Is Adesanya #2 MW in ufc history a general opinion here?

[Hazuki Ryo]

He can win all the close fights if he did slightly more than his opponents in the swing rounds

And I could be president if only i did slightly more in the swing exams

 

[RockyLockridge]

I never watched his fight versus till but losing to yoel was pretty clear

49-46 and 50-45 aren’t reasonable

The only thing that wins Whittaker rounds 4 or 5 are take downs that went no where, He got outstruck in significant and total striking in every round but 4. And even in round 4 he landed ONE more significant strike than Izzy. round 4 is the only round I'd call clear for whittaker and even that round was very close.

if you dont count takedowns that lead to nothing as much, He lost atleast 4 rounds. If you dont count those take downs for anything at all, He lost all 5.

I would score the fight 48-47 Izzy.

But 49-46 izzy is more reasonable than 48-47 whittaker I know that much. 50-45 izzy is about the same sensibillity as 48-47 whittaker

 

[RonDante]

And I could be president if only i did slightly more in the swing exams

If you won slightly more of the popular vote, although I suppose in America it’s win slightly more of the electoral college, then ye you can be president, no matter how close it is

 

[RonDante]

The only thing that wins Whittaker rounds 4 or 5 are take downs that went no where, He got outstruck in significant and total striking in every round but 4. And even in round 4 he landed ONE more significant strike than Izzy.

if you dont count takedowns that lead to nothing as much, He lost atleast 4 rounds. If you dont count those take downs for anything at all, He lost all 50.

I would score the fight 48-47 Izzy.

But 49-46 izzy is more reasonable than 48-47 whittaker I know that much. 50-45 izzy is about the same sensibillity as 48-47 whittaker

Grappling matters. The 2nd round was the swing in my opinion and the striking was basically equal, so the takedown swings it

 

[RockyLockridge]

Grappling matters. The 2nd round was the swing in my opinion and the striking was basically equal, so the takedown swings it

Edit: there was a takedown but it went no where, And he still got outstruck Comfortably. 10-9 izzy

 

[RonDante]

There was no takedown in the second round.

Yes there was

 

[JKS]

Do judges ever make mistakes in your eyes?

Judges make mistakes in moments. But it's very rare that a mistake is so big that it's clear another fighter won. 95% of the time in close fights or split decisions, the fight goes either way. It's not a mistake to judge a close fight. Those fights were not fights that were mistakes, they were close fights.

However, you can't just go around changing results as you see fit.

 

[johny ringo]

it’ll be a long time before we see someone as special as Anderson. Izzy is my number 2 choice and will only solidify it more by the time his career is over.

 

[RonDante]

Judges make mistakes in moments. But it's very rare that a mistake is so big that it's clear another fighter won. 95% of the time in close fights or split decisions, the fight goes either way. It's not a mistake to judge a close fight. Those fights were not fights that were mistakes, they were close fights.

However, you can't just go around changing results as you see fit.

So 95% of the time according to you, the fight can go either way, so let’s count it for the fighter who won in a coin flip, but let’s not count it for the who lost it in a coin flip. Do you realise how stupid that sounds?

 

[JKS]

So 95% of the time according to you, the fight can go either way, so let’s count it for the fighter who won in a coin flip, but let’s not count it for the who lost it in a coin flip. Do you realise how stupid that sounds?

Buddy, you're the only one that sounds stupid, spinning around some make belief fantasy world and changing results.

Let me repeat myself, in a close fight that goes to a split decision or even a UD where a round is decided by a moment or two, the fight can go either way. What you have to get through your thick head, is that the decision judges make is the result of the fight that stands firm and you have a winner. The fact that judges score it one way or the other, is not a mistake or a bad decision, it's the decision that is made and you go by that result. You understand?? Just to make it clear again, you don't dictate who wins fights.

While you may see all those fights Romero lost for him, the fact of the matter is the judges didn't and Romero did not win those fights in this world or any other alternate reality. In fact, I didn't even see any controversy with any of those fights, those were all very good decisions from the judges.

 

[RonDante]

Buddy, you're the only one that sounds stupid, spinning around some make belief fantasy world and changing results.

Let me repeat myself, in a close fight that goes to a split decision or even a UD where a round is decided by a moment or two, the fight can go either way. What you have to get through your thick head, is that the decision judges make is the result of the fight that stands firm and you have a winner. The fact that judges score it one way or the other, is not a mistake or a bad decision, it's the decision that is made and you go by that result. You understand?? Just to make it clear again, you don't dictate who wins fights.

While you may see all those fights Romero lost for him, the fact of the matter is the judges didn't and Romero did not win those fights in this world or any other alternate reality. In fact, I didn't even see any controversy with any of those fights, those were all very good decisions from the judges.

