Head-Fi.org › Forums › Misc.-Category Forums › Members' Lounge (General Discussion) › The MMA thread (Affliction, UFC, DREAM, Strikeforce, etc.)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The MMA thread (Affliction, UFC, DREAM, Strikeforce, etc.) - Page 13

post #181 of 671
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spaceman_Spiff View Post
Again, there is a clear evaluation system that ensures a winner is chosen. That "neither fighter pushed hard enough" is not a good enough reason to award a 10-10 round...A favourite Dana-ism. The fact that the judging system is so poor that you would even consider saying this indicates how far MMA is from being a proper sport.
there is a evaluation system. based on that system they awarded Machida as the winner. when i said there was no clear winner, that was based on my opinion. i should have put "IMO" at the end of the sentence.

IMO shogun did more damage and it's obvious by looking at Machida's face and legs. so he should have been the winner. but if you look at it overall, neither one really won the fight. if the fight kept going to round 6, it could have landed either way depending on who had the better cardio.

the other point i think people were trying to make is that maybe the judges didn't follow the ruling system and they were bias with their scoring (scoring in favor of the champion).

Quote:
Originally Posted by Spaceman_Spiff View Post
As to professionalism versus what's raw and real, there is no reason commentary should not be "raw" or "real." As long as the commentator is performing their intended function there is room for stylistic differences. What there is no room for is crap like this (from UFC104):

Rogan: Gleison moves away and Josh just chases after him.
(Neer throws a front kick that lands)
Goldberg: <indecipherable grunt> (sounds like "teak")
*pause*
Goldberg: That was for my crew. Mark Dellagrotte.

Completely unprofessional. Their job is to call the fight, not to boost their own image, not to suck up to the celebrities that show up to the fights, not to chum around with the fighters or their trainers, and not to promote their twitter feeds. Again, find me a mainstream sport (other than WWE) where commentators behave this way.
i didn't catch that. maybe you are too busy paying attention to the commentary and not watching the fight?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Spaceman_Spiff View Post
Basically it's because of where Rogan and Goldberg sit. They are right at the edge of the ring, which is fine most of the time. But when the fighters are at the other end of the octogon, or when the "striking line" is parallel with their line of sight (i.e. one of the fighters has his back to them obscuring their view of the other pugilist), they can't see the action as well as the cameramen can. They should have a TV monitor for those occasions but they don't seem to use them. The result is, every once in a while, Goldberg or Rogan will say something that is clearly blatantly wrong. Such as "oh he got rocked" when in reality the fighter dodged a blow and slipped in the process.
so he made a mistake? big deal. again, this kind of stuff doesn't really bother me. but i can see how it might bother others. maybe you should focus your attention on the fight instead? or perhaps turn down the volume?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Spaceman_Spiff View Post
I don't see the point of holding strong opinions if you are not prepared to defend them. Argument is an essential part of life. It helps you to understand your own feelings and to clarify your own positions. It helps onlookers to make up their minds on an issue. It helps propagate good ideas and fosters a respect for logic and inquiry. And in the case of arguments such as this one it helps prepare you for serious debates on more important matters.

That doesn't mean that we can't be civil. I certainly don't mean to cause offense.
here's where we do agree. it's not that i run away from arguments, i just prefer to avoid them.
post #182 of 671
Shogun won at least 4 out of 5 rounds if not all 5... what on earth is going on with the UFC? Dana white is always criticizing the judging panel yet nothing changes, very disappointing!

What exactly are the judges looking for? Shogun kicked more, was the aggressor from start to finish, did more damage to Machida's face, body and of course his legs. What won it for Machida? was it just the fact he's the champion and made it 5 rounds? ... for all we know he could start with points because he's champion.
post #183 of 671
post #184 of 671
Haha thats brilliant!

