Jump to content

Do the decision rules change for a championship fight?


kylankool

Recommended Posts

In the countdown to UFC 113 Joe Roegan was saying people just thought Shogun didnt do enough to take away the belt? So does that mean you have to win convincingly in a championship fight if your the challenger?

 

no its just n old saying i think from boxing that you have to BEAT the champ to be the champ. sogun didnt BEAT michida he mightve won the decision but thats irrelevant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

not technically. but its kind of an unwritten rule in boxing, that was rolled out as excuse to mask one of the worst decisions in MMA history.

 

i think its a good idea in principle. but even still i think shogun done enough in the machida fight to win it clearly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Real MMA has no decisions.

 

Thats a change they should never have made.

 

MMA was crap before they had decisions. fights often degenerated into two guys holding each other up or lying on each other sweating and breathing heavily. lay N pray fights where much much worse then. plus it wouldn't get sanctioned.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nonsense. It wasn't. That fight decisions was correct' date=' largley because of the 10 point must system.[/quote']

 

its over a year since i've seen that fight but i remember thinking at the time it was shocking. then last year having this same arguement with someone. and re watching it and thinking the same thing. can't remember exactly

 

but i think hammil was the agressor from start to finish, 1st round hammil almost KO'd bisping and again in the 2nd or 3rd round one round was close. thats just what i can remember but i think hammil won like i thought shogun won and i won't be swayed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the Rua/Machida fight was the first pride-style completely bogus/corrupt decision. We have had bad decisions' date=' but never one so blatantly wrong. Let's just hope it's a "one off".[/quote']

 

LMAO!!!

You're so blind by your love for Shogun, that it has corrupted your mind.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The "you have to beat a champion" thing is just ridiculous imo.

 

Dana always talks about that he wants MMA to be like all the other big sports in the world like soccer, hockey etc. Think if in this years world championship final in soccer between Italy "the world champions" vs some other country the contender country wins with 0-1. But then the referee says that it will be overtime because the contenders goal wasn't good enough to count against the champions.

 

But the Penn vs Edgar fight showed something else.

 

In the end I hope it's an old saying.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The "you have to beat a champion" thing is just ridiculous imo.

 

Dana always talks about that he wants MMA to be like all the other big sports in the world like soccer' date=' hockey etc. Think if in this years world championship final in soccer between Italy "the world champions" vs some other country the contender country wins with 0-1. But then the referee says that it will be overtime because the contenders goal wasn't good enough to count against the champions.

 

But the Penn vs Edgar fight showed something else.

 

In the end I hope it's an old saying.[/quote']

 

It's just an old saying, and it never should have been said in the first place.

Machida beat Shogun, Edgar beat Penn.

Both fights were 48-47.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The "you have to beat a champion" thing is just ridiculous imo.

 

Dana always talks about that he wants MMA to be like all the other big sports in the world like soccer' date=' hockey etc. Think if in this years world championship final in soccer between Italy "the world champions" vs some other country the contender country wins with 0-1. But then the referee says that it will be overtime because the contenders goal wasn't good enough to count against the champions.

 

But the Penn vs Edgar fight showed something else.

 

In the end I hope it's an old saying.[/quote']

 

its because judging a fight is somewhat subjective its not like football where you just count the goals. and if a fight is close everyone will always argue over it. i think having that rule is a good idea in principle if they use it for every title fight. the way it is now though its just an excuse for bad judging. also even with that rule in place i still think shogun shold have won the first machida fight clearly enough.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

its because judging a fight is somewhat subjective its not like football where you just count the goals. and if a fight is close everyone will always argue over it. i think having that rule is a good idea in principle if they use it for every title fight. the way it is now though its just an excuse for bad judging. also even with that rule in place i still think shogun shold have won the first machida fight clearly enough.

 

I totaly agree with you. Same problem even in figure skating :).

 

High tech super sensors would solve the problem!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I totaly agree with you. Same problem even in figure skating :).

 

High tech super sensors would solve the problem!

 

yeah i think they should start using compustat to track fight stats between rounds. if nothing else its good to see who done what in black and white.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i said it before and i'll say it again. MMA was crap before they had decisions' date=' the fights often ended with two guys holding each other up or lying on each other. LnP was much much worse then.[/quote']

 

Good point.

Tough call- rock and a hard place.

Decisions might not be so intolerable if they could just tweak the system so it better suits MMA.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...