who won Aldo or Edgar ?

MMAPlayground.com » MMA General » UFC Forum » who won Aldo or Edgar ?
aussiemma
2/3/13 6:13:16AM
I think Aldo won clear enough. I gave him 1,2 and 5. Rnd 4 for edgar and the 3rd was close.

Adam_Buru
2/3/13 6:40:22AM
I think Edgar just shaved it. I gave him rounds 3, 4 and 5. 5 was close though. Rounds 1 and 2 to Aldo.

Judging at UFC is almost criminal at times. The two that gave it to Aldo 49 - 46 should be arrested.
KingCmb
2/3/13 9:05:11AM
eh i think aldo won....and iv backed edgar in all the previous close fights




but god damn it edgar is all heart
sparky
2/3/13 9:08:20AM

Posted by Adam_Buru

I think Edgar just shaved it. I gave him rounds 3, 4 and 5. 5 was close though. Rounds 1 and 2 to Aldo.

Judging at UFC is almost criminal at times. The two that gave it to Aldo 49 - 46 should be arrested.



I guess I should be arrested to because I thought Aldo won rd 1 2 3 & 5

so on my scorecard I had Aldo winning 49-46

In close contested rounds the champ should get the edge just my opinion.
Michael_Corleone
2/3/13 9:15:38AM
Rds 1 2 & 5 for Aldo. Significant damage in the rounds that he won. Rd 5 was close and 3 was closer. Great fucking fight.
Adam_Buru
2/3/13 9:39:16AM

Posted by sparky



In close contested rounds the champ should get the edge just my opinion.



I actually agree with you there.
prozacnation1978
2/3/13 9:44:53AM
I had aldo winning by a round.
It was very close fight.
FastKnockout
2/3/13 10:51:49AM
I gave 1,2, and 3 to Aldo. 4 and 5 to Edgar.
FastKnockout
2/3/13 10:54:51AM

Posted by Adam_Buru


Posted by sparky



In close contested rounds the champ should get the edge just my opinion.



I actually agree with you there.



Me too. If I remember right someone in the UFC mentioned this after Shogun fought Machida for the title.
king_katool
2/3/13 12:12:08PM

Posted by FastKnockout


Posted by Adam_Buru


Posted by sparky



In close contested rounds the champ should get the edge just my opinion.



I actually agree with you there.



Me too. If I remember right someone in the UFC mentioned this after Shogun fought Machida for the title.



I could not disagree more, if a round is that close where you think " well hes the champ give it to him", then the round should be scored a 10-10 rd,

No one should ever be given a round due their name/title

olunaticfringeo
2/3/13 1:18:05PM
I personally think frankie won the fight, but the fight was so close it could've gone either way.I gave aldo 1, and 2 and edgar 3,4,5. I think frankie was the aggressor and controlled the pace and seceured the takedowns but aldo inflicted more damage and was more effective in his striking. I think crisp,clean shots score more than fast wild shots that don't land.
FlashyG
2/3/13 1:36:27PM

Posted by olunaticfringeo

I personally think frankie won the fight, but the fight was so close it could've gone either way.I gave aldo 1, and 2 and edgar 3,4,5. I think frankie was the aggressor and controlled the pace and seceured the takedowns but aldo inflicted more damage and was more effective in his striking. I think crisp,clean shots score more than fast wild shots that don't land.



I thought Aldo won 4 rounds to 1.

Round 1 was clearly Aldo's and was the easiest round of the fight to score

Round 2 Edgar landed his first takedown but Aldo immediately stood back up and continued to get the better of the striking battle.

Round 3 was when Edgar started to pick up his work rate striking and started coming back, but his 2 takedowns in the round were stuffed and he took a big kick to the face that started his nose bleeding which was the most damage done in the fight. I gave Aldo that round as well for the damage and octagon control but it was the closest round of the first 3.

Round 4 was Edgars, he had the slam takedown and got the better of the striking exchanges.

