I don't get this narrative that Romero's round 5 was a 10-8 round. Anyone else?

[Just Creed]

As soon as i saw who the ts was, it was pretty obvious how the thread was going

 

[Dr Brian Pepper]

Its not though youre telling me the results of another fight doesnt matter even though all the fights are judged by literally the same rules. Looking at the fights objectively literally means nothing. Its the same rules and should be consistent

It means everything, you judge fights objectively. There isnt an argument, especially your logical fallacy you keep using.

 

[ClintoxicatedGoat]

Well considering 75% of media and people polled all think it was a draw or a win for Romero.... it would appear you are wrong.

Only 12% of those same experts scored the Romero Jacare fight to Yoel...But Yoel still won the fight and got a #1 contender shot from it so....shit happens.

 

[DrunkMonkMeth]

It means everything, you judge fights objectively. There isnt an argument, especially your logical fallacy you keep using.

Under the same criteria because you want consistency. you keep saying you judge them objectively like its suppose to mean fuck all in this argument. Yes the results of another fight shouldnt sway the judge. But hes judging off a set of rules and a critieria so they should be consistent in their results. You're literally saying you cannot look at another fight as an example when you feel a fight wasnt judged correctly because its judged objectively.. its actually stupid. Its irrelevent in this discussion. Im not asking for judges to say "i gave michael jackson a 10-8 so this is a 10-8 also."

Its asking for consistency when a 10-8 is given. Youre objectively argument has no grounds here and is just a lazy cop out.

"you cant compare 2 diffetent fights."

Yes the fuck you can..

 

[Dr Brian Pepper]

Under the same criteria because you want consistency. you keep saying you judge them objectively like its suppose to mean fuck all in this argument. Yes the results of another fight shouldnt sway the judge. But hes judging off a set of rules and a critieria so they should be consistent in their results. You're literally saying you cannot look at another fight as an example when you feel a fight wasnt judged correctly because its judged objectively.. its actually stupid. Its irrelevent in this discussion. Im not asking for judges to say "i gave michael jackson a 10-8 so this is a 10-8 also."

Its asking for consistency when a 10-8 is given. Youre objectively argument has no grounds here and is just a lazy cop out.

"you cant compare 2 diffetent fights."

Yes the fuck you can..

"im still stuck in my logical fallacy"

You judge fights objectively, when the judges score the fight, they do so based on that fight alone, not on how other fights may have been scored, you dolt.

The way youre presenting it just not how shit works.

Its like these two colors mix to make a certain color, and youre stuck in corner with a helmet on yelling "wll it COULD make this color if you add this to it!"

And everyone is in class and they all sigh, "but nobody is talking about that, it is irrlelvent, and not how things work."

and youre just "but but but this!" and everyone shakes their heads and feels bad for you

 

[DrunkMonkMeth]

"im still stuck in my logical fallacy"

You judge fights objectively, when the judges score the fight, they do so based on that fight alone, not on how other fights may have been scored, you dolt.

I think you might be an actual idiot now...

Yes i completely understand you judge fights objectly and do not consider the results of another fight to score the fight if youre a judge..but as a fan watching the fights there is Literally no reason to be objective about it. Its perfectly okay to ask why something got a 10-8 but why another didnt. There is no rules on having an opinion of the results of a fight. So literally what youre saying is irrelevent.. its not even an argument.. youre just saying the judges score fights objectively like its some genius relevation. Its not.


What you dont realize is that all fights are judged by the same criteria.. there should be consistency. Being judged objectively literally has nothing to do with this. if Youre objectively judging a fight under the same critiera the results should be consistent.

The real discussion is whether round 5 was as dominate enough to be a 10-8.. saying its objective and cant compare to other fights is just fucking stupid and irrelevent to the topic... like i said its a cop out. You arent making any points. Youre just stating a fact about how judges operate to pretend there is no debate to be had.

 

[listrahtes]

The judging system is sposed to have changed recently meaning total dominance and multiple near finishes aren't needed for 10-8 anymore.

No now you have to shoot , stomp and chainsaw the opponent dead before you get it. Maybe Romeros was a 10-8 (I did not think it was that clear but this was always the big weakness in UFC that much more obvious dominations (TS had examples) would only get a 10-9 score.

For a 10P must scoring system you really need to use alle of its width and very competent judges. The answer why it doesnt work imo is obvious.

 

[Dr Brian Pepper]

I think you might be an actual idiot now...

Yes i completely understand you judge fights objectly and do not consider the results of another fight to score the fight if youre a judge..but as a fan watching the fights there is Literally no reason to be objective about it. Its perfectly okay to ask why something got a 10-8 but why another didnt. There is no rules on having an opinion of the results of a fight. So literally what youre saying is irrelevent.. its not even an argument.. youre just saying the judges score fights objectively like its some genius relevation. Its not.


What you dont realize is that all fights are judged by the same criteria.. there should be consistency. Being judged objectively literally has nothing to do with this. if Youre objectively judging a fight under the same critiera the results should be consistent.

The real discussion is whether round 5 was as dominate enough to be a 10-8.. saying its objective and cant compare to other fights is just fucking stupid and irrelevent to the topic... like i said its a cop out. You arent making any points. Youre just stating a fact about how judges operate to pretend there is no debate to be had.

"umm youre an idiot!"


TLDR

 

[DrunkMonkMeth]

"umm youre an idiot!"


TLDR

Yes you did.. now you're silent bye

 

[Sjb1888]

It wasn't even remotely close to a 10-8, people allowed their emotions to taint thier judgment

 

[Dr Brian Pepper]

Yes you did.. now you're silent bye

point proven.


wasnt a 10-8, sry ur bf lost

 

[jeskola]

I wouldnt be surprised if the majority of people who were crying robbery on sherdog watched that fight high on drugs (weed) or were severely drunk

A lot of sherbros are gay for Yoel's hot bod and it tints their vision of the fight. I have no problem with their lust for Romero, but that shouldn't affect judging.