Pick'em Leagues: THE BIG SHOW CASUAL BEST OF THE REST Single Event PvP: FANTASY POOLS Betting Leagues: THE BIG SHOW BEST OF THE REST

Whats The Worst Decision In UFC/Pride

Print  
  Page 4 of 6     1     2     3     4     5     6  
Posted By Message

nubby

Banned

nubby Avatar
 
 
 


 
 
Posts:1,247
Career:212-114
Joined:Mar 2007
Camp: Punishment Athletics
Chips:
89
Anyone saying that Forrest won against Tito is just being lead by the commentators just like someone else said above. Tito won round 1 and 3 decisively. I'm rewatching the Vitor fight right now.

Post #46   11/7/07 8:33:07PM   

Mayhem13

MMA Sensei

Mayhem13 Avatar
6





 
 
 


 
 
Posts:2,400
Career:2,175-1,292
Joined:Jun 2007
Camp: Team Sakara Eye Punch
Chips:
288
UFC= Hammil vs Bisping

PRIDE= Jackson vs Ninja

Post #47   11/7/07 8:34:57PM   

ko-kbo130

MMA Regular

ko-kbo130 Avatar
 
 
 


 
 
Posts:190
Career:208-140
Joined:May 2007
Chips:
25

Posted by Crisis167

i actually believe that the decision over Bisping's victory was proper... It wasn't a pretty win, and it definately wasn't a decisive win, but Bisping did what he needed to do in the 2nd and 3rd rounds to swing the judges. Remember it was only a split decision....

I think Hamill demolished Bisping the first round completely..... Bisping's face was totally messed up.... but Hamill didn't do enough to convincly take the latter rounds.... He was breathing hard he started getting sloppy and he was having troubles with the takedown.

i don't believe that Bisping totally controlled round 2 and 3, but i think he did just enough to sway the vote. Now for those who think that Hamill was downright robbed, I think Hamill is a great fighter... I was cheering for him, but I definately don't see in anyway that he pulled the win from this fight... At best Hamill should've pulled a draw but no more than that, Bisping's face didn't look pretty but Hamill didn't controll either of the last two rounds.

I think that the GSP vs Bj Penn fight... was judged in exactly the same way.
Bj wrecked George's face in the first round.... but Gsp did what he needed to do, just like Bisping in the 2nd and 3rd rounds to pull out the victory.


i feel the same way. i dont think it was a dominating victory by any means. i said it right after the fight that it was gunna be a close decision. people make it like hammil completly dominated the fight. IMO nobody dominated that fight.

Post #48   11/7/07 8:50:57PM   

TheLegend

Learning to Sprawl

TheLegend Avatar
 
 
 


 
 
Posts:19
Career:306-161
Joined:Jul 2007
Camp: fightlockdown
Chips:
1
It's Hamill/Bisping I can't see how that went to Bisping and regarding the Tito/Forrest fight Forrest even admits that he thinks he lost the fight.

Post #49   11/9/07 3:25:47PM   

Djbb

Standup Guy

Djbb Avatar
 
 
 


 
 
Posts:398
Career:31-27
Joined:Sep 2007
Camp: Keyboard Warriors of LMAOville
Chips:
59
Why the hell is everyone saying Hamill was ripped off against Bisping? If you guys would rewatch the fight, Hamill wasn't as aggressive as he should've been. Even Rogan commented during the fight that Hamill kept letting Bisping up after a takedown. Secondly, it was NOT hometown favouritism. The only british judge voted in favour of Hamill, both American judges voting in favour of Bisping. There was no vast conspiracy to make Bisping win in his hometown. Maybe if there was 2 british judges vs 1 american, but the sole british judge voted in favour of the American. This isn't WWE, there was no Montreal Screwjob. If you guys wanna know what I think was the worst decision in the UFC, I think it was not letting the fight go until someone was KO'd so people would STFU.

