michael bisping hurt luke rockhold's feelings for like 13 minutes

Hello may i interject?

You seen to have forgotten the fact that Bisping dropped Andy on his ass not once but twice.

Well of course you did because it doesn't fit your narrative.

My narrative? I remembered that. I gave Bisping those rounds. That is why I had it 48-47 Anderson. He did not do enough damage in the other rounds.
 
Last edited:
My narrative? I remembered that. I gave Bisping those rounds. That is why I had it 48-47 Anderson.

Just seemed worth mentioning instead of giving Bisping no credit at all.

On the end of the day Bisping dropped him twice and was only dropped once himself.


Booyah!
 
I agree Bisping won the decision easily, but the problem is it never should've gone there to begin with. That flying knee was a TKO. Herb on the herb again.
na, he wasnt out
 
Sherdoggers gonna Sherdog, lol

You were disputing my point that image searches of fights are generally indicative of the most significant moments in that fight, remember? But you just posted a really old meme, so I can only imagine that you can't formulate any more ideas and are settling into the meme reply portion of this discussion, so I'll just leave now... also a heads up, maybe you'd get a better reaction if you used some less played-out memes. What's next, Picard facepalm?
so you think that google images is a good way of knowing who won a fight?

were you dropped as a child?
 
Just seemed worth mentioning instead of giving Bisping no credit at all.

On the end of the day Bisping dropped him twice and was only dropped once himself.


Booyah!

Yeah, Bisping did much better than I expected.

Take my scores with a grain of salt obviously... I have scoring idiosyncrasies like everyone else, and I don't like rewarding point fighters... If one guy lands more overall strikes but I feel like the other guy did more damage, I will almost always give it to the latter guy. For me to give someone a round on points when they took the more damaging strikes, they would need to either have a massive differential in strikes landed, or have visibly worn the other guy down with volume. I didn't think those were applicable in at least 3 of the rounds in the Anderson fight.

The funniest thing about all this is that I'm actually a Bisping fan. Thought he was underrated for years... I just also thought he lost that Silva fight
 
Find me any dominant victory where the image results consist entirely of pictures of the losing fighter landing shots.
condit.png

121_georges_st-pierre_vs_carlos_condit_gallery_post.0.jpg

(49-46, 50-45, 50-45)
 
It's a snapshot of the most searched for and therefore significant moments of the fight. The fact that there isn't a single shot of Bisping landing should tell you something.

You should really rewatch the fight instead of looking at Google images. Bisping clearly won rounds 1, 2 and 4.

UnawareBowedChinchilla-size_restricted.gif
 

Nice try.

Actual search results:

2cfxhfq.png


My point isn't that image results tell you everything that happened in a fight obviously. But when you tell me someone won a fight 4-1 and I can't find a single image of them landing, I call bullshit on that not being at least a close fight
 
Nice try.

Actual search results:

2cfxhfq.png
click the next page for the other pic(it'll be one of the first ones), or are you classing GSP hugging Condit on the ground as a strike?

this is the dumbest way of deciding who won a fight though.... try actually watching and understanding fighting, it tends to help!
 
click the next page for the other pic(it'll be one of the first ones), or are you classing GSP hugging Condit on the ground as a strike?

this is the dumbest way of deciding who won a fight though.... try actually watching and understanding fighting, it tends to help!

...

It's not about proving who won a fight, dumbasses. It's about disproving a claim that someone won a fight dominantly.

For the record here are some image results from actual dominant decisions:


24kz86g.png



4uyyw7.png


Can you seriously not notice the difference between these and the bisping-silva results?
 
Last edited:
Yeah, Bisping did much better than I expected.

Take my scores with a grain of salt obviously... I have scoring idiosyncrasies like everyone else, and I don't like rewarding point fighters... If one guy lands more overall strikes but I feel like the other guy did more damage, I will almost always give it to the latter guy. For me to give someone a round on points when they took the more damaging strikes, they would need to either have a massive differential in strikes landed, or have visibly worn the other guy down with volume. I didn't think those were applicable in at least 3 of the rounds in the Anderson fight.

The funniest thing about all this is that I'm actually a Bisping fan. Thought he was underrated for years... I just also thought he lost that Silva fight


The only way you can say you thought he lost that fight is if you truly believe it should have been stopped in the third. He won rounds 1,2 ,4 clearly, and imho won 4:59:58 min of the third. You can call it point fighting if you want but Bisping was actually fighting! Ole Andy didn't do jack shit until that knee then for whatever reason turned it on in the fifth, he won that one for sure.

Andy got boxed up for 4 rounds and you'll be much better off when you can just accept that fact.

:D
 
Last edited:
The only way you can say you thought he lost that fight is if you truly believe it should have been stopped in the third. He won rounds 1,2 ,4 clearly, and imho won 4:59 min of the third. You can call it point fighting if you want but at least Bisping was fighting! Ole Andy didn't do jack shit until that knee then for whatever turned it on in the fifth, he won that one for sure.

Andy got boxed up for 4 rounds and you'll be much better off when you can just accept that fact.

:D

Boxed up... Andy looked like he'd gone for a light jog after the fight. All of that boxing up really didn't seem to have much effect... even the knockdowns didn't do much, Andy fell back, did not look out and immediately pulled guard.

I just didn't think Bisping did enough damage to give him some of those rounds.
 
...

It's not about proving who won a fight, dumbasses. It's about disproving a claim that someone won a fight dominantly.
nobody said it was dominant, but it was obvious to anyone who watched the fight who won it.... apart from you and the odd idiot that has no clue about fighting!
 
Boxed up... Andy looked like he'd gone for a light jog after the fight. All of that boxing up really didn't seem to have much effect... even the knockdowns didn't do much, Andy fell back, did not look out and immediately pulled guard.

I just didn't think Bisping did enough damage to give him some of those rounds.
but he done more than Anderson in those rounds, which is why he won!
 
nobody said it was dominant, but it was obvious to anyone who watched the fight who won it.... apart from you and the odd idiot that has no clue about fighting!

You said it was 4-1 Bisping! None of the judges gave Bisping more than 3 rounds!

And I'm the idiot who has no clue about fighting... lol. I've been watching MMA for 23 years man.
 
You said it was 4-1 Bisping!
and? You do realise that even the most competitive fight can end 50-45 right? All that has to happen is one guy edges another guy each round.

you really dont know anything about fighting do you?
 
Back
Top