Bisping/Silva result = Shear volume of strikes VS amount of significant damage per strike

Bisping 1,2,4 /thread

This
ask the hospital bisping went to who won

Silva won the "Fight" but MMA as a sport Bisping won 3 rounds to 2. Pride rules are great but Pride died because it was a corrupt entity from its inception and not a viable structure long term. UFC are in a difficult position with McGregor as he is raking in the cash short term but if he keeps leaping to the front of the line to fight division champs it devalues the sport and its divisions and its ability to generate stories based on the Belt and who is the best despite Charisma. There wont always be guys who can talk and fight. Look at Robbie Lawler, I love watching him fight but he has nothing to say.
 
This is why we need more 10-8. In fact, most rounds should be 10-8's. 10-9's should only be used if the round was very close or there was very little activity overall but there was, in fact, a clear winner. Bisping's round 4 should have been a 10-9 and Silva's round 3 should have been 10-8 or 10-7.

Otherwise we need to scrap round scoring and score the fight as a whole.
 
That's the problem I think that people just see this as just another "Silva-Bisping" thread but really I am talking about mma in general and the concept of winning rounds strategically etc.

But once again I am bored with Sherdog's lack of respect and willingness to openly discuss things with a shred of intellect and thus will forget I even bothered. 80% of Sherdog - you are disgraceful.

Pro tip. If this is not another Bisping Silva thread, then dont put BISPING SILVA in the darn title. As things stand this is an obvious bisping silva troll thread using mma scoring as your cover. And if your point is as you claim..Condit Lawler would have made for a far superior example.
 
That reply makes no sense if you actually read my post.

yuXfJ2e.gif
 
Pro tip. If this is not another Bisping Silva thread, then dont put BISPING SILVA in the darn title. As things stand this is an obvious bisping silva troll thread using mma scoring as your cover. And if your point is as you claim..Condit Lawler would have made for a far superior example.


Well it IS a Bisping-Silva thread, just not another that is basically the same as all the rest. That's what I meant.

Why people are reacting so poorly to it is merely a relic of that. The content of the thread itself is a perfectly good discussion. But I am tired of defending myself to a bunch of Trolls.

Go ahead and delete this thread nobody clearly has the mind capacity to sit still for more than 5 minutes and talk about some critical aspect of our sport.

Condit-Lawler also did not just happen last night, hence why this is the example. People just don't understand that one topic can prompt discussion for another concept as well at least on this simple minded site.
 
I agree. Silva was way, way too inactive in that fight to get the W to me. Bisping just flat out fought more than Anderson did. That's why I felt it was score correctly.
 
Well it IS a Bisping-Silva thread, just not another that is basically the same as all the rest. That's what I meant.

Why people are reacting so poorly to it is merely a relic of that. The content of the thread itself is a perfectly good discussion. But I am tired of defending myself to a bunch of Trolls.

Go ahead and delete this thread nobody clearly has the mind capacity to sit still for more than 5 minutes and talk about some critical aspect of our sport.

Condit-Lawler also did not just happen last night, hence why this is the example. People just don't understand that one topic can prompt discussion for another concept as well at least on this simple minded site.

Okay listen, your main point is also something that has been discussed ad nauseum. The "damage done vs. strikes landed" has been going on since effing Diaz and Condit (and really, since way before that). And just because "power units" sounds different than "damage done," doesn't make your point any less redundant. We all know by now that fighting to win the fight works out better than fighting to hurt the other person.

Also, Condit-Lawler is a perfect counter-example. Lawler landed the more significant strikes, and so was given the decision. It's really up to the judges, not some mystical "system" that fighters need to play. Don't come in here getting all pissed off at people when you're discussing nothing new or interesting and implying that you're somehow superior to everyone else here. They didn't get your point because there was no point to your post.
 
Okay listen, your main point is also something that has been discussed ad nauseum. The "damage done vs. strikes landed" has been going on since effing Diaz and Condit (and really, since way before that). And just because "power units" sounds different than "damage done," doesn't make your point any less redundant. We all know by now that fighting to win the fight works out better than fighting to hurt the other person.

Also, Condit-Lawler is a perfect counter-example. Lawler landed the more significant strikes, and so was given the decision. It's really up to the judges, not some mystical "system" that fighters need to play. Don't come in here getting all pissed off at people when you're discussing nothing new or interesting and implying that you're somehow superior to everyone else here. They didn't get your point because there was no point to your post.

That's a perfectly valid opinion, but that aside I was more pissed that people misunderstood me completely and jumped to conclusions. Some were even disrespectful and in no circumstances should that type of attitude be condoned.

