Silva vs Bisping fightmetric

[IamStryker]

I feel like this is a strong indication that you're not a mature individual and this is about to be an excercise in futility but let's see...
.

I really wasn't joking. I thought if anyone would cry over a fighter losing it would be this instance.

I just rewatched the round for the first time. Live I gave it and the fight to Bisping. Upon rewatching I think it could go either way.

First thing is that the majority of Bisping's strikes were blocked or dodged. And most of the strikes Bisping was landing were grazing, partially blocked, and not at all stiff and flush. Throughout the round as Bisping is dictating the pace and firing off shots Silva is sticking him with fast, flush, and stiff jabs. And then he goes on to pour it on with by far the most effective action of the round in the last 30-60 seconds.

So if you want to give it to Bisping for pushing the pace and landing more I won't argue. If you want to give it to Anderson for landing the most effective strikes, doing the most damage, and Bisping being hurt the most then I also won't argue.

I really doubt that you would feel this way if it wasn't Anderson. Not going to argue with you about it as I have seen too many of your posts in the past.

 

[TheComebackKid]

I really wasn't joking. I thought if anyone would cry over a fighter losing it would be this instance.

I was thoroughly entertained by this fight. Got to see vintage a Anderson fight complete with all kinds of fuckery and was genuinely happy seeing Bisping get the biggest win of his career. You're reaching.

I really doubt that you would feel this way if it wasn't Anderson. Not going to argue with you about it as I have seen too many of your posts in the past.

Ok

 

[Supereem]

Meh didn't slay shit, Bisping head looked like it got run over by a lawn mower

History only remembers the victors.

 

[rpn453]

Fightmetric sets a very low bar for what constitutes a significant strike. Rewatching, the fight, I counted significant strikes as follows, with each round having a single strike that clearly hurt the opponent:

Round 1: Bisping 7 - 3. Silva was visibly affected by a punch near the end of the round.
Round 2: Bisping 8 - 5. Silva was dropped by a punch near the end of the round but immediately recovered on the way down.
Round 3: Silva 14 - 8. Bisping was dropped by a devastating knee at the end of the round.
Round 4: Bisping 13-10. Bisping was visibly affected by a punch near the end of the round.
Round 5: Silva 8 - 4. Bisping was visibly affected by a front kick near the middle of the round.
Total: 40 - 40.

My scoring was the same as it was upon first watch:

Bisping 10-9
Bisping 10-9
Silva 10-8
10-10
Silva 10-9
48-47 Silva

But I have no problem with the decision. I can understand giving Silva a 10-9 in the third, considering the situation at the end of the round, which some may have felt was unsportsmanlike. I can also understand perceiving either fighter to have had the advantage in round 4. So I believe the fight could be reasonably scored anywhere from 48-46 Silva to 48-47 Bisping.

I still couldn't understand the GSP-Hendricks decision when I rewatched that one. There was a clear round for GSP, a clear round for Hendricks, a dominant round for Hendricks, and two close rounds. 49-47 Hendricks. I think Hendricks had the edge in one of the close rounds and GSP in the other, but even giving GSP those two rounds should only result in a draw. Scoring those close rounds in favor of GSP only strengthens the argument for a 10-8 Hendricks round. The only way that fight can be scored for GSP is if the judges believe that the only possible score for a round is 10-9. I can't agree with that. It's too simple to accurately represent a fight.

I am a GSP fan who always got nervous before his fights and I was in a room with about ten other Canadians who were also cheering for GSP during that fight. We were quiet by the end of the fight and in disbelief at the decision. That decision was not a reasonable representation of how the fight went. We all knew he got his ass kicked.

