4 were very close, but i feel for the most part it was Forrest controlling the match. And round 5 completely wen't to forrest. Hell, Rampage couldn't even walk properly at that time, let alone land anything.
ncordless
7/6/08 3:41:22AM

Posted by beerman77

I had the fight a split decision for Rampage, with it being a good close fight. That being said I wanted Forrest to win, but I don't think he did. I see why they gave Forrest the belt though, it's more profitable for the UFC for the so called "fan favorite" to be champ. I think the crowd booing after the decision came down told the whole story. Sad to say it but the UFC is turning a dangerous corner to being similar to the WWE.



How can anyone have it as a split decision? By the very definition of a split it makes no sense at all.
Pookie
7/6/08 3:45:54AM
I dont agree with the decision(or the Cote one) but i do understnad the judges dont get to see the fight from the angle we do.

Rampage clearly landed the harder shots, and landed more of them. but... as someone pointed out when you leave it in the judges hands... shit happens.
Rampage was a great sport about it though... The only bright side here is now Wandy v. Rampage 3 is perfectly justifyable.
FrankTheTank1181
7/6/08 3:46:47AM

Posted by Ordep

I had it 49-46 Rampage.

From ___ MY ____ point of view they just want Liddell to take the title back...

Why? ....

Pad Liddell record w/ Rashad...
Liddell - Rampage 3 doesn't make sense....
GIVE the belt to Forrest....
Liddell (the ""face"" of the UFC) vs. Forrest ( the original TUF) for the 205 title in the NYE event...

UFC = WWE

Thus, $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ for the Administrators. Once again, IMO- UFC Damins, doesn't care about the actual sport, they just want $$$$. They showed it with the July 19th Card and now stealing fights. Once again ___I.M.O.___.

Really disappointing tonight's event.



Good points. I laughed when the fans booed when the decision came out. Just shows the judges are full of crap.
FrankTheTank1181
7/6/08 3:49:35AM

Posted by GrizzlyChadams

Anyone who thinks Rampage won was watching another fight. I think it was much closer then the judges scored it but Rampage definitely lost.

I think round 1 was very close, Rampage rocked Forrest but at the sametime Forrest landed all those leg kicks which clearly did the most significant damage of the match. Round 2 wen't to Forrest without a doubt, possibly a 10- 8 round. Rounds 3 and 4 were very close, but i feel for the most part it was Forrest controlling the match. And round 5 completely wen't to forrest. Hell, Rampage couldn't even walk properly at that time, let alone land anything.



Typical Forrest lover. One leg kick hurt him. Forrest being champ makes the UFC much more money and that's what business is all about, which is sad to say but the truth hurts.
Playground_Samurai
7/6/08 3:54:04AM
I picked Rampage to win by decision. I scored it 48-47 for Forrest. That's without scoring the second round 10-8. I realize this was a close fight, but I think it's a bit rediculous to start hollaring conspiracy. Rampage even said he got his ass kicked. I see nothing wrong with the decision.

On a side note, I think the Rampage/Henderson fight was closer than this.

telnights
7/6/08 3:56:32AM
I thought Forrest won the fight. But same time I don't think either fighter did much in the fight. The main factor in the fight seamed to be the leg kicks. They really seamed to affect Rampage a lot. But I really would have liked to see more action from both fighters. I really think the layoff was not good for either of them.
ncordless
7/6/08 4:01:44AM

Posted by gspfan

I picked Rampage to win by decision. I scored it 48-46 for Forrest. That's without scoring the second round 10-8. I realize this was a close fight, but I think it's a bit rediculous to start hollaring conspiracy. Rampage even said he got his ass kicked. I see nothing wrong with the decision.

On a side note, I think the Rampage/Henderson fight was closer than this.




Ok... I am kinda getting the feeling from the guy that said he saw it as a split and you who came up with the number 48-46 that you guys don't understand how it works. There is no way to come up with 48-46 without a 10-8 round, unless you think someone should have been deducted a point.

Also, one person cannot see it as a split... it is not possible. it takes three disagreeing viewpoints to get a split... and unless you have 3 personalities which saw the fight different ways... it is not possible.


Please do not post how you judged if you don't know how the scoring works...


EDIT: Alright it's edited now. I guess I can see that... but that means you gave the 3rd to Griffin?
Purge
7/6/08 4:08:35AM
I gave rounds 1, 2, 3 and 5 to Griffin, I don't see who this decision was bad.
Aether
7/6/08 4:09:24AM
I basically said the same stuff hippysmacker, pookie, smill etc have been saying in the spoilers thread.

I can see arguments for it going either way, I personally scored it as a tie and agree that in a title fight the challenger needs to definitively beat the champ and even if you want to give forrest the nod I don't think that happened and rampage should have retained the title.

Same deal with the cote fight. Cote was pushing forward, so you can give him aggression, but I personally think that landing shots while backing up should be given points over advancing while missing. Even if you want to give cote the edge for pushing I think the takedown at the end should have been enough to swing it in ricardo's favour. It could be the fact that he missed that armbar attempt and fell into guard.

Who knows.... They were all too close for anyone to really say the decisions were _BAD_ but I think they were definitely both highly debatable. Ultimately that's the fighter's fault but I do think judging criteria should be broken down specifically and different maneuvers should be assigned values. Whether they be all equal or have varying values there should just be some more specific judging criteria so judges can say "look here this is why we scored it this way, like it or not here's out reason" just a simple opinion doesn't seem good enough. I think there needs to be something a little more quantifiable.
JoyDivision
7/6/08 4:20:55AM
Good decision:
1st round- Obviously Rampage's round. He almost knocked Forrest out.
2nd round- All Forrest. He landed a few knees and got Rampage down. Mounted him and did some GnP.
3rd round- Razor thin, but Forrest was slightly more aggressive.
4th round- Rampage won this one. He landed some good shots and took Forrest down.
5th round- Also a fairly close round but again, Forrest was a little more aggressive except for maybe the last 30 seconds.

