Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 12 of 13

Thread: Ufc 167

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Clayton,NC
    Posts
    7,340

    Ufc 167



    Anyone watch it?

    I fell asleep. But I've been able to catch a few links to see every round but the 4th. A lot of controversy. So a few questions.

    Who thinks Hendricks tapped in the 1st?
    Who do you think won what rounds?
    We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid. - Benjamin Franklin




  2. #2

    Re: Ufc 167

    Quote Originally Posted by NCRAVEN View Post
    Anyone watch it?

    I fell asleep. But I've been able to catch a few links to see every round but the 4th. A lot of controversy. So a few questions.

    Who thinks Hendricks tapped in the 1st?
    Who do you think won what rounds?
    I had GSP winning the 3rd and 5th, Hendricks with the 1st and 4th. 2nd was really close. I gave it to Hendricks but i dont think its nearly as controversial as some do. if it was by "Stockton Rules" (see nick diaz). Hendricks clearly won. He hit more power shots but based on the actual 10-9 fight scoring Pierre did enough that it could go either way. Hendricks biggest mistake was cruising in the 5th because he thought he had already won. He had enough in the tank to try and win that round and basically gave it to GSP. no fighter should be content with going to the judges.

    Hendricks kind of tapped at another point in the fight to. I dont think either were him trying to, but it did make me question it at the time if he did. Basically I dont think he was in any real danger at either time to warrant it.
    -JAB




  3. #3

    Re: Ufc 167

    judges I think all had the same 2-5 rounds, GSP 3&5 Hendricks 2&4, but varied on the first round. I guess I could be mixing up the round I thought was close but I remember Hendricks coming out pretty strong.
    -JAB




  4. #4
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Clayton,NC
    Posts
    7,340

    Re: Ufc 167

    From what I understand the judges had 2 and 4 to Hendricks and 3 and 5 to GSP. Round 1 was the questionable one. Most had it to Hendricks.

    I don't think it was as controversially as some say either. All split decisions are close enough to go either way.

    Hendricks is a total D. If he wanted the fight as bad as he said he did, he should have given 100% in every round.

    I liked this article put it.
    http://www.ufc.com/news/UFC-167-GSP-Hendricks-Musings
    We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid. - Benjamin Franklin




  5. #5

    Re: Ufc 167

    Quote Originally Posted by NCRAVEN View Post
    From what I understand the judges had 2 and 4 to Hendricks and 3 and 5 to GSP. Round 1 was the questionable one. Most had it to Hendricks.

    I don't think it was as controversially as some say either. All split decisions are close enough to go either way.

    Hendricks is a total D. If he wanted the fight as bad as he said he did, he should have given 100% in every round.

    I liked this article put it.
    http://www.ufc.com/news/UFC-167-GSP-Hendricks-Musings
    I probably just mixed them up by the sounds of it.
    -JAB




  6. #6
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Clayton,NC
    Posts
    7,340

    Re: Ufc 167

    Quote Originally Posted by JAB1985 View Post
    I probably just mixed them up by the sounds of it.
    I think you had it right,.
    We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid. - Benjamin Franklin




  7. #7
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Clayton,NC
    Posts
    7,340

    Re: Ufc 167

    So I just watched all the rounds again. This was not that big of a deal. To be honest, I have no problem with the decision, at all.

    I see the fight like this. GSP won the majority of the fight but when Hendricks won he won big.
    We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid. - Benjamin Franklin




  8. #8
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Houston, TX Y'all
    Posts
    22,835

    Re: Ufc 167

    Hendricks got jobbed. But you never leave it in the hands of the judges. Same is true in boxing.

    NSAC needs to be scrapped. If not, it's going to end up making MMA as slimy as boxing.

    I don't blame Dana White one bit for threatening to move out of Nevada. The very same body that sanctioned MMA is the one that's about to destroy it. The Hendricks decision is one in a long line of botched decisions that's killing the sport.
    WARNING: This post may contain material offensive to those who lack wit, humor, common sense and/or supporting factual or anecdotal evidence. All statements and assertions contained herein may be subject to literary devices not limited to: irony, metaphor, allusion and dripping sarcasm.




