More controversial UFC title fights: Robbie Lawler or Benson Henderson?

?


  • Total voters
    50

ExitLUPin

K
@Steel
Joined
Oct 3, 2015
Messages
29,981
Reaction score
44,106
Benson defended the title the same # of times as BJ Penn (3).

Hobbie defended the title the same # of times as Hughes in his 2nd reign (2).

Benson had a very close, somewhat controversial first fight with Frankie he got but most scored it for him and won the title.

Hobbie had a very close, somewhat controversial 1st fight with Hendricks that he lost.

Bensons 2nd fight with Frankie was very controversial and most had Frankie winning but Benson retained.

Hobbies 2nd fight with Johny was very controversial but Hobbie took the title.

Benson dominated Nate. Hobbie finished Hory in the 5th.

Hobbie/Carlos was very controversial as was Benson/Gilbert.
 
Lawler most likely lost to hendricks but I don't give a damn because Lawler won under PRIDE rules.


Lawler lost to Condit...Pride or UFC rules, the man lost...Condit was robbed.

Benson beat Frankie twice....Benson beat Gilbert...Benson beat Nate.


Robbie lawler is more contreversial.
 
Robbie fights to the death, it's not his fault the fights are close.

I don't care if Robbie steals a victory from someone, he fights like you have to kill him to win - so it's only fitting someone almost does that and takes the belt from his psychopathic, cold, dead hands.

Assume your not going to out-battle Lawler over 25 minutes and try to murder him like he does with his opponents - It's the only way to be sure and I have no problem with that at all.
 
Benson was a career-long offender in this way (Cerrone in WEC, Josh Thomson after his title reign ended).

Also Lawler tries desperately to win/finish these close fights (last rounds of Condit & Hendricks 2).

It has to Benson. When he knew a fight was close, he flicked his hair back and threw a legkick or two. No urgency, little passion.

And for me the clearest fight out of all of the ones you mention was the rematch with Edgar, which he just clearly lost. It shouldnt even have been controversial, it was clear.
 
Lawler most likely lost to hendricks but I don't give a damn because Lawler won under PRIDE rules.


Lawler lost to Condit...Pride or UFC rules, the man lost...Condit was robbed.

Benson beat Frankie twice....Benson beat Gilbert...Benson beat Nate.


Robbie lawler is more contreversial.

How did Benson beat Frankie the 2nd time?
 
I felt Carlos definitely beat Robbie, but Bendo/Gil could of gone either way.
 
They also have in common that their opponents acted like babies after losing extremely close decisions to them, throwing hats and talking about retirement.
 
Voted Robbie just because I think his were pretty clear robberies. For Bendo they were just close. Really, the only two were the second Frankie fight(which I did not think Bendo would win when being announced) & the Gil fight which was suuuuper close.

Benson laid on people to get his splits
Whaaaat? :p
 
Giblert, Punk and Frankie 2 were all bollocks decisions for Bendo. Sure Punk wasn't a title fight, but still.

That's why purists considered Aldo/Frankie 1 a superfight. Frankie was rightful LW champ at the time. (Of course Frankie got a lucky one against BJ, but that's beside the point.)
 
Robbie%2BLawler%2BStares%2BDown%2BJohny%2BHendricks%2BAfter%2Bthe%2BBell%2B-%2BUFC%2B181.gif


This motherfucka will kill you and eat your soul

Greatest UFC welterweight Champion imho
 
Voted Robbie just because I think his were pretty clear robberies. For Bendo they were just close. Really, the only two were the second Frankie fight(which I did not think he'd win when being announced) & the Gil fight which was suuuuper close.


Whaaaat? :p

How were Hobbies robberies and Frankie 2 wasn't?
 
Robbie fights to the death, it's not his fault the fights are close.

I don't care if Robbie steals a victory from someone, he fights like you have to kill him to win - so it's only fitting someone almost does that and takes the belt from his psychopathic, cold, dead hands.

Assume your not going to out-battle Lawler over 25 minutes and try to murder him like he does with his opponents - It's the only way to be sure and I have no problem with that at all.

Yes sir, well said.
 
Robbies wins were more controversial imo
 
Also yeah Josh was very controversial fight too but it's irrelevant here since it wasn't a UFC title fight
 
I still don't understand how most of you are legally allowed to drive w/ such shitty eyesight when you believe Lawler v. Condit was a robbery.
qI9o5FtAoZJXG.gif

Condit was literally playing touchbutt with that other dork in a literal fucking park.
carlos-condit-3-1024x683.jpeg


Judges know pitter patter shadow boxing when they see it, and they saw that Condit's Touch-Butt-Fu was weak.
 
Only fight Benson probably lost was the 2nd Edgar fight
 
I have Robbie winning the most controversial title by controversial split decision.

I thought Hendricks won the first fight with Robbie and lost the second. I thought Robbie lost to Condit. I thought Benson beat Frankie the first time and beat Melendez. I haven't rewatched the second Edgar fight, but I remember being less upset about it than Frankie.
 
Love Lawler. He's like the mma version of the Ultimate Warrior in WWF. Always brings it hard...
 
Back
Top