Im trying again to remember the majority of hardcore fans criteria of 'what scores a takedown' just to try and get some consistency about the 'scoring' criteria.
The Lombard takedown in the 3rd round I wouldnt consider to count for much. The point in which Lombard took Boetsch down was 0:27 left in the 3rd round, the point in which Boetsch was on his feet again was 0:22 left in the 3rd round the time in between Lombard didnt throw any GnP (nor did he really have a position to control, him Boetsch was up he kneed Lombard in the gut a few times until the fight was over.
I am completely perplexed as to how this was considered a 'ROBBERY'. You could argue for Lombard, but you could argue for Boetsch considering not too much happened.
Take it for what its worth of course, but here are the fightmetric stats Boetsch/Lombard stats
The sheer volume of Boetsch strikes in relation to Lombards single strike attack made it a little more cloudy or even subjective to a point of what was scored more. I felt Boetsch won the first round due to nothing really significant happened, while Boetsch was a little more active. Lombard won the second round. The third round IMO would be the round of 'what you score more'.
Boetsch had the more significant strikes... but i've heard the questioning of what is considered a 'significant strike' . Lombard had a takedown, but I question the consideration of the takedown due to Boetsch being able to pop back up within a 5 second period.
I read similar posts (regarding fights in a general sense) that have the sentiment of "oh fighter X didnt do anything with the takedown, it shouldnt be scored significantly" Likewise, I've read multiple posts (regarding fights in a general sense) of "oh, fighter X handed more, but fighter Y landed the harder strikes.. that should count more for fighter Y". You can see the subjectivity of the aforementioned arguments
Now I think one portion of the fight that gets overlooked is the clinch.
When clinched up, Lombard stuck Boetsch on the fence.... Boetsch outlanded him with knees to the body even though Hector had 'control' what do people score more? The control, or the landing shots in that regard? (I've heard cases for both).
Simply put, this fight shouldnt have the word 'robbery' thrown around as loosely as it is.
EDIT ---- As for the Ring/McGee fight.
I bet a good amount of actual money on Ring winning. I thought there was on outside chance that he could cash in on a 29-28 decision, but felt that McGee 'should have' won. I am happy with the decision from a monetary standpoint though : D but not necessarily from an 'absolute pure sport' standpoint.