bacardimayne Posted November 17, 2013 Share Posted November 17, 2013 He's pissed off at the Nevada State Athletic Commission and says that they're ruining the sport of MMA like they ruined boxing with their incompetent judging. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bran Posted November 17, 2013 Share Posted November 17, 2013 He's pissed off at the Nevada State Athletic Commission and says that they're ruining the sport of MMA like they ruined boxing with their incompetent judging.speaking the truth Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coma16 Posted November 17, 2013 Share Posted November 17, 2013 It just cut out at the best part Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forsaken Posted November 17, 2013 Share Posted November 17, 2013 A champ should never lose via decision.GSP got dominated dude. http://mmajunkie.com/2013/11/17/twitter-reacts-to-georges-st-pierres-controversial-ufc-167-title-defense/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coma16 Posted November 17, 2013 Share Posted November 17, 2013 A champ should never lose via decision. GSP got dominated dude. The ref never came close to stopping it at all during the fight. While I agree he got dominated, I still don't think a champ should lose the belt via decision. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forsaken Posted November 17, 2013 Share Posted November 17, 2013 A champ should never lose via decision. GSP got dominated dude. The ref never came close to stopping it at all during the fight. While I agree he got dominated, I still don't think a champ should lose the belt via decision.But Hendricks dominated the entire fight, who cares if the ref never came in to stop it. The decision should have been unanimous and it wasn't even close. Saying you have to KO or sub a champion to get the belt is asinine, Hendricks put on a clinic dude. That said, I was already pissed about the Gustafsson decision in the Bones fight, and this one just sealed the deal for me. These last two main event decisions have been terrible. There was something fishy going on when giving GSP that win, probably knowing he was going to retire/"take time off" after the fight.Big Rig got robbed, point blank period. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nobodys_Fault Posted November 17, 2013 Share Posted November 17, 2013 A champ should never lose via decision. GSP got dominated dude. The ref never came close to stopping it at all during the fight. While I agree he got dominated, I still don't think a champ should lose the belt via decision.I get what you're saying in that GSP 'defended' his belt by not being finished and in some ways I agree - the challenger should always have to beat the champ clearly. But Hendricks did. He put a beating on him.Dana is a fucking dick for throwing GSP under the bus like that in the post fight presser though. Pierre has been nothing but professional for his entire title run and for Dana to say shit like that when the guy clearly has some personal issues was really out of line. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tater Totts Posted November 17, 2013 Share Posted November 17, 2013 Hendricks was robbed, this whole Champ never losing the title via decision is bullshit. Based on that logic Anderson would have won the first Chael fight despite being beaten up for 4.5 rounds. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jackie Moon Posted November 17, 2013 Share Posted November 17, 2013 I cannot wait to re-watch the fight. Based on the scorecards the difference was this - two judges gave GSP round 1. I don't remember round 1...or the fight...or the rest of the night... all that well, but I do recall thinking Hendricks looked like he would win within the first 5 minutes or so. I'm thinking Hendricks probably won round 1?Moving forward, Cowboys Stadium:Roy Nelson vs loser of Bigfoot/Mark HuntRobbie Lawler vs Nick Diaz IIGSP vs Hendricks IICain Velasquez vs Fabrico Werdummake it happen Dana. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bacardimayne Posted November 18, 2013 Share Posted November 18, 2013 Nelson vs Hunt would be a slugfest for the ages. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bards Posted November 18, 2013 Share Posted November 18, 2013 Re-watched and agree with the judges. GSP took 1,3,5. Most people agree that GSP took 3 and 5 while Hendricks took 2 and 4 so it all comes down to how you saw the first round.GSP had the edge in significant strikes in the first round and had the only sub attempt in the round. He had a good body attack as well and I thought had the greater octagon control. They each had 1 takedown and Hendricks did a good job attacking GSP's legs. Other than the one flurry of elbows against the fence, Hendricks didn't land a lot in round 1. It was a close round but I'm confident in giving it to GSP.It's also worth noting that despite Dana saying (and knowing) otherwise in the post-fight presser, "damage" is not part of scoring under the Unified rules. Plus, bloodying GSP is like saying Fedor got cut or Nick Diaz, a strong breeze will do it. Some guys just bleed easy. Those thinking "robbery" need to re-evaluate their definition of the word. It was as close as Jones-Gus or Chandler-Alvarez from Bellator. It wasn't even close to being a bad decision, let alone the worst of the year. Davis-Machida anyone?Dana's post-fight tantrum was the most disgusting part. GSP's made dump trucks of money for the UFC and is clearly going through some personal issues and perhaps some physical ones as well. To say GSP "owes the sport and owes Hendricks" an immediate rematch with no regard for GSP's well-being was shocking and depressing. Especially in an era where we know more about concussions and head trauma than we ever have.GSP's been the best corporate citizen Dana White could have ever asked for over the course of his career and to hear White slag him like that at the post-fight presser showed that these guys really are just pieces of meat to him. