Another robbery on the UFC ?? Condit X Hendricks

MMAPlayground.com » MMA General » UFC Forum » Another robbery on the UFC ?? Condit X Hendricks
andre_pt
3/18/13 10:33:12PM
I have a question .. The juris give more score to takedowns even if they not lead anywhere once they are on the ground than a Fluid stand up striking ??

Yes . Im talking about Condit X Hendricks .. "sloppy job" of the jurys in my opinion.

Here the stats of the fight from Espn :

Image Attachment(s):
Photo Attachment 1 Photo Attachment 2
Kpro
3/18/13 10:36:25PM
I had it 29-28 Condit and so did multiple others in the Surprise Van, but if you're on top you're winning.
andre_pt
3/18/13 10:41:34PM
But that doesn't make sense , being on top doesn't mean you doing good all times .. And the unamimus decision for Hendricks , exaggerated.
Kpro
3/18/13 10:43:08PM

Posted by andre_pt

But that doesn't make sense , being on top doesn't mean you doing good all times



you'll never become a judge with that attitude!



sparky
3/18/13 10:46:48PM
I was rooting for Condit but, I had Hendricks winning 29-28.

I hear ya Kpro though because a few ppl I watched with had Condit winning the fight. 2nd round was extremely close wouldnt have surprised me if they gave Carlos the win
andre_pt
3/18/13 10:48:27PM
I guess i dont
Chael_Sonnen
3/18/13 10:49:41PM
If you cannot stop 12 takedowns you deserve to lose...Johny CLEARLY won....a guy on his back with another fella between his legs is begging the "jurors" to score it for the bad guy (Bigg Rigg).

Another 'W' for the bad guy
Kpro
3/18/13 11:00:36PM
Yeah, it was no robbery. But #1 contender fights need to go 5 rounds. Why they keep making main event fights HW bouts as 5 rounders and making the #1 & #2 contender battle in a 3 round WW tilt for the next title shot is beyond me.
Pookie
3/18/13 11:14:00PM
I thought Hendricks landed the harder blows on top of Td after slam after Td.
kopower
3/19/13 12:40:16AM
I had Hendricks 29-28. Those repeated td's swayed the fight in his favor, even though he didn't do much with them. I also thought he landed the harder shots in rd 1 and 2.

I agree about #1 contender matches going 5 rounds. Johny was on his way to losing, if the fight went another 2.
postman
3/19/13 8:33:01AM
I didn't have a chance to watch any of the fights from Saturday aside for them main event was this a fight worth finding? Any other suggestions?
kopower
3/19/13 8:52:55AM

Posted by postman

I didn't have a chance to watch any of the fights from Saturday aside for them main event was this a fight worth finding? Any other suggestions?



It was definitely entertaining, and worth a watch. Ellenberger/Marquardt had a nice finish, and I enjoyed the Makdessi/Cruickshank fight.
airkerma
3/19/13 9:47:30AM
Rewatched it yesterday and have no doubt in my mind Hendricks won. As others said, his takedowns were not only too frequent, but too easy for Condit to win the first two rounds. As for striking, to me it didn't look like Condit came to life until the 3rd, he also didn't do much damage off his back until the 3rd. Hendricks clearly landed bigger shots until the 3rd round as well.
tattflash
3/19/13 10:23:07AM
This was a cracking fight, and another two rounds I think Condit would of took it easily. For me it was that type of fight where both fighter's gave their all in an exciting, all action,with every style of MMA used I would not of complained who had got the decision. I also think this fight highlighted how well rounded and durable Condit is( other than TDD against top wrestler's), and in Hendricks there is someone with the speed and power to give GSP big problems
Bubbles
3/19/13 11:36:31AM

Posted by andre_pt

But that doesn't make sense , being on top doesn't mean you doing good all times


that's what she said
Bubbles
3/19/13 11:38:37AM

Posted by kopower
Johny was on his way to losing, if the fight went another 2.


I don't know, another 8 TDs were in order
MuayThaiGeek13
3/19/13 11:56:01AM
Every fighter knows how the fight will be scored, regardless if they agree with the system. Condit and Hendricks both knew TDs are like bonus points. We all saw who worked for the bonus points.

Just because you think a field goal should be worth more than 3 points doesn't give you an excuse to why you lost the game. Both teams agree to the rules before the coin toss.
jae_1833
3/19/13 11:58:00AM
TD's get points because of the judging criteria in regards to Octagon Control.
Kpro
3/19/13 1:09:35PM
Unfortunately going 0 for 13 on takedowns like Nurmagomedov against Tibau, the judges still view failed attempts as Octagon Control also (Diego Sanchez is another who gets undue scoring credit often for this), when it is the person with the Takedown Defense who is controlling where the fight is.

Just looking at round 1 of that fight shows how bad judging is (Khabib won 30-27x3 and went 0-13 on TD's, landed less strikes, attempted less strikes, and landed at a lower percentage when he did find the mark).

Nurmagomedov: 8 of 28 striking and 0 for 8 on takedowns.
Tibau: 15 of 32 striking and 0 for 1 on takedowns.

