View Single Post
Old
11-21-2013, 11:19 AM
  #744
idk
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 348
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
What are you even arguing about anymore? That it was a close fight? Fine, let's say for the sake of the argument, it was.
You still have about 70% of the people saying Hendricks won, which is all that matters.
You think it's close, I don't think it really was, who freaking cares. It's all very subjective and completely irrelevant to the main debate, that GSP should have lost.
So give it a rest already with your rd 1-2-3-4-5 breakdown. At the end of the day, a big majority of MMA fans thought GSP lost.



I'm only doing so because you're saying things like ''wtv the official statistical provider of the UFC is wrong'' and ''wtv, GSP would have fallen anyways''.
Or morons saying ''he tapped!''.
You hit the nail on the head. It wasn't a close fight in terms of outcome. GSP got beaten pretty badly. The problem is 100% with how the fight is scored.

Look at it this way. Hendricks clearly won rounds two and four. He was far and away the better fighter. Of the two the second round was more handily in Hendricks's favour, but he pounded on GSP pretty good in each round. GSP clearly won round five (although he was not as dominating as Hendricks in either two or four) and was in control for round three. Hendricks still did more damage in his two rounds, but at the end of the day it doesn't matter - the scoring system says that all the rounds count the same. At the end of the day short a knock down (which was close in round two but didn't happen) it doesn't matter by what margin you win a round, simply that you win it. Looking at those four rounds the score is tied 38-38.

Throw on top of that the problem with the first round. Yes, it was close. Yes, GSP probably got the champion's point on two of those scorecards. But it was really close. And it was the first round. It was before everything else. Before the savage beating Hendricks laid on GSP in rounds two and four. If you take round one and tack the exact same round on at the end of the match and I assure you that JH goes home the winner.

That "early round/late round" problem came around again in round two. JH really dominated that round. He didn't knock GSP down but he came within a punch of doing so. However the judges typically don't give 10-8 scores without a knock down unless there is a really good reason for doing so. Flip rounds two and five and JH and the judges very well might have given him a 10-8 round because he had been so dominant for so long.

That's it. 100% of the problem right there. It's not GSP's fault - I doubt he was aiming to take the beating of his life and get by on the skin of his teeth. It's not UFC's fault. They're bound by the state athletic rules. It's not the judge's fault - they scored the rounds as they saw them and couldn't exactly go back and change their scores or break the rules to fit the narrative that the match took on. It might be the Nevada State Athletic Commission's fault, but the ten point system is (a) universally used in combat sports and (b) is better than the alternatives (like amateur boxing, where shots landed count). It sucks, especially for JH, but I doubt he's going to go away that quickly. Unless GSP retires altogether he'll have a chance to do it again.

idk is offline   Reply With Quote