St.Pierre's post fight image controversy. Wake up peeps!

[boss429]

This is getting pathetic. Grabbing at straws are we?
In the beginning it was the Dana White argument, " even Dana said Hendricks won!"
Well now that Dana (like a lot of us) has watched the fight again & admits he was wrong. That GSP did in fact win the fight. You're back to clinging to the sports writers. Who for the record are not certified judges. They're just like any other sports fan off the street but they get paid to do it. I'd be curious how many of the sports writers have changed their tune after watching again?

How long have you been watching combat sports, being a certified judge usually seems to mean you know less about the sport than the hardcore fans, judges get the decision wrong all the fucking time.

I haven't had a chance to re-watch cause the WIFI in this motel is a joke but when I watched the fight live I had Jonny winning 4-1, and I'm a huge fan of GSP, I was devastated after the fight, couldn't believe what I just saw.

If the judges had used the rules as written Hendrix won, getting outlanded by an insignificant number in a round were you land the far more effective strikes is supposed to be scored to the guy landing more effectively, this was Jonny in all but round 5.

Won't be home for a month or so at which point I will re-watch but I doubt my opinion will change.

 

[hussar922]

Eighty is the total number of hits to the head, body and legs. Six, count'em six head power shots by Diaz. Thirty-seven head jabs by Diaz. Doesn't paint a picture of a guy that put it to him...and nonetheless, he was pretty cut up...that does paint a picture of a guy that looks busted up easily.

maybe you don't get numbers or understand what it means to get 37 jabs to the face with 6 power shots to the face - he looks exactly like what you'd expect from those numbers

 

[abracadordosaco**]

Actually that is an untrue statement,

who does have a black eye, a bruise on top of his left eye.

But that doesn't mean anything. There are people who take punches very well and don't show the marks. We seen fighters who go to war and don't show a mark on their faces. It means nothing.

Lol, nice try buddy, but I didn't even have to notice the background to know that this was the Diaz-GSP fight, where Hendricks (imo) lost against Condit but still got the UD victory.

 

[devilfisted]

location: ottawa

enough said

by the way - when 90% of the world says you're wrong guess what? - you're wrong - there's no conspiracy and you're not that smart - for a true freethinker appeals to authority and a rebellious instinct have nothing to do with it (unless you're a child) - he/she weighs the evidence and makes an informed decision -

Show me a stat that says 90% of the world had it for Johnny! Until you can stop talking talking evidence. I watched it many times and have made my own decision base on facts not opinion or appeals to Dana. Fact rnd one was close i thought GSP won the grappling and land better strike from outside.

 

[silentjay]

no he doesn't - he has a few small bruises on his face with zero swelling and that's it - sad part of all this is that now fans like you will say literally any mark on his face is evidence of "bruising easily" - just sad

wow... you are obviously a hater.

this is concrete evidence that he bruises easily.

you have no idea if I'm a fan or not. you are just assuming.

take the concrete evidence given here. Hardy landed NO significant head strikes according to Compustrike and there are bruises on GSP's face.

he DOES bruise easily.

It's a fact. the evidence is there and overwhelming.

take the facts for what they are, leave your assumptions and biases aside for a moment of logic.

 

[CombatCyborg]

Now, I think Hendricks won, but three of those scores were from Sherdog employees, and Sherdog said Brock Lesnar was #1 in the world, consequently their opinions on anything are suspect.

 

[qbanwayz]

How long have you been watching combat sports, being a certified judge usually seems to mean you know less about the sport than the hardcore fans, judges get the decision wrong all the fucking time.

I haven't had a chance to re-watch cause the WIFI in this motel is a joke but when I watched the fight live I had Jonny winning 4-1, and I'm a huge fan of GSP, I was devastated after the fight, couldn't believe what I just saw.

If the judges had used the rules as written Hendrix won, getting outlanded by an insignificant number in a round were you land the far more effective strikes is supposed to be scored to the guy landing more effectively, this was Jonny in all but round 5.

Won't be home for a month or so at which point I will re-watch but I doubt my opinion will change.

I think giving 4-1 to hendricks is as ridiculous as saying GSP clearly won. Nobody here is arguing that GSP lost 4 rounds, we are all coming to the same conclusion except for round 1, but somehow you saw some other fight. That is a pretty wacky score card you gave and pretty much undermines your point.

