For whom did you score the fight: Michael Bisping or Anderson Silva? (Poll)

For whom did you score the fight: Michael Bisping or Anderson Silva?

  • Total voters
    1,321
cant believe there are that many idiots on sherdog, I mean I knew there were a few.... but about 40%?

Bisping clearly won
 
It was bipsing vs hamill all over again
 
Well maybe not that bad. But bisping got beat up. :)
 
Listen, it was fairly obvious that Michael had 3 10-9 rounds (1,2 and 4) however if u sent me into an arena to watch 2 guys fight for 25 minutes and asked me who got the best of who when I came out, Id say this guy from England had very little behind his punches and Id say the guy from Brazil is obviously the better mmartist......he just seemed to be a tad tentative and it cost him in the way of getting outpointed.
 
Frode Falch said:
Well maybe not that bad. But bisping got beat up. :)
Click to expand...
he had already won 2 rounds before Anderson landed anything decent on him(the knee). Still won the 4th after being flash KO'd

he got beat up, but still won the fight
 
Franklin U. said:
Listen, it was fairly obvious that Michael had 3 10-9 rounds (1,2 and 4) however if u sent me into an arena to watch 2 guys fight for 25 minutes and asked me who got the best of who when I came out, Id say this guy from England had very little behind his punches and Id say the guy from Brazil is obviously the better mmartist......he just seemed to be a tad tentative and it cost him in the way of getting outpointed.
Click to expand...
and then whoever you are talking to will say "yeah..... but who won?"

the correct answer is "Michael Bisping", whichever way you look at it
 
Team Sleep said:
Again, if you end up laying on the ground for a minute and a half at the end of the round, unable to get to your feet, you were dominated.
Click to expand...
A 10-8 would represent a summary of what happened over the course of the entire round, not only the closing moment, and especially not after the bell. The judges cannot take anything after the bell has sounded into account, that's for the ref.

Getting hit with a good one at the end of an otherwise competitive round produces a 10-9, using the current criteria and convention.
 
Krouget said:
A 10-8 would represent a summary of what happened over the course of the entire round, not only the closing moment, and especially not after the bell. The judges cannot take anything after the bell has sounded into account, that's for the ref.

Getting hit with a good one at the end of an otherwise competitive round produces a 10-9, using the current criteria and convention.
Click to expand...
Bisping was as close to being finished as he could be without the fight being stopped. I score that a 10-8. If he only got 60 seconds, he wouldn't have answered the bell. He couldn't even make it to his corner. Score it how you want. I score that a 10-8. If he had already been losing I would have scored it a 10-7.
 
Bisping rd 1 & 2

Silva 3,4,5

I suppose the controversy arises from rd 4, but Silva clearly landed the harder shots in that round
 
48-47 Bisping. If the fight was scored as a whole I probably would've gone with Anderson but round by round, it was an easy 3 rounds to 2 for Bisping, imo.
 
Team Sleep said:
Bisping was as close to being finished as he could be without the fight being stopped.
Click to expand...
Silva would've had to control more of the round in similar dominant fashion, for that to be a 10-8. Isolating a moment of action to define an entire round isn't how the judging works, not to mention it's already rare to see 10-8's.

If he only got 60 seconds, he wouldn't have answered the bell. He couldn't even make it to his corner. Score it how you want. I score that a 10-8. If he had already been losing I would have scored it a 10-7.
Click to expand...
Personally, I'd prefer the scoring system to work a bit differently, but you can't consider how long it takes a guy to get up AFTER a round has ended, as a part of the criteria. Once the bell rings, it's on the ref to control what happens, but as a judge, you're blind to it.
 
Kalmyk Fighter said:
Lighter-colored skin shows bruising easier.

GSP looked like he got put through a meat-grinder in every single fight- even after 50-45'ing pillow-fisted Jon Fitch.

People keep talking about that knee Silva landed but forget tat Bisping dropped Silva in round 1 and dropped him and ground and pounded him round 2 that was reminiscent of hte 1st round of Weidman/Silva II.
Click to expand...

1) Your second point is BS.

2) It clearly states in the scoring criteria that the appearance of bruises and cuts on a fighter are supposed to be factored in. You can hate it all you want, but you can't ignore the scoring criteria. That'd be like saying "Well, I think the Steelers should've won because they scored 2 touchdowns while the 49ers only scored 5 field goals and I don't think field goals should matter really." Therefore, you must consider the cuts & bruises inflicted on Bisping in the rounds they are inflicted. Like it or not, that is part of the scoring current scoring criteria.
 
Even though I had £100 on Silva to win via decision @ 9/2 odds (£550 return if he won) I still thought Bisping won the fight.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,237,113
Messages
55,468,158
Members
174,786
Latest member
plasterby

Share this page

Back
Top