A split decision went the wrong way? BOOOHOOO

[Valhoven]

That shouldn't be how it goes, the best man in the fight should walk away with the belt and just because the Condit fight was a split that doesn't make it any less of a robbery.

This.^^

Agreed with TS at first (he did limit his scope to razor-thin decisions for a (C) to get the nod) but ultimately this means that the calling of a given fight on one night is weighing also a fighter's career or past accomplishments; that doesn't sound too good a system, lol.

Now, if strap-holders could wield a knife or pepper-spray in the championship rounds of 4 and 5, then we have an argument for unequivocally beating a champ to become one...or not.

 

[The MM Analyst]

Yeah. Also all split decisions should go to the guy who's ranked higher in the case of non-title fights. If they're both unranked, give it to the guy with the better facial hair.

 

[IRENICUS]

Did Condit decisively beat Lawler for the belt? NO
Did Hendricks decisively beat GSP for the belt? NO
Did Gus decisively beat Jones for the belt? NO

Anyone else agree?

Did Lawler decisively beat Usada Hendricks for the belt?


Did Condit deserve the title shot to begin with after beating nobody ranked for it?(he deserved to win vs Lawler, do 2 wrongs make it right?)