If the fight can go either way then both fighters should get credit for the win. You see how stupid that sounds?

so let me repeat myself, the winner is decided by the judging criteria, not the judges

 

[Hazuki Ryo]

If the fight can go either way then both fighters should get credit for the win. You see how stupid that sounds?

so let me repeat myself, the winner is decided by the judging criteria, not the judges

Judges interpret judging criterias to make a decision. That's why there are different decisions from different interpretations from the 3 judges.

In your mind, Romero has never benefited from these interpretations and he's the uncrowned champ who should have been declared second best MW of all time (do you realize how stupid it sounds?)

Let me tell you this : it's only in your mind. In reality, Romero has not done enough in any of those fights to be declared clear winner. In fact, Romero, as much as I love him, has played rope a dope a few times. He has had a body language and an attitude that indicated the judges that he was not always the man in control of the fight.

That's why he was in many close fights and that's why you can't compare his legacy to what Israel has done. Adesanya CLEARLY beat Costa, Whittaker the first time, Vettori, Pereira the second time, and has successfully defended his belt. Romero has not. That's it.

 

[Question]

After going through these last few pages, I think people should take in that just because a fight was close doesn't make it a robbery.
Bouts like Costa/Romero, Romero/Jacare. Whittaker/Romero 2, Izzy/Romero and Izzy/Whittaker 2 we're all close bouts.

Most could've possibly gone either way, but there's none where the "wrong" guy won here.

 

[JKS]

If the fight can go either way then both fighters should get credit for the win. You see how stupid that sounds?

so let me repeat myself, the winner is decided by the judging criteria, not the judges

My friend, go get help. Seek a mental health professional.

You make no sense.

 

[moreorless87]

Honestly though yeah he probably is, maybe #2 overall as really MW has always been lacking in fighters with really dominant runs.

 

[RonDante]

Judges interpret judging criterias to make a decision. That's why there are different decisions from different interpretations from the 3 judges.

In your mind, Romero has never benefited from these interpretations and he's the uncrowned champ who should have been declared second best MW of all time (do you realize how stupid it sounds?)

Let me tell you this : it's only in your mind. In reality, Romero has not done enough in any of those fights to be declared clear winner. In fact, Romero, as much as I love him, has played rope a dope a few times. He has had a body language and an attitude that indicated the judges that he was not always the man in control of the fight.

That's why he was in many close fights and that's why you can't compare his legacy to what Israel has done. Adesanya CLEARLY beat Costa, Whittaker the first time, Vettori, Pereira the second time, and has successfully defended his belt. Romero has not. That's it.

So 3 judges can have 3 different results (like Dolidze vs imavov) and you just think to yourself “this is a great system, these judges know exactly what they’re doing and all 3 scorecards are correct at the same time”

and I do think yoel has benefitted from poor judging. I don’t think he beat jacare, I thought it was a draw, but it’s not a loss so it’s essentially a moot point in terms of his legacy

“control of the fight” it’s not about controlling the fight it’s about who’s landing the better strikes, that’s what it’s always been about

beating costa isn’t impressive, it wasn’t impressive for yoel and it’s not impressive for adesanya. The guy hasn’t beaten anyone, his only good win is Uriah hall, and the “I took a round off yoel” trophy isn’t enough

Who actually cares about title defenses? Is Yoel knocking out weidman less impressive than izzy beating jared by a boring anaesthetic 5 rounder? It was a title eliminator, both men knew if they won they would fight for the title, the stakes were high for both of them. Why isn’t that win over a 3 time defending champion worth more than a guy like marvin who beat jack Hermansson and Kevin Holland for a title shot?

I will agree that you need to be a champion at the very least. And Yoel beat the champions rob and Izzy

 

[RonDante]

My friend, go get help. Seek a mental health professional.

You make no sense.

“Judging criteria decides fights, not 3 people sitting cageside who we constantly berate for nonsense decisions all the time”
“you’re crazy!”

 

[RonDante]

After going through these last few pages, I think people should take in that just because a fight was close doesn't make it a robbery.
Bouts like Costa/Romero, Romero/Jacare. Whittaker/Romero 2, Izzy/Romero and Izzy/Whittaker 2 we're all close bouts.

Most could've possibly gone either way, but there's none where the "wrong" guy won here.

If they can go either way, then both men won and both men lost. Now I don’t actually believe that, becuase there is a winner even if it’s not clear (I believe the winners in all of those bouts were not that hard to score).
someone won, someone lost, if a fight genuinely can go either way then why not speak of it as a draw?

 

[Dorkman]

Yep can't really refute. Weird guy, but the resume speaks for itself.

 

[JKS]

“Judging criteria decides fights, not 3 people sitting cageside who we constantly berate for nonsense decisions all the time”
“you’re crazy!”

Let me explain something to you dummy, the three judges sitting cage side interpret the judging criteria and decide a winner. They are the ones who use that criteria and select a winner based off that.

Like I said, you need help. One of the most idiotic arguments I've every seen on here.