  9. #9

    Re: Ufc 167

    Quote Originally Posted by NCRAVEN View Post
    So I just watched all the rounds again. This was not that big of a deal. To be honest, I have no problem with the decision, at all.

    I see the fight like this. GSP won the majority of the fight but when Hendricks won he won big.
    Which is why they need to scrap 10-must scoring, or at minimum start using 10-8 and 10-7 rounds.

    Barely winning two, low-action, low-damage rounds should not trump pounding the other guy into a pulp for a single round. No way. But it happens all the time in the UFC judging.




  10. #10

    Re: Ufc 167

    Quote Originally Posted by NCRAVEN View Post
    So I just watched all the rounds again. This was not that big of a deal. To be honest, I have no problem with the decision, at all.

    I see the fight like this. GSP won the majority of the fight but when Hendricks won he won big.
    I think thats a solid way of seeing it. Like I said, I had hendricks by a thin margin so i cant see a complaint for being Robbed. coming blank for a real example but say if Chael lost a decision to Anderson Silva in the first fight instead of getting tapped. Total domination for all 5 rounds, would have been robbery. Hendricks lost rounds whether close or not doesnt matter, he still lost them, which means it was close enough to warrant a split decision.

    I wouldnt be opposed to a different scoring system, but even in that fight I wouldnt say hendricks dominated rounds enough to call it a 10-8. Thats two rounds of punishment in a single round... i didnt witness that. I saw some big shots from a guy that really only offers big shots. total count, total big shots, both went to GSP, which is pretty telling of the whole fight vs 2 rounds. If it only takes 2 rounds to win a fight there would be tons of bad decisions.

    Prides scoring system focuses on:
    the end result.
    damage.
    and trying to finish the fight.

    GSP had two submission attempts, more significant strikes, and didnt take a round off. Im not sure Pride rules are even a sure thing for Hendricks. It was just a lot closer fight than some saw.
    Last edited by JAB1985; 11-19-2013 at 07:06 AM.
    -JAB




  11. #11
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Clayton,NC
    Posts
    7,340

    Re: Ufc 167

    Quote Originally Posted by JAB1985 View Post
    I think thats a solid way of seeing it. Like I said, I had hendricks by a thin margin so i cant see a complaint for being Robbed. coming blank for a real example but say if Chael lost a decision to Anderson Silva in the first fight instead of getting tapped. Total domination for all 5 rounds, would have been robbery. Hendricks lost rounds whether close or not doesnt matter, he still lost them, which means it was close enough to warrant a split decision.

    I wouldnt be opposed to a different scoring system, but even in that fight I wouldnt say hendricks dominated rounds enough to call it a 10-8. Thats two rounds of punishment in a single round... i didnt witness that. I saw some big shots from a guy that really only offers big shots. total count, total big shots, both went to GSP, which is pretty telling of the whole fight vs 2 rounds. If it only takes 2 rounds to win a fight there would be tons of bad decisions.

    Prides scoring system focuses on:
    the end result.
    damage.
    and trying to finish the fight.

    GSP had two submission attempts, more significant strikes, and didnt take a round off. Im not sure Pride rules are even a sure thing for Hendricks. It was just a lot closer fight than some saw.
    JAB this might be the most I've ever agreed with you around these parts

    The first round was razor thin for whoever you thought won it. The second while Hendricks dominate the 4th and 3rd minute, lost or at least didn't win the 5th, 2nd and last minute of that round. GSP easily won the 3rd as Hendricks had no power or gas in the round. Hendricks easily won the 4th and there is no debate about the 5th.

    Whether you go 10 point must scoring system or Pride rules or a an overall fight it was exactly what the result was, as razor thin split decision. If you think stats of the fight are an indication then it shows exactly that: http://www.ufc.com/event/UFC167
    We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid. - Benjamin Franklin




  12. #12

    Re: Ufc 167

    Quote Originally Posted by NCRAVEN View Post
    JAB this might be the most I've ever agreed with you around these parts
    haha, probably right.
    -JAB




Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Russell Street Report Website Design by D3Corp Ocean City Maryland