Playground_Samurai
7/6/08 4:20:59AM

Posted by ncordless


Posted by gspfan

I picked Rampage to win by decision. I scored it 48-46 for Forrest. That's without scoring the second round 10-8. I realize this was a close fight, but I think it's a bit rediculous to start hollaring conspiracy. Rampage even said he got his ass kicked. I see nothing wrong with the decision.

On a side note, I think the Rampage/Henderson fight was closer than this.




Ok... I am kinda getting the feeling from the guy that said he saw it as a split and you who came up with the number 48-46 that you guys don't understand how it works. There is no way to come up with 48-46 without a 10-8 round, unless you think someone should have been deducted a point.

Also, one person cannot see it as a split... it is not possible. it takes three disagreeing viewpoints to get a split... and unless you have 3 personalities which saw the fight different ways... it is not possible.


Please do not post how you judged if you don't know how the scoring works...


EDIT: Alright it's edited now. I guess I can see that... but that means you gave the 3rd to Griffin?



Yea, I know how to score a fight. No need to get bent out of shape about a typo. I corrected it before your post even went up.

Anywho, yea, I gave Forrest the 3rd. He was taking the center of the octagon, pushing the pace, and I think he landed more shots than rampage. Octagon Control.
beerman77
7/6/08 4:25:29AM

Posted by JoyDivision

Good decision:
1st round- Obviously Rampage's round. He almost knocked Forrest out.
2nd round- All Forrest. He landed a few knees and got Rampage down. Mounted him and did some GnP.
3rd round- Razor thin, but Forrest was slightly more aggressive.
4th round- Rampage won this one. He landed some good shots and took Forrest down.
5th round- Also a fairly close round but again, Forrest was a little more aggressive except for maybe the last 30 seconds.




Not enough to give the challenger the belt, no matter how much the UFC loves him...
Lord_Lenny
7/6/08 4:46:05AM
being more aggressive while landing less punches and doing considerably less damage is not means to winning a round. The logic behind that is like saying Tito should have beat machida because he was pressing the pace and being more aggressive. I think it was cmill21 that said forrest landed some jabs and leg kicks but rampage landed harder shots and more of them, and i completely agree. rampage takes 1,3,4 at least. With 5 going either way to me. 2 could be considered 10-8, because of positioning however forrest wasnt close to finishing the fight and did little damage other than the two leg kicks.

The commentating and crowd seems like it swayed a lot of people and possibly the judges, however i dont believe in the conspiracies that will be floating around, but maybe im too optimistic about the sanctity of the sport

I think my post in the spoiler forum was better written but im in a rush
beerman77
7/6/08 4:54:07AM
FYI: Opinions are taken more serious if you don't use caps lock. Most posts I see in all capital letters are not worth reading. You may have made some valid points but I wouldn't know...
Playground_Samurai
7/6/08 4:54:54AM

Posted by Lord_Lenny

being more aggressive while landing less punches and doing considerably less damage is not means to winning a round.



Agression and octagon control are supposed to be factors in the scoring.
ncordless
7/6/08 4:58:45AM

Posted by gspfan


Posted by ncordless


Posted by gspfan

I picked Rampage to win by decision. I scored it 48-46 for Forrest. That's without scoring the second round 10-8. I realize this was a close fight, but I think it's a bit rediculous to start hollaring conspiracy. Rampage even said he got his ass kicked. I see nothing wrong with the decision.

On a side note, I think the Rampage/Henderson fight was closer than this.




Ok... I am kinda getting the feeling from the guy that said he saw it as a split and you who came up with the number 48-46 that you guys don't understand how it works. There is no way to come up with 48-46 without a 10-8 round, unless you think someone should have been deducted a point.

Also, one person cannot see it as a split... it is not possible. it takes three disagreeing viewpoints to get a split... and unless you have 3 personalities which saw the fight different ways... it is not possible.


Please do not post how you judged if you don't know how the scoring works...


EDIT: Alright it's edited now. I guess I can see that... but that means you gave the 3rd to Griffin?



Yea, I know how to score a fight. No need to get bent out of shape about a typo. I corrected it before your post even went up.

Anywho, yea, I gave Forrest the 3rd. He was taking the center of the octagon, pushing the pace, and I think he landed more shots than rampage. Octagon Control.



Fair Enough... the 3rd was definitely close. Forrest did have the center. He really didn't land anything at all except for leg kicks in that round. Rampage landed some shots that had Forrest stumbling away. But like the fight as a whole, I guess I could see it either way.
ncordless
7/6/08 4:59:57AM

Posted by beerman77

FYI: Opinions are taken more serious if you don't use caps lock. Most posts I see in all capital letters are not worth reading. You may have made some valid points but I wouldn't know...



Pretty much anything said in all caps is idiotic... regardless of content.
Lord_Lenny
7/6/08 5:12:37AM

Posted by gspfan


Posted by Lord_Lenny

being more aggressive while landing less punches and doing considerably less damage is not means to winning a round.



Agression and octagon control are supposed to be factors in the scoring.


Octagon Control is subjective, but your right they are factors. Perhaps the judges are supposed to be putting more emphasis on aggressiveness than i think, but damage and near fight ending incidents was on Rampage's Side the whole fight other than round 2
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5
Related Topics