Just how bad WAS the Condit/Lawler decision?

[J. Bernie Cunningham]

Rory F'd Lawler up.

Condit made Lawler look like he went for a morning jog in a gated New York community.

How would you know, you didn't watch the fight.

 

[Breaking]

And without Condit's chin being what it is he likely would have been finished in the 5th. So let's just stick to the facts instead of make believe scenarios, yeah?

The guy who claims that Condit was whipped about like Willow Smith's hair, and references street fighter to make his non-point, wants to avoid make believe scenarios...rich.

 

[Fedor>Cain]

He landed 82 more significant strikes than Robbie, which is the most in UFC history for a losing fighter...

This is the reason why people should never look at "significant strikes" stats. They are awful.

 

[riitzni]

Worse than the Diaz fight which people are still bitching about to this day.

 

[Fedor>Cain]

Atrocious. Anybody that defends it either doesn't understand what they're watching, they love Robbie or they hate Condit.

The guy was literally outstruck by 2-1 in every round except the 5th and was outstruck by 8-1 in the 4th.

One of the worst decisions I've ever seen.

I like Condit and Robbie both. Anybody saying that either fighter clearly won this fight is either delusional, dishonest, or extremely biased.

 

[Fedor>Cain]

look at the fight metric.

He landed like 130+ head shots.

Do people really believe that Condit "landed" 130+ head shots in this fight? That fight was on TV a couple of days ago and I rewatched it. There is no way on hell Condit landed that many head shots. Fight metrics are giving Condit credit for shit that Robbie slipped in this fight. Condit hit air A LOT.

 

[Money509]

I thought condit won the fight when watching it live, but im not mad about the decision.

 

[yookfarb]

People shooting down the stats need to realize they're only brought up when people who are all about how "you gotta really watch the fights to know" say shit indicating they didn't watch the fight.

A ton of leg kicks? Pitter-patter shots? He ran a lot? No one who watched the fight would say such dumb shit.

True but every single one of Lawlers strikes had power behind it.

Furthermore what is this imaginary condit knockdown you keep referncing?

 

[Codpiece]

It was bad. Overall damage it seemed like a close fight, but this is scored by rounds.

Condit very clearly took 3 rounds. Anyone agreeing with the decision is loosely/biasedly using pride rules or is a Diaz fan still filling salt shakers.

I see things exactly the same way. There is no justification at all for Lawler winning the fight under the judging rules we have. Horrible decision.

Good fight though, I hope to watch it a few more times without the emotion and just enjoy two good fighters hitting each other.

 

[DatWall]

Weird that given this incredible stat Lalwer couldn't finish him and knockdowns and damage was even.

Damage wasn't even. Condit never scored a knockdown.

 

[BigGing]

Idk it was iffy. You're gunna get a bunch of morons calling Condition a point fighter though

 

[BigGing]

Damage wasn't even. Condit never scored a knockdown.

He did in the first, it was definitely a flash Knockdown but it happened

 

[Davemeddlehed]

The guy who claims that Condit was whipped about like Willow Smith's hair, and references street fighter to make his non-point, wants to avoid make believe scenarios...rich.

Yes, because comedic interlude is exactly the same as cherry picking the most important moment of a round in a close fight. Do you have anything to add, or are you going to try and strawman from here on out?

 

[Rubberchin]

So because you felt the shots were bigger, the differential in strikes is irrelevant? No. Sorry. The 3rd round was clearly Condit. Take any hard punch Lawler landed in that round and compare it to Condit's hardest in the round. What's the difference?

I gave it to Condit on the night but I can see how 2 of the judges gave it to Lawler. Lawler, when he did land, landed harder and usually to the head. This sort of things stick in the memory of the judges at the end of a round. A lot of Condit's offense was much more about maintaining distance or trying to disguise more significant shots within it. Fightmetric imo are just wrong to count this stuff as "Significant strikes". I think Condit's performance was more impressive because he made it very difficult for Robbie to find any rhythm and to ever really get going until the 5th, but I don't think the decision was a bad one because Robbie clearly won 2 of the 5 rounds (2nd and 5th) and the 3rd is arguable.

There is something seriously wrong with any strike count system that counts a lot of Condit's strikes in that fight as "Significant" imo.

 

[Breaking]

Yes, because comedic interlude is exactly the same as cherry picking the most important moment of a round in a close fight. Do you have anything to add, or are you going to try and strawman from here on out?

When did I strawman you? Or do you not know what that means?

I said Robbie won round two, so how is that cherry-picking anything?

That's right, it isn't.

 

[M16]

They both hurt each other


Because he landed a couple of punches that didn't drop Condit in the last 90 seconds?

It's a 5 round fight, Lawler didn't do a whole lot for 4 rounds of it.

He may have landed more total strikes but the judges seen that most of those kicks were just thrown out there to attempt to keep Robbie off of him and that Robbie was landing the more effective shots through out the whole fight, Carlos is good and made it close but Robbie got the better of him

 

[Davemeddlehed]

He dropped him in the first with a short left flush on the chin, it was Condit that was caught more off balance when he was dropped in the 2nd.

Engaging actively is not avoiding the fight.

That's the product of forward momentum and being off balance.



That's a knockdown. See the difference?

 

[Davemeddlehed]

When did I strawman you? Or do you not know what that means?

I said Robbie won round two, so how is that cherry-picking anything?

That's right, it isn't.

It's the inevitable last resort judging by the direction your posts are going right about now. More and more they have less and less to do with what we're discussing, and more to do with make believe scenarios where we take away a pivotal point in a given round so we can call it Condit's round.

 

[ButtonMasher]

Was just watching today IDK if you wanna say Condit was busier that's fine but Lawler was rocking him.

That matters to me more than playing patty cake.

 

[Breaking]

It's the inevitable last resort judging by the direction your posts are going right about now. More and more they have less and less to do with what we're discussing, and more to do with make believe scenarios where we take away a pivotal point in a given round so we can call it Condit's round.

Shut up. You're the one who accused me of strawmanning you. You're the one who claimed that I was cherry picking...

If you don't want to talk about the bullshit YOU introduce into the conversation, then don't say stupid ass shit that you don't know anything about.

Condit won round three.