Post #50   11/9/07 6:40:12PM   

cmill21

Heavyweight Champ

cmill21 Avatar
2

 
 
 


 
 
Posts:6,489
Career:444-230
Joined:May 2007
Chips:
742

Posted by Djbb

Why the hell is everyone saying Hamill was ripped off against Bisping? If you guys would rewatch the fight, Hamill wasn't as aggressive as he should've been. Even Rogan commented during the fight that Hamill kept letting Bisping up after a takedown. Secondly, it was NOT hometown favouritism. The only british judge voted in favour of Hamill, both American judges voting in favour of Bisping. There was no vast conspiracy to make Bisping win in his hometown. Maybe if there was 2 british judges vs 1 american, but the sole british judge voted in favour of the American. This isn't WWE, there was no Montreal Screwjob. If you guys wanna know what I think was the worst decision in the UFC, I think it was not letting the fight go until someone was KO'd so people would STFU.



No, he was ripped, he controled the entire fight.

Post #51   11/9/07 6:43:36PM   

jiujitsufreak74

,,[],, *******,,[],,

jiujitsufreak74 Avatar
8
 
 
 


 
 
Posts:5,256
Career:1,056-572
Joined:Sep 2007
Chips:
1,150

Posted by Djbb

Why the hell is everyone saying Hamill was ripped off against Bisping? If you guys would rewatch the fight, Hamill wasn't as aggressive as he should've been. Even Rogan commented during the fight that Hamill kept letting Bisping up after a takedown. Secondly, it was NOT hometown favouritism. The only british judge voted in favour of Hamill, both American judges voting in favour of Bisping. There was no vast conspiracy to make Bisping win in his hometown. Maybe if there was 2 british judges vs 1 american, but the sole british judge voted in favour of the American. This isn't WWE, there was no Montreal Screwjob. If you guys wanna know what I think was the worst decision in the UFC, I think it was not letting the fight go until someone was KO'd so people would STFU.



ok, first of all, hamill was definitely ripped, he controlled the whole match as cmill correctly pointed out and he was winning the stand up battle and ground battle. he punished bis[ping, the only round i saw that could possibly go to bisping was the third, but the enitre fight hamill was dominating. if this had been pride rules and judging, hamill wins hands down.

and as for letting the fight go until someone gets KOed...thats just ridiculously stupid. no body wants to see two exhausted guys sloppily throwing wild, tired punches and resting for ten minutes at a time. look at ken shamrock royce gracie fight that went 25 minutes (one continuous round). It would not be entertaining and it would just lead to the dragging out of a boring fight instead of the definitive the conclusion that you think it would bring. rounds are fine the way they are, to let it go on until someone is Koed is just barbaric and non-entertaining IMO.

Post #52   11/9/07 6:50:12PM   

Djbb

Standup Guy

Djbb Avatar
 
 
 


 
 
Posts:398
Career:31-27
Joined:Sep 2007
Camp: Keyboard Warriors of LMAOville
Chips:
59

Posted by jiujitsufreak74

ok, first of all, hamill was definitely ripped, he controlled the whole match as cmill correctly pointed out and he was winning the stand up battle and ground battle. he punished bis[ping, the only round i saw that could possibly go to bisping was the third, but the enitre fight hamill was dominating. if this had been pride rules and judging, hamill wins hands down.

and as for letting the fight go until someone gets KOed...thats just ridiculously stupid. no body wants to see two exhausted guys sloppily throwing wild, tired punches and resting for ten minutes at a time. look at ken shamrock royce gracie fight that went 25 minutes (one continuous round). It would not be entertaining and it would just lead to the dragging out of a boring fight instead of the definitive the conclusion that you think it would bring. rounds are fine the way they are, to let it go on until someone is Koed is just barbaric and non-entertaining IMO.



Good post, I feel my argument was adequately torn apart by your logic. Quick question, how much money is Dana White paying you to judge fights?

Post #53   11/9/07 6:52:46PM   

jiujitsufreak74

,,[],, *******,,[],,

jiujitsufreak74 Avatar
8
 
 
 


 
 
Posts:5,256
Career:1,056-572
Joined:Sep 2007
Chips:
1,150

Posted by Djbb

Good post, I feel my argument was adequately torn apart by your logic. Quick question, how much money is Dana White paying you to judge fights?



well, don't get me started on the inadequacies of the UFC judges. I have seen many bad decisions, most of which are all posted in this topic alone. so i, as well as a profound majority of mma fans, believe hamill won that fight. IMHO, anyone who has ever been in an mma match or knows first hand experience knows that Hamill won that fight. So maybe dana should pay me to judge fights, i think i could do a better job then they did with the hamill fight. or better yet, he should hire judges that actually know what they are doing...wouldn't mind seeing bas behind the scorers table or even couture if he officially retires.