 

[abracadordosaco**]

same old crap from Hendrick fans.. I predict the crying will stop in about a month or so

Not a Hendricks fan but come on. They've got every reason to cry.

Shit I'm a Diaz fan and even his fight with Condit wasn't as clear of a victory for him as this fight was for Hendricks over GSP.

I thought Diaz beat Condit 4-1 and at the worst 3-2, but I knew it was close. I was pissed because of the way Carlos fought, but I know how judging works.

I honestly didn't think GSP would even get a split decision loss, I thought it would be unanimous scores of 49-46 and/or 48-47 for Hendricks.

 

[MMASuperfan]

Showing polls of what people think doesn't do anything. The point of this just like what happened with Gus vs Jones where people took the decision way out of proportion is people use of unnecessary factors to judge a fight. Did Hendricks do more damage to GSP in rounds 2 and 4 than GSP did in rounds 3 and 5, yes he did. But the fight is judge on a round to round basis.

The Sherdog Graph is, indeed "What People Think," but the media scores and compustrike stats are not "what people think." The media scores are regarded with authority and are considered to be the scores of experts.

The fight stats with compustrike, etc are just the facts. People saying GSP won are completely delusional.

 

[boss429]

I think giving 4-1 to hendricks is as ridiculous as saying GSP clearly won. Nobody here is arguing that GSP lost 4 rounds, we are all coming to the same conclusion except for round 1, but somehow you saw some other fight. That is a pretty wacky score card you gave and pretty much undermines your point.

How so? Jonny landed the more effective strikes in the round while GSP "out struck" him by 1 strike, it's written right in the rules man, if the numbers are close the advantage goes to the more effective striker, this was Jonny.

I didn't see a different fight, I've just been watching combat sports long enough to know how to apply the rules as written. But like I said, I had to watch it in a bar and haven't had a chance to re-watch, my opinion may change when I get that opportunity.

 

[Intellidamus]

How long have you been watching combat sports, being a certified judge usually seems to mean you know less about the sport than the hardcore fans, judges get the decision wrong all the fucking time.

I haven't had a chance to re-watch cause the WIFI in this motel is a joke but when I watched the fight live I had Jonny winning 4-1, and I'm a huge fan of GSP, I was devastated after the fight, couldn't believe what I just saw.

If the judges had used the rules as written Hendrix won, getting outlanded by an insignificant number in a round were you land the far more effective strikes is supposed to be scored to the guy landing more effectively, this was Jonny in all but round 5.

Won't be home for a month or so at which point I will re-watch but I doubt my opinion will change.

I guess once you re-watch it you'll have a stronger case to argue. Whether it be Johny, GSP or draw.
Either way a second watch sometimes gives a different perspective

 

[hussar922]

[YT][url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jg3HayF_dCM[/YT][/URL]

no... they actually didn't.
for examply, Hardy didn't even land 50 (fight metric has him landing 40, compustrike has him at 22 for the entire fight) strikes in their entire 5 round fight.

yet, GSP still looked like he took a good amount of shots:

and

watch the video and tell me how "busted up" he looks once the sweat is cleaned off

[YT][url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jg3HayF_dCM[/YT][/URL]

edit: it won't embed - just paste the link

 

[silentjay]

How so? Jonny landed the more effective strikes in the round while GSP "out struck" him by 1 strike, it's written right in the rules man, if the numbers are close the advantage goes to the more effective striker, this was Jonny.

round 3 was GSP's is the point that poster was trying to make.

 

[devilfisted]

How long have you been watching combat sports, being a certified judge usually seems to mean you know less about the sport than the hardcore fans, judges get the decision wrong all the fucking time.

I haven't had a chance to re-watch cause the WIFI in this motel is a joke but when I watched the fight live I had Jonny winning 4-1, and I'm a huge fan of GSP, I was devastated after the fight, couldn't believe what I just saw.

If the judges had used the rules as written Hendrix won, getting outlanded by an insignificant number in a round were you land the far more effective strikes is supposed to be scored to the guy landing more effectively, this was Jonny in all but round 5.

Won't be home for a month or so at which point I will re-watch but I doubt my opinion will change.

4-1 is silly! Re-watch!

 

[Chubz]

A picture is worth a thousand words ...