All 3 judges see that 10-9 for Nurmagomedov even though he was outstruck 2 to 1 and failed on ever takedown attempt because they think Octagon Control was his persistent attempts against the fence most of the round while it was obviously Tibau controlling the fight to stay standing. This is the issue with how judges view Octagon Control, and it's flawed after TD's too when the person gets outstruck from the bottom, has to fend off submission attempts to finish, and they can never pass out of full guard. Unfortunately that is a win to judges (I'm not referencing the Hendricks/Condit fight in this post, just "Octagon Control" and it's improper usage by judges).
andre_pt
3/19/13 2:41:50PM
Very funny. Here we discuss mma.
prozacnation1978
3/19/13 2:44:48PM
Johnny made those takedowns look like child's play
I probably could have taken his ass down myself too
If I knew johnny was gonna wrestlefuck him I would have picked him to win
infestructure
3/19/13 4:43:22PM

Posted by Kpro

Unfortunately going 0 for 13 on takedowns like Nurmagomedov against Tibau, the judges still view failed attempts as Octagon Control also (Diego Sanchez is another who gets undue scoring credit often for this), when it is the person with the Takedown Defense who is controlling where the fight is.

Just looking at round 1 of that fight shows how bad judging is (Khabib won 30-27x3 and went 0-13 on TD's, landed less strikes, attempted less strikes, and landed at a lower percentage when he did find the mark).

Nurmagomedov: 8 of 28 striking and 0 for 8 on takedowns.
Tibau: 15 of 32 striking and 0 for 1 on takedowns.

All 3 judges see that 10-9 for Nurmagomedov even though he was outstruck 2 to 1 and failed on ever takedown attempt because they think Octagon Control was his persistent attempts against the fence most of the round while it was obviously Tibau controlling the fight to stay standing. This is the issue with how judges view Octagon Control, and it's flawed after TD's too when the person gets outstruck from the bottom, has to fend off submission attempts to finish, and they can never pass out of full guard. Unfortunately that is a win to judges (I'm not referencing the Hendricks/Condit fight in this post, just "Octagon Control" and it's improper usage by judges).



I picked Khabib for that fight, and fully agree with you. I was shocked when they called his name
pmoney
3/19/13 8:09:48PM

Posted by infestructure


Posted by Kpro

Unfortunately going 0 for 13 on takedowns like Nurmagomedov against Tibau, the judges still view failed attempts as Octagon Control also (Diego Sanchez is another who gets undue scoring credit often for this), when it is the person with the Takedown Defense who is controlling where the fight is.

Just looking at round 1 of that fight shows how bad judging is (Khabib won 30-27x3 and went 0-13 on TD's, landed less strikes, attempted less strikes, and landed at a lower percentage when he did find the mark).

Nurmagomedov: 8 of 28 striking and 0 for 8 on takedowns.
Tibau: 15 of 32 striking and 0 for 1 on takedowns.

All 3 judges see that 10-9 for Nurmagomedov even though he was outstruck 2 to 1 and failed on ever takedown attempt because they think Octagon Control was his persistent attempts against the fence most of the round while it was obviously Tibau controlling the fight to stay standing. This is the issue with how judges view Octagon Control, and it's flawed after TD's too when the person gets outstruck from the bottom, has to fend off submission attempts to finish, and they can never pass out of full guard. Unfortunately that is a win to judges (I'm not referencing the Hendricks/Condit fight in this post, just "Octagon Control" and it's improper usage by judges).



I picked Khabib for that fight, and fully agree with you. I was shocked when they called his name



I picked Tibau in that fight because I knew he would win. And he did. Too bad the judges were too stupid to realize it.
sbulldavid
3/19/13 9:06:39PM
I knew the outcome but I knew it was bullshit. There is zero emphasis on striking in MMA, it's sad that the rules are geared towards a wrestler swing for the fences kind of fighter. This is the reason why striking will never reach the highest skill level in MMA.
aussiemma
3/20/13 5:58:42AM

Posted by Kpro

Unfortunately going 0 for 13 on takedowns like Nurmagomedov against Tibau, the judges still view failed attempts as Octagon Control also (Diego Sanchez is another who gets undue scoring credit often for this), when it is the person with the Takedown Defense who is controlling where the fight is.

Just looking at round 1 of that fight shows how bad judging is (Khabib won 30-27x3 and went 0-13 on TD's, landed less strikes, attempted less strikes, and landed at a lower percentage when he did find the mark).

Nurmagomedov: 8 of 28 striking and 0 for 8 on takedowns.
Tibau: 15 of 32 striking and 0 for 1 on takedowns.

All 3 judges see that 10-9 for Nurmagomedov even though he was outstruck 2 to 1 and failed on ever takedown attempt because they think Octagon Control was his persistent attempts against the fence most of the round while it was obviously Tibau controlling the fight to stay standing. This is the issue with how judges view Octagon Control, and it's flawed after TD's too when the person gets outstruck from the bottom, has to fend off submission attempts to finish, and they can never pass out of full guard. Unfortunately that is a win to judges (I'm not referencing the Hendricks/Condit fight in this post, just "Octagon Control" and it's improper usage by judges).



you make everything so clear and logical. Its good to have you back !! totally agree by the way.
andre_pt
3/21/13 6:45:42PM
I agree .
Related Topics