Post #54   11/9/07 7:00:32PM   

NatedawgThaM

MMA Sensei

NatedawgThaM Avatar
 
 
 


 
 
Posts:2,901
Career:676-444
Joined:Jun 2007
Chips:
339
KEVIN RANDLEMAN vs. BAS RUTTEN!!!

RIGGED! The opening round Kevin Randlema comes out. Takes Bas to the ground. The heck you all smoking saying "LNP?" Kevin was hitting him with monster shots through the 1st 5 minutes. Then the last 5 it was more technical wreslting but he still through shots! IN overtime Kevin took him down and just pinned him to the mat.

Kevin took him down whenever he wanted to. Threw some tremendous punches at the beginning. Controled the fight throughout. Why would you even consider Bas? Those girly strikes form the bottom didn't do squat!


MARK COLEMAN vs PEDRO RIZZO!!!

Mark took him down and CONTROLED him for the WHOLE 1st round. Pedro didn't do squat. Sure he landed a few shots but so did Coleman.You can't just give someone the fight when they landed as much strikes as your opponent but got dominated on the ground....


BS decisions!!! THE JUDGES HATE WRESTLERS!!!!

Post #55   11/9/07 8:29:50PM   

Ultimate_fighter

Banned

 
 
 


 
 
Posts:1,116
Career:270-165
Joined:Feb 2007
Chips:
25
Usually i dont think dec's are bad, just becuz i wonder, why in the hell are fighters even allowing the judges to say who won, why not just give it ur all and finish it.... i dont really think there are bad decisions out there.... the loser of these "bad decisions" got what they deserve.....

Post #56   11/11/07 11:58:01PM   

Franklinfan47

Simply The Best

Franklinfan47 Avatar
11
 
 
 
 


 
 
Posts:3,695
Career:2,629-1,436
Joined:May 2007
Camp: Project Mayhem
Chips:
687

Posted by Ultimate_fighter

Usually i dont think dec's are bad, just becuz i wonder, why in the hell are fighters even allowing the judges to say who won, why not just give it ur all and finish it.... i dont really think there are bad decisions out there.... the loser of these "bad decisions" got what they deserve.....



I dont really agree with that, some fighters are just hard to finish or are just very evenly matched. And to take the victory away from them with a foolish decision is just wrong.

As for worst decisions, I'll say Bisping vs Hamill because its still fresh in my mind.

Post #57   11/12/07 11:12:09AM   

tomp6581

Standup Guy

tomp6581 Avatar
 
 
 


 
 
Posts:374
Career:406-255
Joined:Jan 2007
Chips:
73
Ricco V Nog
Bass V Randleman
Ninja V Rampage
Hammill V Bisping


One of those surely

Post #58   11/12/07 11:38:46AM   

BerndRealBad

MMA Regular

BerndRealBad Avatar
2

 
 
 


 
 
Posts:116
Career:1,068-556
Joined:Apr 2007
Chips:
7
Pat Miletich over Mikey Burnett at Ultimate Brazil. All Miletich did the entire fight was try to expose Mikey's balls by pulling his tights up and holding him against the fence. Burnett pressed the action, landed more strikes and stuffed all of Miletich's takedown attempts. He even took Miletich down and landed some shots but Miletich does have a great guard and basically tied him up without going for ANYTHING until Burnett got back up. I don't blame Mikey for walking out after that decision was announced.

Post #59   11/12/07 12:48:00PM   

Canadian_32

Learning to Sprawl

Canadian_32 Avatar
 
 
 


 
 
Posts:6
Career:484-284
Joined:Nov 2007
Chips:
1
michael bisping vs matt hamill was the worst one i lost $100 bucks on that much i was so pissed

Post #60   11/12/07 12:51:33PM   
 
  Page 4 of 6     1     2     3     4     5     6