How do you have opponents back for 12 of 15 minutes...and lose???

[Marco Tropoja]

See, I thought about this and I was thinking that because of the format of the show, they couldn't have a majority draw, because someone needs to move to the next round. So I was thinking that in the case of a majority draw, they asked the judges "who do you think won overall?" And that's how it was decided.

This isn't like a regular fight, which is why it doesn't show on your fight record, so I was thinking for the format of the show that was how they designed it.

Is this written somewhere? Cause it looked like they made it up on the fly.

 

[RachelZane**]

fighters like stephen should be permanently banned from fighting

"superior grappler!!!"
"better fighter won!! omg!!"

wtf are you serious?
my 5 year old niece can do literally the exact same thing as stephens

holy autism

 

[Jaden Korr**]

The result of this fight reads like a mathematical impossibility to me.

In order to get a third round, the scorecards must be even. Right?
So either it was 10-9 & 9-10 or it was 10-10 & 10-10.
I'm fine with that. First two rounds were hard to score with Stephens not doing anything with his dominant position and Zapata doing most of the damage.

But Zapata clearly lost the third round.
He was controlled and beat up for most of the round, making it 10-9 Stephens.
Plus there's the point deduction: that's 10-8 Stephens.

If the judges had it 10-9 Zapata, then that's a 9-9 and the fight is a draw.
The third round had to be scored 10-8 Zapata (9-8 after the point deduction) for him to get the win.
How the hell was that a dominant round for him? He got his ass kicked for the majority of it.

Did the judges take a point from the wrong guy? I can't think of any other explanation...

I'm pretty sure 2 judges scored the last round 9-9, with one judge scoring it 10-8, but because of the format of the show they had to have a winner, so they asked the judges who won over all and 2 chose Zapata.

It seems obvious to me two judges did NOT like the human blanket tactics and weren't giving points for it.

 

[Jaden Korr**]

Is this written somewhere? Cause it looked like they made it up on the fly.

When Dana explained it that's what I got from it, because when I was watching I was like, what if it's a draw, how do they move someone to the next round?

So I was kind of expecting something like this and wondering what the outcome would be if they scored the round for Zapata after the point was taken away.

 

[Tebowned]

The real question is how do you have your opponent's back for 80% of the fight and not finish our throw a million strikes to your opponent's head???

Give and take.

Say he threw a bunch, he'd lose position.

 

[Skydome]

fighters like stephen should be permanently banned from fighting

"superior grappler!!!"
"better fighter won!! omg!!"

wtf are you serious?
my 5 year old niece can do literally the exact same thing as stephens

holy autism

Let's not give Zapata props either. Sure, he was more active, but after the first round the other dude was GASSED. If he had any TDD at all he could have stayed on the feet.

Best part of the fight was watching Dedes reaction everytime he got taken down and Coleman after the point was taken

 

[Jaden Korr**]

I don't think Dana hates wrestling at all, he loved Brock, but that was because Brock went out there to fight. I think Dana just doesn't want the blanket stuff, and frankly, last night was one of the worst blanket performances I've ever seen. I picked him to win too, but I was very disappointed that he didn't fight. I get he was going for the rear naked, but you know how you get that? Mix it up with striking. Make him defend your strikes while you set up the rear naked. If he would have hit him while taking his back no one could complain, instead he just humped him, and I can understand the frustration.

 

[camadoquarto]

Ian won both rounds in my opinion. And even in the 3rd round it was a draw. I have no idea how Zapata won.

 

[Street Level]

Give and take.

Say he threw a bunch, he'd lose position.

Sounds like he needs to mix some martial arts together, not just use wrestling to get in a dominant position then have no clue what to do after he gets there.

This is like the Mo fight least weekend. If you use td's to gain position, then pound the other guy out or submit him. I think we are seeing a change in judging for the better.

 

[BrainBar]

You guys seem to be so pissed that the grappler didn't strike enough.

How about be upset that the striker...had just God awful grappling skills, which allowed him to be completely dominated on the ground.

The BEST fighter wouldn't get dominated on the ground like that. Which was a better striker? We don't know, because they didn't strike much.

Why didn't they strike much? Because the grappler was such a superior ground/takedown fighter, that he mopped the floor with the guy for the entire fight.