 

[boomertx]

maybe you don't get numbers or understand what it means to get 37 jabs to the face with 6 power shots to the face - he looks exactly like what you'd expect from those numbers

Maybe you don't know the difference between the head and the face or how Diaz strikes. You're making the assumption that all those punches land to the face...they don't...just like you made the assertion that GSP got hit in the head with 80 sig strikes he didn't...you lose credibility when you don't use numbers correctly or make silly assumptions.

But then you just want to slam GSP fans so I understand...it's commonplace on this forum.

 

[qbanwayz]

location: ottawa

enough said

by the way - when 90% of the world says you're wrong guess what? - you're wrong - there's no conspiracy and you're not that smart - for a true freethinker appeals to authority and a rebellious instinct have nothing to do with it (unless you're a child) - he/she weighs the evidence and makes an informed decision -

Not sure what that point is. Nobody is talking about conspiracy here. The point of the thread and many people was that it was a close fight. 90% of people including the people you site agree that the fight came down to round 1. Round 1 wasn't this dominate round for Hendricks, or GSP for that matter. The point of the thread is the over reaction of the decision that made it seem like hell just froze over. This has been a trend going with close fights that have a winner winning a decision. Bendo fights are examples of this.

Gus and Jones is a great example of this. You look at this fight and saw that the champ clearly won the last two rounds, the other three rounds were close. Nobody dominated them. But what blinds people is not whether the challenger ACTUALLY won, but how well he did in regards to their expectations. That seems to blind a lot of people when judging a fight. That and the fact that a lot of people wanted Jones to loose.

The point is to look at each round and see who won them. There is no way we cannot see that each guy had 2 rounds a piece won decisively, the first round was the round in question. I don't think people are being honest when judging these type of close fights. No robbery happened. Just that two judges thought GSP did enough to win round 1 and the other judge gave it to Hendricks.

 

[Face Stab]

no he doesn't - he has a few small bruises on his face with zero swelling and that's it - sad part of all this is that now fans like you will say literally any mark on his face is evidence of "bruising easily" - just sad

The point is that he's marked up with almost no beating.


Let's just be honest and realistic. GSP marks up easy.

This was his face after the Koscheck 2 fight, and Koscheck only had one eye for four rounds and couldn't see shit. :icon_lol:

15 strikes did that.


Some guys mark up. Other guys don't. Look at Anderson Silva after the Sonnen I fight. Nobody will ever accuse Sonnen of being a power striker, but he hit Silva 251 times in the head, lol.

Sonnen looked like this:

Silva looked like this:

So please, get the fuck out of town with your nonsense.


I scored it for Hendricks, but trying to pretend like GSP doesn't get marked up easy. I met GSP at Burger King once while he was trying to finish a Whopper Junior. I coughed while we were talking and it left a small welt. Was really awkward.

 

[hussar922]

wow... you are obviously a hater.

this is concrete evidence that he bruises easily.

you have no idea if I'm a fan or not. you are just assuming.

take the concrete evidence given here. Hardy landed NO significant head strikes according to Compustrike and there are bruises on GSP's face.

he DOES bruise easily.

It's a fact. the evidence is there and overwhelming.

take the facts for what they are, leave your assumptions and biases aside for a moment of logic.

1st - the fact is that i'm a huge st pierre fan - just go back and look at my previous posts over the years to confirm that - i'm just not a blind fan who ignores the obvious - the above is st pierre at the press conference post hardy - a fight where he got hit in the head 37 times - so what? any mark means he must bruise easily? - that's ridiculous - get over it

 

[silentjay]

[YT][url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jg3HayF_dCM[/YT][/URL] and

watch the video and tell me how "busted up" he looks once the sweat is cleaned off

[YT][url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jg3HayF_dCM[/YT][/URL]

edit: it won't embed - just paste the link

wow.

okay...

here is some more logic and fact for you.

1. there is clearly bruising on his forehead, side of his face and temple

2. they don't just clean off the sweat before the post-fight interview sessions, the ice down the bruising and clean and close any cuts/abrasions

3. that is from 0 significant strikes landed by Hardy, which debunks your assumptions from earlier.

just admit it.

the evidence is overwhelming.

I'm not asking you to say GSP won.

Just to look at the overwhelming evidence and facts to logically admit that GSP bruises rather easily.