Round 5 I could see being scored for either fighter, Edgar landed a few more shots but mostly to the legs and body, while Aldo scored late with the shot off the cage and a final flurry. I gave it to him based on damage and takedowns defended but I could see it scored for Edgar.
postman
2/3/13 2:24:52PM
I had ppl over and the managed to keep me from really watching it as close as I would like. But I thought Aldo won it fairly convincingly.
TheShaman
2/3/13 3:38:42PM
I wish I could see the fight to give a good breakdown. All I have are play by plays, post fight shows/articles, stats, and video clips. I won't make an official judgment until I can actually see the fight.

Metrics has Edgar landing more strikes in 3,4,5, but Aldo landed more head shots in all but one round... so it's total strikes vs head strikes

Edgar would appear to be the aggressor with all the takedown attempts, but I heard that Aldo controlled the center of the cage more. Also, failing at takedowns could imply that the other fighter is in fact controlling where the fight takes place by stuffing them/fighting them off (octagon control), even though attempting so many takedowns is being aggressive (aggression).

Sonnen and Cormier both had Edgar eeking it out with total strikes, aggression, and takedowns, but Dana had Aldo winning the fight.

Another analysis had Aldo on the retreat in the late rounds, yet landing shots in doing so.

I have also heard that a champion can't lose the belt in a close decision (you have to beat the champ to be the champ), but in the past couple of years I have seen a champion lose the belt in close decisions, which contradicts that philosophy, so I wondered if they eliminated that "policy".
scoozna
2/3/13 3:41:01PM

Posted by Adam_Buru


Posted by sparky



In close contested rounds the champ should get the edge just my opinion.



I actually agree with you there.



I never understood that point of view. Shouldn't it be based on some criteria that is relevant to the fight itself? The mysterious "edge" described here sounds so subjective.
postman
2/3/13 3:44:10PM

Posted by scoozna


Posted by Adam_Buru


Posted by sparky



In close contested rounds the champ should get the edge just my opinion.



I actually agree with you there.



I never understood that point of view. Shouldn't it be based on some criteria that is relevant to the fight itself? The mysterious "edge" described here sounds so subjective.



It should be a 10-10 round IMO
LightsOUT23
2/3/13 4:04:00PM
Aldo clearly won 3 rounds minimal.

Also The Reem got KTFO !!!!!!!
tcunningham
2/3/13 4:09:26PM
aldo won the fight. i gave him rounds 1 2 & 3. edgar won the 4th and 5th. i think the closest and toughest round to call was the 3rd.
Adam_Buru
2/3/13 5:21:21PM

Posted by scoozna


Posted by Adam_Buru


Posted by sparky



In close contested rounds the champ should get the edge just my opinion.



I actually agree with you there.



I never understood that point of view. Shouldn't it be based on some criteria that is relevant to the fight itself? The mysterious "edge" described here sounds so subjective.



It's just that I feel you have to do more if you want to dethrone a champion. I'm talking about really, really close rounds. I think to be a champion, you should beat a champion relatively decisively.

But yeah, that's just my opinion, like Sparky said.
hashyandy4
2/3/13 5:50:56PM
48-47 Aldo
postman
2/3/13 7:08:34PM

Posted by Adam_Buru


Posted by scoozna


Posted by Adam_Buru


Posted by sparky



In close contested rounds the champ should get the edge just my opinion.



I actually agree with you there.


I never understood that point of view. Shouldn't it be based on some criteria that is relevant to the fight itself? The mysterious "edge" described here sounds so subjective.



It's just that I feel you have to do more if you want to dethrone a champion. I'm talking about really, really close rounds. I think to be a champion, you should beat a champion relatively decisively.

But yeah, that's just my opinion, like Sparky said.

Really really close rounds should be 10-10. If no one wins a round its a drawn round
jae_1833
2/3/13 8:53:07PM
I watched closely and to be hones I gave the first three rounds to Aldo and the last two to Edger. I think this is just how Edger fights, we have seen it a number of times and I can't score to very very short takedowns over getting outstruck for over three minutes...and I am a wrestler at heart.
airkerma
2/4/13 10:17:14AM
I had it 2 to 2 going into the 5th...then I passed out and woke up during the reairing of Bigfeets vs Overeem
ncordless
2/4/13 1:43:36PM
I had it 4-1 for Aldo. The majority of the fight was done on the feet, therefore the most important criterion was effective striking.