 

[suffersystem]

Fightmetric sets a very low bar for what constitutes a significant strike. Rewatching, the fight, I counted significant strikes as follows, with each round having a single strike that clearly hurt the opponent:

Round 1: Bisping 7 - 3. Silva was visibly affected by a punch near the end of the round.
Round 2: Bisping 8 - 5. Silva was dropped by a punch near the end of the round but immediately recovered on the way down.
Round 3: Silva 14 - 8. Bisping was dropped by a devastating knee at the end of the round.
Round 4: Bisping 13-10. Bisping was visibly affected by a punch near the end of the round.
Round 5: Silva 8 - 4. Bisping was visibly affected by a front kick near the middle of the round.
Total: 40 - 40.

My scoring was the same as it was upon first watch:

Bisping 10-9
Bisping 10-9
Silva 10-8
10-10
Silva 10-9
48-47 Silva

But I have no problem with the decision. I can understand giving Silva a 10-9 in the third, considering the situation at the end of the round, which some may have felt was unsportsmanlike. I can also understand perceiving either fighter to have had the advantage in round 4. So I believe the fight could be reasonably scored anywhere from 48-46 Silva to 48-47 Bisping.

I still couldn't understand the GSP-Hendricks decision when I rewatched that one. There was a clear round for GSP, a clear round for Hendricks, a dominant round for Hendricks, and two close rounds. 49-47 Hendricks. I think Hendricks had the edge in one of the close rounds and GSP in the other, but even giving GSP those two rounds should only result in a draw. Scoring those close rounds in favor of GSP only strengthens the argument for a 10-8 Hendricks round. The only way that fight can be scored for GSP is if the judges believe that the only possible score for a round is 10-9. I can't agree with that. It's too simple to accurately represent a fight.

I am a GSP fan who always got nervous before his fights and I was in a room with about ten other Canadians who were also cheering for GSP during that fight. We were quiet by the end of the fight and in disbelief at the decision. That decision was not a reasonable representation of how the fight went. We all knew he got his ass kicked.

I thought there were no 10-10 scores in unified rules?


Because otherwise you are not actually scoring the fight using the acrtual rules they fought in.

Same with how people keep mentioning Pride. This is not Pride. Pride died a long time ago, and if people want to fight thinking they are fighting pride rules, then they will continue to lose using pride rules.

 

[rpn453]

I thought there were no 10-10 scores in unified rules?

There are. They just don't like anyone using them. I guess it's not good for the sports betting industry or something. Better to have clear wins for that purpose than to give fighters records that accurately reflect the closeness of some of their battles.

"The 10-Point Must System will be the standard system of scoring a bout. Under the 10-Point Must Scoring System, 10 points must be awarded to the winner of the round and nine points or less must be awarded to the loser, except for an even round, which is scored (10-10).

. . .

A round is to be scored as a 10-10 Round when both contestants appear to be fighting evenly and neither contestant shows superiority by even a close margin. This score should rarely be used."

http://abcboxing.com/Unified_Rules_of_MMA_Judging_Criteria.pdf

If they don't want those used, then more 10-8 and 10-7 rounds should be scored.

 

[suffersystem]

There are. They just don't like anyone using them. I guess it's not good for the sports betting industry or something. Better to have clear wins for that purpose than to give fighters records that accurately reflect the closeness of some of their battles.

"The 10-Point Must System will be the standard system of scoring a bout. Under the 10-Point Must Scoring System, 10 points must be awarded to the winner of the round and nine points or less must be awarded to the loser, except for an even round, which is scored (10-10).

. . .

A round is to be scored as a 10-10 Round when both contestants appear to be fighting evenly and neither contestant shows superiority by even a close margin. This score should rarely be used."

http://abcboxing.com/Unified_Rules_of_MMA_Judging_Criteria.pdf

Well, you learn something new every day. I honestly thought there were no 10-10's. Good to know.

 

[mudrubble]

Of course Bisping dominated the fight save for the cheap knee. It is only blind fanboys who cannot see this.

Cheap? The knee was one of the best parts of the fight. The execution was lightening. It was a glimpse of old Silva. I just WISH he'd gone for the g'n'p do Herb could have stopped it.

Is it cheap because his opponent was trying to play referee at the time?