Yet, somehow, many are upset at the grappler for being so dominating...instead of saying that striker HAS NO BUSINESS in a cage with such poor grappling skills. Fact.

 

[BrainBar]

Sounds like he needs to mix some martial arts together, not just use wrestling to get in a dominant position then have no clue what to do after he gets there.

.

That makes no sense to criticize the guy who was dominating on the ground.

The striker (red) had NO CLUE what to do on the ground. Yet, we blame the grappler for making it a "boring" fight?

The fault is in the striker being allowed into that cage with absolutely no grappling skills at all. Yet, we then blame the grappler for being too superior on the ground, and GIVE THE STRIKER THE WIN? For what? Getting his ass owned on the ground?

 

[Gigaton Punch]

The real question is how do you have your opponent's back for 80% of the fight and not finish our throw a million strikes to your opponent's head???

Ask Demian Maia, cause he did the exact same thing against Jon Fitch. Everyone on here acted like it was the greatest thing since sliced bread though.

 

[BrainBar]

Simple fact is, wrestlers and jiujitsu guys are, in general, the better fighters. A guy who was an elite wrestler or high level jiujitsu guy can take 6 months of kickboxing, and get good enough to survive and get the fight to the ground most times...so long as his opponent isn't also an elite grappler.

But its impossible to take an elite striker, and give him a 6 month grappling camp, and expect him to survive on the ground.

UFC hates that. They want all strikers, but, for the sake of keeping the label of "Worlds best fighters", they must tolerate the grapplers. So now, they just punish guys for grappling.

 

[Sirwastealot]

It was a robbery. I loved it though, my favorite robbery. The guy who deserved to win, won. Its as simple as that.

The even bigger question than the title is. How can you grab on to a guy for dear life for 80% of the fight, trying to hide your face completely the whole time, just holding him and hiding your face the whole time, and call yourself a fighter?

 

[BrainBar]

It was a robbery. I loved it though, my favorite robbery. The guy who deserved to win, won. Its as simple as that.

The even bigger question than the title is. How can you grab on to a guy for dear life for 80% of the fight, trying to hide your face completely the whole time, just holding him and hiding your face the whole time, and call yourself a fighter?

Haha, um, no. If your grappling is that pathetic, you have no business in the UFC, and have no business winning that fight.

He was going for the RNC nearly the entire time. The striker was grabbing his hands (proper defense) so he has to keep working to free them. It was very clear that he was constantly going for that.

BETTER question: You walk into a UFC cage, and get taken down with ease, get your back taken, and have your back taken for 12 out of 15 minutes, and you have absolutely no clue how to get up or get him off your back.

And you call yourself a Mixed Martial Artist, or even consider yourself the best fighter?

Hes a boxer who got taken down, got dominated, had no clue what to do........and people are applauding him as the better fighter?

Twilight Zone Fighting Championship.

 

[Sirwastealot]

Haha, um, no. If your grappling is that pathetic, you have no business in the UFC, and have no business winning that fight.

He was going for the RNC nearly the entire time. The striker was grabbing his hands (proper defense) so he has to keep working to free them. It was very clear that he was constantly going for that.

BETTER question: You walk into a UFC cage, and get taken down with ease, get your back taken, and have your back taken for 12 out of 15 minutes, and you have absolutely no clue how to get up or get him off your back.

And you call yourself a Mixed Martial Artist, or even consider yourself the best fighter?

Hes a boxer who got taken down, got dominated, had no clue what to do........and people are applauding him as the better fighter?

Twilight Zone Fighting Championship.

Well no one is under any delusion that either of those guys is "the best" fighter or even a great fighter. But there seems to be a lot of delusion about "amazing grappling" in that fight. There was no amazing grappling.

He had the back of a "pathetic" grappler and was constantly going for the choke, yet never even got close. His strategy was to find the best place to hide his face so he doesnt get knocked out on the floor. Yea great job. There was barely anything in that fight you can even call a submission attempt.

So um, no. One guy's who approach was pathetic and stalling, and his grappling was average at best. Most of his "dominance" came from hanging on for dear life. And he still got beat up somehow.

