Nunes vs Shevchenko: Who did you have winning the fight?

Who should have won the fight?


  • Total voters
    299
I had VS winning 2,3,4,5.

Nunes shouldn't have gotten points for her takedowns at the end of round 5. She did nothing with top position and VS was throwing punches/elbows from the bottom. Takedowns are meaningless without followup.
 
I think we are going to see Nunes fighting not to lose from now on, rather than going out there to win outright.

And Nunes definitely wins hands-down for worst tattoo for that God-awful lioness-morph-into-self-portrait fiasco.
 
I felt asleep after the first round. But I'll vote for Val since she's hotter.
 
Shevlinko was backing up the entire fight while landing shit.

No way she won that shit.
 
Shev in a non title bout. Nunes in a title bout or rather draw. Shev didn't do enough to take the title.
 
Easy to score fight. Val won 2 and 4, Nunes won the rest.

Val was obviously the better fighter but she played the counter puncher and Nunes was smart not to fall into her trap.
 
It's pretty evident that polls like these are mostly meaninless. MMA journalists had it 50/50 which should also be reflected in other polls if people are unbiased. I dislike Nunes and her stupid jock/douche look but I think Nunes won 3 rounds and Schevchenko 2. Schevchenko could have easily stolen one or two more rounds if she was more active and didn't let Nunes be the aggressor all the time. Terrible fight and I have no interest in watching these two girls fight again.
 
Haven't rewatched it, but I scored it as:

10-9 Nunes
9-10 Shevchenko
10-10 Draw
9-10 Shevchenko
10-9 Nunes

48-48 draw.
 
I actually bet on it being a draw. I almost won.
 
I've watched it twice.

1st - Nunes
2nd - Shev
3rd - Shev
4th - Shev
5th - Nunes

But all rounds were close, with the exception of the 5th round.

I'm not a fan of champs losing their belts in such close rounds.

So, although I had Shev winning, it wasn't by much, and shelost the 5th round clearly. It's not worth calling bullshit that Nunes is still the champ.
 
Amanda landed next to nothing of significance. People who bring up fightmetric stats are morons with no clue how to judge a fight.
and you do. Obviously you should be at the octagons side instead then.
 
I had Val winning even without the fouls that Amanda should have received for the constant outstretched fingers.

She didn't actually commit a foul....nobody ever got poked in the eyes. Infact, she never even came close, she just pawed at her hand. Hence the reason there was no point taken away.
 
She didn't actually commit a foul....nobody ever got poked in the eyes. Infact, she never even came close, she just pawed at her hand. Hence the reason there was no point taken away.

I thought the rule was about outstretched fingers and didn't need to include an actual eye poke since the rule (I think) was to prevent eye pokes.
 
I thought the rule was about outstretched fingers and didn't need to include an actual eye poke since the rule (I think) was to prevent eye pokes.

That is the new rule, but there was no foul commited because clearly Big John didn't find it be worthy of being considered a true foul. Neither did I, she never went anywhere near Valentina's face with the outstretched fingers. They are grapplers, they need to be able to use their hands, the rule is only in place to prevent eye pokes.
 
That is the new rule, but there was no foul commited because clearly Big John didn't find it be worthy of being considered a true foul. Neither did I, she never went anywhere near Valentina's face with the outstretched fingers. They are grapplers, they need to be able to use their hands, the rule is only in place to prevent eye pokes.

I didn't think the rule specified the distance from the face.
 
I didn't think the rule specified the distance from the face.

You're probably right, but that is why it is up to the ref to use their best judgement. I can't recall Amanda ever eyepoking anyone....if it was Jon Jones on the other hand...
 
Back
Top