After being blistered on the internet for 36 hours, Cecil Peoples, one of the judges from the disputed Lyoto Machida-Mauricio Rua is firing back. Fans have been crushing him and the UFC over the Machida 48-47 decision. Many fighters outside the cage believed that Rua won the fight. One media member said the UFC [expletive] up and Dana White needs to stop blogging and fix the sport. Peoples told CageReport.net that there is a lack of understanding on how to score a fight:

Story here


Basically he says he had a better view than we at home did, that Rua was aggressive but not effective and Lyoto landed more damaging strikes through the fight. I have to wonder did we watch the same fight?

Take a look at this: http://www.fightmetric.com/fights/Machida-Shogun.html
post #185 of 671
Is anyone going to Strikeforce in Chicago?
post #186 of 671
wow ufc 108 is STACKED!

Lesnar-Carwin
Belfort-Spider
Evans-Thiago Silva
Gabriel Gonzaga-Junior dos Santos

and now even talks of the Machida-Shogun rematch being scheduled for 108.

wat.
post #187 of 671
Machida-Shogun rematch will save UFC's face.
post #188 of 671
Quote:
Originally Posted by gevorg View Post
Machida-Shogun rematch will save UFC's face.
Yes and I predict Shogun getting KTFO'd this time...lol
post #189 of 671
Seriously, that is a ridiculously stacked card. What a way to start the new year.
post #190 of 671
Quote:
Originally Posted by Graphicism View Post
Haha thats brilliant!

After being blistered on the internet for 36 hours, Cecil Peoples, one of the judges from the disputed Lyoto Machida-Mauricio Rua is firing back. Fans have been crushing him and the UFC over the Machida 48-47 decision. Many fighters outside the cage believed that Rua won the fight. One media member said the UFC [expletive] up and Dana White needs to stop blogging and fix the sport. Peoples told CageReport.net that there is a lack of understanding on how to score a fight:

Story here


Basically he says he had a better view than we at home did, that Rua was aggressive but not effective and Lyoto landed more damaging strikes through the fight. I have to wonder did we watch the same fight?

Take a look at this: Machida-Shogun

Does the media understand that the UFC does not hire their own judges? They have no say in who gets appointed to judge fights, that is the athletic commission. Dana White cannot "fix the sport" in this case. The UFC is run remarkably well and fights are typically matched very well. They cannot control bad judging.

I did not get to see the Machida-Rua fight, but I know Cecil Peoples very well from years of watching boxing. He and Patricia Jarman have to be the worst judges I've ever seen. Thank god Harold Lederman doesn't judge MMA...
post #191 of 671
Quote:
Originally Posted by EyeAmEye View Post
Does the media understand that the UFC does not hire their own judges? They have no say in who gets appointed to judge fights, that is the athletic commission. Dana White cannot "fix the sport" in this case. The UFC is run remarkably well and fights are typically matched very well. They cannot control bad judging.
Yeah you always hear Dana saying that and its no doubt true, but something needs to change, perhaps with the way the fight is scored. Being the aggressor should definitely count for something, Machida was given points for quelling Rua's attacks but without attacking it would be a very boring fight. I would even entertain the idea of no judges and if no one wins after 4 or 5 rounds it's a draw... this way you see a good fight, not a tactical fight to stay out of trouble... maybe that would be too barbaric for a sport but it's what we all want to see.
post #192 of 671
Quote:
Originally Posted by Graphicism View Post
Yeah you always hear Dana saying that and its no doubt true, but something needs to change, perhaps with the way the fight is scored. Being the aggressor should definitely count for something, Machida was given points for quelling Rua's attacks but without attacking it would be a very boring fight. I would even entertain the idea of no judges and if no one wins after 4 or 5 rounds it's a draw... this way you see a good fight, not a tactical fight to stay out of trouble... maybe that would be too barbaric for a sport but it's what we all want to see.
That is one thing that has always bugged me about scoring in MMA or boxing. Defense should not "score points". Defense does not win fights, offense does. I never agreed with the aggression thing either. I understand why they encourage aggression for overall fight entertainment, but being an aggressor alone shouldn't count for anything. You need to successfully land strikes, takedowns or submissions to "score". Simply moving forward and throwing strikes or attempting takedowns does not make you a winner of a fight. To score based upon defensive tactics and failed strikes, submissions and takedowns is a battle of technique. I want to see a fight, not an expo.