Its funny that people claim to be such fans of grappling can't really identify high quality grappling.

 

[BrainBar]

Well no one is under any delusion that either of those guys is "the best" fighter or even a great fighter. But there seems to be a lot of delusion about "amazing grappling" in that fight. There was no amazing grappling.

He had the back of a pathetic grappler and was constantly going for the choke, yet never even got close. His strategy was to find the best place to hide his face so he doesnt get knocked out on the floor. Yea great job. There was barely anything in that fight you can even call a submission attempt.

So um, no. One guy's who approach was pathetic and stalling, and his grappling was average at best. Most of his "dominance" came from hanging on from dear life. And he still got beat up somehow.

Its funny that people claim to be such fans of grappling can't really identify high quality grappling.

It wasn't elite grappling...the kid needs a lot of submission work. But, relative to his opponent, who was AWFUL, his grappling was vastly superior.

You missed the handful of times he had the choke set in, but to his credit, Zapata tucked his chin.

If "average at best" was good enough to keep Zapata's back for 12/15 minutes, and good enough to impose his will on the guy, then all it says is Zapata's grappling is so bad, he has no business in UFC, and....strikers need help from refs, rounds and rules to win fights vs grapplers.

Elite grappling is sometimes hard to recognize, because so many little details are hard to see.

But sorry, pathetic grappling that wouldn't make it past the 1st round of a NAGA mid-skill level tournament is easy to see, and it does NOT belong in the UFC.

Sadly, Dana White is allowing it because, well, he'll throw punches, and they can use rules, refs and rounds to help the strikers win more.

 

[Nola213]

You're taking things too far. All Dana wants to see is some damage done. He doesn't discourage grappling per se.

What if we replace Stephens with Rousey, and Zapata with Cyborg, and have the EXACT fight play out the same way(not likely but for arguments sake). Who do you think DW would say won the fight?

Would he be talking about the amazing grappling and control displayed by Rhonda Rousey. Yea, yea he would.

 

[BrainBar]

What if we replace Stephens with Rousey, and Zapata with Cyborg, and have the EXACT fight play out the same way(not likely but for arguments sake). Who do you think DW would say won the fight?

Would he be talking about the amazing grappling and control displayed by Rhonda Rousey. Yea, yea he would.

Bottom line is, Dana and UFC want more striking. But, in general, pure strikers aren't nearly as good overall fighters as pure grapplers. So, they need the rules, refs and rounds to help the strikers win more.

How many UFC champs or contenders do you see who were pro boxers or pro kickboxers...who then learned jiujitsu or wrestling later in their career to fight?

How many UFC champs or contenders do you see who were jiujitsu or wrestling stars, who then picked up on boxing and kickboxing later, and then thrived?

But Dana knows striking sells tickets to the casual fan. So, instead of pursuing the "best fighter"......he wants the best TV ratings and PPV numbers, so they're adjusting rules to help strikers start winning.

 

[Jaden Korr**]

Simple fact is, wrestlers and jiujitsu guys are, in general, the better fighters. A guy who was an elite wrestler or high level jiujitsu guy can take 6 months of kickboxing, and get good enough to survive and get the fight to the ground most times...so long as his opponent isn't also an elite grappler.

But its impossible to take an elite striker, and give him a 6 month grappling camp, and expect him to survive on the ground.

UFC hates that. They want all strikers, but, for the sake of keeping the label of "Worlds best fighters", they must tolerate the grapplers. So now, they just punish guys for grappling.

The wreslter held the striker down for 12 minutes, yet didn't leave a mark on his face because he didn't throw any strikes. When he did throw strikes, the judges gave him the nod. That's the point, it's not wrestling, it's MMA, it's a fight, you are saying he deserves credit for the art of fighting without fighting lol.

You have to score points, if he takes the other guy down he gets points for the take down, but if he doesn't strike and the guy he took down does, then he lost points on striking. And if the judges view him as being gassed and just trying to hump a guy to get a cheap win, hey, some of them aren't going to be okay with that.

i actually had your boy winning 2 rounds to 1, I gave him rounds 2 and 3, but I was disappointed in him because he could have WRECKED zapata if he would actually fought instead of doing what he did. I thought he was the favorite to win the whole thing, lol.