The point to my post was that Anderson needs to adapt to these circumstances if he wishes to once again start racking up some wins, a criticism to his "performance" last night. And if me defending myself comes off as being superior to some people it's only because they put myself at such a low standard to begin with. I don't like being condescended and I really don't think that my thread was at all redundant but we are each entitled to our own opinions.

And of course certain things on this forum will be brought up from time to time, you can't expect each and every thread to be completely original those expectations are unrealistic. What better time to bring up a concept than the night following such an event?

So honestly as per usual a decent post gets treat unfairly just because of the current mood of the place. What could have been a discussion about mma turned into a discussion about something redundant in of itself if you guys can't see that than I have nothing more to say.
 
I rewatched the bout and this time scored it for Anderson.

This wasn't Condit-Lawler where Carlos scored SOOO much offence. A lot of what Bisping threw was ducked or otherwise avoided by Silva. Mike looked busy, but in some parts of the fight - round four particularly - didn't actually land too much. Meanwhile Silva landed the nastier stuff.

It definitely wasn't a robbery and I'm happy for Bisping to get a signature win in a very close fight. But I think Silva should have gotten the nod. And if Bisping wasn't ready to fight within sixty seconds of the big knee, the bout should have been stopped. Herb gave him 90 seconds!
 
I didn't read all of that but you can't objectively quantify damage, so there.

You can't perfectly and with 100% accuracy quantify damage, but when the gap is so big it's obvious to see who deal more damage. And Silva obviously, clearly and without a doubt dealt more damage in that fight, it wasn't even close.


This is why I miss Pride. Under Pride Rules judging the bout on aggression, ring control, damage and finishing strong, Silva would have won the fight easy.
 
Bisping landed the bigger shots in the first two rounds I believe.. but sure, you can't win a 5 minute round with only a couple of flurries unless you seriously hurt somebody like round 3. We all know how judging goes down, and Anderson didn't play the game.
 
This is why we need more 10-8. In fact, most rounds should be 10-8's. 10-9's should only be used if the round was very close or there was very little activity overall but there was, in fact, a clear winner. Bisping's round 4 should have been a 10-9 and Silva's round 3 should have been 10-8 or 10-7.

Otherwise we need to scrap round scoring and score the fight as a whole.

Scoring the fight as a whole is better, Pride style. The 10-point must system may make sense for boxing, but I have never liked it for MMA. Especially when you are judging both standup and ground games. UFC Judges still score bouts like boxing matches, like if a player gets a "down" (aka was taken down) they almost always score it for the guy who got a takedown, regardless of how the rest of the round went.
 
You can't perfectly and with 100% accuracy quantify damage, but when the gap is so big it's obvious to see who deal more damage. And Silva obviously, clearly and without a doubt dealt more damage in that fight, it wasn't even close.


This is why I miss Pride. Under Pride Rules judging the bout on aggression, ring control, damage and finishing strong, Silva would have won the fight easy.


I would as far to say that perhaps if the fight was in brazil with different judges, he easily could have been scored the W.

All in all not the most satisfying fight.
 
You can't perfectly and with 100% accuracy quantify damage, but when the gap is so big it's obvious to see who deal more damage. And Silva obviously, clearly and without a doubt dealt more damage in that fight, it wasn't even close.

Define damage
 
That's the problem I think that people just see this as just another "Silva-Bisping" thread but really I am talking about mma in general and the concept of winning rounds strategically etc.

But once again I am bored with Sherdog's lack of respect and willingness to openly discuss things with a shred of intellect and thus will forget I even bothered. 80% of Sherdog - you are disgraceful.

Don't waste your time. Everybody knows the scoring criteria and system for MMA in general is flat-out retarded. The problem with trying to discuss on this forum is that people would very much rather try to out troll each other than put any original thought.

It's why sherdog is the taint of the mma community and why the majority of fighters avoid it like the plague.
 
Don't waste your time. Everybody knows the scoring criteria and system for MMA in general is flat-out retarded. The problem with trying to discuss on this forum is that people would very much rather try to out troll each better than put any original thought.

It's why sherdog is the taint of the mma community and why the majority of fighters avoid it like the plague.

I usually don't let it bother me but today just hit a nerve. In the end it doesn't matter, most people just have their opinions and no matter what you say nothing will change that.
 
You can't perfectly and with 100% accuracy quantify damage, but when the gap is so big it's obvious to see who deal more damage. And Silva obviously, clearly and without a doubt dealt more damage in that fight, it wasn't even close.


This is why I miss Pride. Under Pride Rules judging the bout on aggression, ring control, damage and finishing strong, Silva would have won the fight easy.
Mike wins on Octagon control and aggression easy. Rounds 1 and 2 were easily Bispings. Round 4 was close. So what exactly are you complaining about?
 
Back
Top