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bono Posted November 18, 2013 Share Posted November 18, 2013 If people wanna say Hendricks won a "fight" that's fine but the fact is GSP won the MMA contest. The controversy here comes from the fact that Hendricks hits so damn hard that when he connects it has more wow factor to it. GSP legitimately won rounds 1, 3 & 5. But the rounds Hendricks won are more memorable because he wobbled GSP. Truth is though GSP landed more significant strikes, he had more takedowns, he attempted more submissions and it was in fact GSP who pushed forward and dictated the pace of the fight. Based on the way you score an MMA fight GSP did win that fight. Problem is people have been seduced by Hendricks power shots. The fight was way too close on the scorecard and in fact leaned in GSP's favour and rightfully so, to just give the belt to Hendricks. And you can NOT base the results of the fight on "damage done" as Dana said because a guy like GSP bruises and cuts obviously very easily. He looked worse for wear after the Condit fight and the Diaz fight, both fights in which he obviously dominated. If this were the case you could have a fight where a guy dominates, inflicts no surface damage and then gets clipped one time and loses because he had a bloody noise. That's horseshit and not how MMA works. Hendricks obviously doesn't bruise or cut easily because GSP hit him hard and often. Yeah sure he says GSP didn't hit him with anything hard but that's complete and utter bullshit. It's just a guy who's pissed because he feels he won and he wants to present the image that he dominated when he in fact did not. Also his bullshit line about only going 70% is pure posturing on his part. He gave it his all and didn't get the job done so he's making excuses. I give Hendricks all the credit in the world. He took it to GSP and did better than anyone in years but the fact is GSP legitimately won on the scorecards and the stats back that up. As for Hendricks whining about being robbed, well he arguable lost to Koscheck and Condit and got the benefit of the judges scorecard so he needs to pipe down. You want the belt then don't say you went 70%. Go out there and fucking take it. He didn't and he has nobody to blame but himself. they definitely need to rematch though.Also let's be honest had the ref been in position to see it, the fight would've been stopped within the first 15 seconds when Hendricks seemed to tap out. Regardless of whether anyone thinks he did or not the fact is he made a very distinct tapping motion with his hand while GSP had him in a choke and had the ref seen that he'd have stopped the fight. Johnny got away with one there. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bran Posted November 18, 2013 Share Posted November 18, 2013 (edited) GSP won round 3 and that was it. hendricks did go and take it, he clearly dominated the fight. when the leader of your sport comes out and says that hendricks was fucked you know something is seriously wrong. Edited November 18, 2013 by bran Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bono Posted November 18, 2013 Share Posted November 18, 2013 GSP won round 3 and that was it. hendricks did go and take it, he clearly dominated the fight. when the leader of your sport comes out and says that hendricks was fucked you know something is seriously wrong.Wow. You were seriously drunk and high or both if you think Hendricks won the 5th round. I could maybe hear an argument for the 1st but no way in hell did Hendricks win the 5th round. That's just silly talk.Funny how people take Dana's word as the holy grail of MMA when it suits their opinion but when it doesn't Dana is just a loud mouth. Fact is Dana is a walking contradiction. For him to say it's about "damage done" is a fucking joke because he's said in the past so many times that MMA is about all aspects. Dana's problem isn't that GSP won it's that he freaked out that GSP publicly stated he wanted to take a break and Dana being the promoter he is knew that with such a close fight and such a "controversial" decision that a rematch is HUGE money. Dana is no different than anyone. His word on who won or lost doesn't mean any more than yours or mine except that he's biased because he also sees it as a business. GSP won the fight base don how you score MMA fights. That is a straight up fact. Damage done does not figure into the scoring system. I have no problem saying GSP got his ass beat BUT he hung in there and did what he had to do