Not saying that applies directly to the Machida-Rua fight, but in general.

What you suggested really wouldn't work. The competitor getting the short end of the stick most of the fight would quickly transition into strict run/defense tactics to eat the remainder of the fight and escape with a draw.
post #193 of 671
Quote:
Originally Posted by EyeAmEye View Post
What you suggested really wouldn't work. The competitor getting the short end of the stick most of the fight would quickly transition into strict run/defense tactics to eat the remainder of the fight and escape with a draw.
Well you've heard it said I'm sure that a street fighter (i.e. Kimbo) can't fight MMA, but what about the other way around, an MMA fighting street. Those fights don't last 25 minutes and are a lot more entertaining to watch, why they can't just go at it I don't know. The last fight in Ultimate Fighter where the fighters were just swinging at each other was more entertaining, even Dana White said "what a fight!" If UFC isn't careful well start to see an influx of fat guys who pin a guy down and punch him until he submits, I don't want to see that.

If there were no judges and a draw on the table if the fight goes the distance there would be no pay at the end of it, or a no-contest. The most entertaining fights are the ones where they go at it, the most boring are the technical fights were few punches are thrown and they dance around the ring for 20 minutes... as if there scared to get hit, that's not what I'm paying to watch. I watch a fight to see someone get punched in the face, blood, and someone getting hurt at the end of it.
post #194 of 671
Quote:
Originally Posted by Graphicism View Post
Well you've heard it said I'm sure that a street fighter (i.e. Kimbo) can't fight MMA, but what about the other way around, an MMA fighting street. Those fights don't last 25 minutes and are a lot more entertaining to watch, why they can't just go at it I don't know. The last fight in Ultimate Fighter where the fighters were just swinging at each other was more entertaining, even Dana White said "what a fight!" If UFC isn't careful well start to see an influx of fat guys who pin a guy down and punch him until he submits, I don't want to see that.

If there were no judges and a draw on the table if the fight goes the distance there would be no pay at the end of it, or a no-contest. The most entertaining fights are the ones where they go at it, the most boring are the technical fights were few punches are thrown and they dance around the ring for 20 minutes... as if there scared to get hit, that's not what I'm paying to watch. I watch a fight to see someone get punched in the face, blood, and someone getting hurt at the end of it.
A true mixed martial artist would destroy any street fighter sans a gun. Wild fighting only is effective against other wild fighting. A good technique would render basic street fighting harmless.

Have to say Dana White was embleshing the quality of the Mitrione-Junk fight. The fight was, pun intended, Junk. Two guys with zero stamina and apparently no MMA talent flailing away at each other is not my idea of entertaining fights. If the UFC morphed into that, I would stop watching immediately.
post #195 of 671
Yeah the second and third round was empty because they gave it all they got in the first... people want to see aggressive fighting; at the start of the Machida v Rua fight Machida had the crowed on his side while he entered the ring and by the end of the first round the crowed had changed and were chanting for Rua, this is simply because he was the aggressive fighter and thats what people pay to see.

Why would anyone want to see 2 guys basically dance around in there underwear for 20 minutes? Fighters are made to think technical because of the judges, this I think affects there fighting style... most fighters aren't scared to get hit but when they know they accrue points for dancing and dodging thats what they end up doing. And that's exactly what I'm getting at, take away the judges, get rid of the drama and let's see some fights!
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Misc.-Category Forums › Members' Lounge (General Discussion) › The MMA thread (Affliction, UFC, DREAM, Strikeforce, etc.)