Rounds 1 and 2 were Aldo's. Aldo dominated Frankie. Aldo was constantly a step ahead of Edgar, and Edgar's game was frustrated by fighting someone that much faster than him. Aldo's got a pretty nifty jab these days, and combined it with some nice leg/body kicks. In the past, Aldo has shown a penchant for explosive offense, so it was interesting to see him rely almost exclusively on a jab/counter style. Edgar gamely engaged, but was getting damaged without any effective offense of his own.

Halfway through the 3rd, it became obvious that Aldo was slowing down, while Edgar wasn't. The end of Aldo's absolute dominance kind of skewed the way the fight felt because Edgar keeping it competitive felt more like he was winning. Aldo's output slowed, but he still landed the more effective offense. Edgar' was now landing strikes as well, but nothing as effective as the the counters and front face kicks that Aldo was landing.

The 4th round was Edgar's. Edgar was landing consistently all round, while Aldo's output had slowed to a crawl. Many of Aldo's strikes were thrown without much power behind them. Most of the strikes he did land were not effective.


Lot's of people give the fifth to Edgar, but I don't see it that way and would encourage people to watch the round again.. Edgar definitely landed more strikes, but the strikes Aldo landed in the fifth were more effective than what Edgar was doing. Aldo's counters had lost their power, but he still landed all the powerful shots. When talking about "effective" striking, it is important to consider the effect of the strike. Nothing that Edgar landed in the fifth had any effect on Aldo. Aldo landed some stout shots in the fifth, including a barely off-the-cage superman punch.

This isn't the first time Aldo's slowed down, and when he does it all of a sudden makes it feel like the momentum changes. I think that kind of momentum change has its place in scoring, either in aggression or octagon control. But when a fight is predominantly striking, the prime factor is effective striking. "Effective" does not describe the amount of strikes, but rather the total impact/result of the strikes. I never saw Edgar land anything that I thought had much effect. Of course, all the strikes he landed together did have some effect. But except for round 4, I never thought it outweighed the effect of what Aldo was landing.
TheShaman
2/4/13 3:53:01PM
Concerning effectiveness, I think an effect is stun, rock, knockdown, or knock out.

I don't think effectiveness should be judged by the amount of blood, since fighters bleed at different rates, but rather the effect that it has on a fighter's actions/abilities.

However, I do think there is a difference among individual strikes. As an example of comparison, a little pitter patter shot can be worth 1 point, a good hard clean shot that doesn't effect an opponent's actions can be worth 5 points, and a shot that has an actual effect on an opponent's actions (as stated in the first sentence) can be worth 10 points... points merely being a way to compare strikes in this example

I personally believe a "significant strike" is only the second and third category from the above example, and the first category should only be considered in the total strikes.

I am weary to assess the fight without seeing it, but the clips that I have seen didn't show either fighter being effected by any shot, so it would seem that neither fighter was really effective other than to control the fight. However some significant strikes of the second category were landed.

I am still on the fence about whether or not damage should be considered in judging when the actual strikes are so much more definitive than how quickly an individual fighter's skin may bleed. If fights were judged as a whole instead of round by round, damage might make more sense.

A big reason for this belief is that a fighter can be badly "damaged" and still be more effective, or even finish their opponent. I think as long as it does not effect their performance, it should not count against them other than whether or not it was a significant strike that caused the damage.
Bubbles
2/4/13 4:32:57PM
Edgar won rounds 3-5. Round 3 can be argued either way but I gave it to Edgar. No way a superman jab gave Aldo round 5
Bubbles
2/4/13 4:35:39PM

Posted by TheShaman

Metrics has Edgar landing more strikes in 3,4,5, but Aldo landed more head shots in all but one round... so it's total strikes vs head strikes


that was good enough for Condit to "beat" Diaz
telnights
2/5/13 12:52:16AM
I had it 4-1 Aldo.

Edgar only winning the 4th round. If you listen to Rogan you would think Frankie was winning. But Aldo use of the jab and counters was clearly winning him the fight. It was clear after the 3rd most of Edgar's punches didn't have much on them and Aldo's were still having a clear affect on Frankie. Lot of people like Edgar because he is a tough fighter but truth is he took a beating and because he is tough was able to keep it kind of competitive. But keeping it kind of competitive doesn't mean he was even close to winning.
Related Topics