to score enough points to win the contest. Anyone who can't see that or refuses to see that isn't really an MMA fan, they're simply a fan of seeing guys get beat up.I'll say it again.GSP landed more significant strikes, he had more takedowns, he had more submission attempts, he's the guy who pushed the pace all fight long. It was a damn close fight but you do not give the belt to the challenger when the stats look like this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forsaken Posted November 18, 2013 Share Posted November 18, 2013 I don't have to read any of that to know GSP did not win that fight, and the people trying to justify GSP's win are even worse, lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kapitch_77 Posted November 18, 2013 Share Posted November 18, 2013 (edited) I don't have to read any of that to know GSP did not win that fight, and the people trying to justify GSP's win are even worse, lol You're in denial. Everything Bono said are facts, and just look at the stats. Edited November 18, 2013 by Kapitch_77 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forsaken Posted November 18, 2013 Share Posted November 18, 2013 I know what I saw, everyone knows what they saw. Who are accountable for those "stats"? The Nevada State Athletic Commission? If you really wanna talk MMA, Big Rig had a clear advantage in grappling as well and totally controlled GSP on the cage with numerous reversals when GSP tried to grapple. You guys can believe what you want but I mean...Even that seems too close. AS for UFC fighters reactions....http://mmajunkie.com/2013/11/17/twitter-reacts-to-georges-st-pierres-controversial-ufc-167-title-defense/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kapitch_77 Posted November 18, 2013 Share Posted November 18, 2013 It was a close fight, that's for sure. I watched the fight with 3 other guys, right after the fight we didn't know the scoring or anything, but 3 of us thought that GSP would keep his belt. It was a damn close fight, so the people saying it was a robbery are ridiculous, as if Hendricks kicked the shit out of GSP and dominated, that's not the case. One way or the other the decision would have cause controversy because it was so close. You don't take the belt to the champion for a fight like this, it would have been absurd. Hendricks and Dana's reactions after the fight are ridiculous too, unprofessional and childish. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moreblack Posted November 18, 2013 Share Posted November 18, 2013 People were shocked when Gus didn't get the nod over Jones. I felt this one was even more of a surprise. Just watching it, it looked like one guy was having his way most of the fight, and stopping everything the other guy was trying to do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forsaken Posted November 18, 2013 Share Posted November 18, 2013 In reality, in a title fight like that, you gotta put GSP away if you are Hendricks and not leave it in the judges hands. I felt the same about Gus not getting the win over Bones, and this took it to another level. Honestly, I didn't even think GSP had a split, I thought it would have been a unanimous decision. Myself, and 90% of the majority including the two announcers calling the fight(not really trying to credit Goldberg or anything lol) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kapitch_77 Posted November 18, 2013 Share Posted November 18, 2013 It was a really close call but I think GSP won, but maybe I should re-watched the fight, to see if I would change my opinion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kapitch_77 Posted November 18, 2013 Share Posted November 18, 2013 Can't find right now the full fight but here's the 5 th roundhttp://www.mma-core.com/videos/fights/St_Pierre_vs_Hendricks_UFC_167_5/10059836 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forsaken Posted November 18, 2013 Share Posted November 18, 2013 I've rewatched it and I guess I can see how the judges could be leaning toward GSP.... just trying to make sense of this. Round 1 is the tale of the tape. I think Hendricks got Rounds 2,4 no doubt and GSP probably Rounds 3,5.... then Round 1 to GSP (in the judges eyes). Round 1 was close to call, though. I guess the deciding factor had to be the sub attempt by GSP, other than that, the round is very close to even. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bards Posted November 18, 2013 Share Posted November 18, 2013 Honestly, I didn't even think GSP had a split, I thought it would have been a unanimous decision.Then those terms don't mean what you think they mean. A split decision is a result of two judges seeing the fight one way and one judge seeing it another. One judge cannot score a "split" as the result.The unified rules: http://www.ufc.ca/discover/sport/rules-and-regulations#14Nowhere is "damage" a criteria. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forsaken Posted November 18, 2013 Share Posted November 18, 2013 I understand the rules, but after my first watch of the fight, I didn't even think that it would come down to a split decision is what i'm saying. I thought it would have been unanimous all three judges for Hendricks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.