Technical split decision

[JustOnce]

What's your point exactly? I'm not dissing Romanov in any way for not continuing. But you can't give the fight to Romanov based on the fact that he got fouled. Accidentally, mind you. If we're judging that on the fight itself, it was a clear win for Espino. Judges were told to score round 3. They must have either given that or round 1 to Romanov which makes no sense at all. If you're gonna be like tf nothing happened in round 3, then score it a draw. That was a bad decision.

No one gave round three to Rmanov. Romanov got two first rounds in two judges cards.

Now did I think Romanov lost if they scored the fight up to that point? Yeah.

But you can't give the fight to the guy who ended the fight with nutshot either.

There have been much worse decisions. Like I said, I thought Espino 2-1, but you can't give the fight to the guy who ended the ight with nutshot.

 

[dipstickjimmy]

What was the scoring???
My DVR for the prelims cut out as they were about to announce and the Main card DVR started with Romanov being the winner.

I do believe that judging a round that was only 1 minute is BS. If I know we are 1-1 going into the 3rd and I have a good minute but feel gassed I can just kick my opponent in the balls and win??? That wouldn't make sense. A clean nut shot should be an automatic point. A fence grab should be a point. even if it is seen in review/replay between rounds. Eye pokes should be a point. Foul take a point no questions so warnings.

 

[JustOnce]

Just to be clear
final score was
10-9
10-9
9-10

Romanov x 2

 

[Sticko]

I never heard of "Technical" split decision. Please educate me, the bare knuckle Vale Tudo guy.

"technical" means a fight is stopped because of an injury. Like a TKO or a technical submission.
It goes to the scorecards for a decision when an accidental foul stops it in the second half (3rd round of a 3-round fight, 4th round of a 5-round fight).

 

[Iron Skin]

I never heard of "Technical" split decision. Please educate me, the bare knuckle Vale Tudo guy.

Technical decision because the fight ended early due to a destroyed nut. They judged 2 rounds plus 1 minute and 5 seconds of the third round.
Split cause 2 judges gave the fight to Romanov and 1 judge gave it to Espino.

 

[No Mas]

Imagine wanting to give Espino the fight for having a 30 seconds mount in a round he was handily losing before, and in the second getting dominated and close to stopped by GNP if Romanov had a little more gas.

I guess he totally won those 40 seconds of that third round.

That's what listening to Dominic Cruz does to mouth breathers.

 

[JustOnce]

EVERYONE ATTENTION

ROMANOV WON FIRST TWO ROUNDS

SO THIRD ROUND DIDNT MATTER BECAUSE ROMANOV LOST THIRD ROUND ON ALL CARDS

so there's nothing shady or odd or wierd about it. Espino had mount, but before that Romanov was winning.

IF you have been paying attention to MMA for a while now, you must know that judges have been fucking over fighters who had dominant positions. Even IF they had sub attempts, and Espino didn't really go for any subs, he probably didn't want to lose positions. And I'm fairly sure it was Romanov who was going for some wierd ass Kimura from the bottom.

So this is nothing new or anything like that.

I personally thought it was 2-1 Espino, but two judges gave the first round to Romanov. It had nothing to do with the third round at all.

There have been numerous decisions that was much much worse than this one. At least round 1 wasn't as lopsided as some people are making it out to be. I gave that round to Espino, but Romanov was winning before the TD, and Espino didn't attempt any sub, I think it was Romanov trying something from the bottom as well.

All in all, at the end of the day, I don't think Espino should win that fight after ending the fight with the nutshot in my opinion anyways.

 

[SouvlakiSpaceStation]

No one gave round three to Rmanov. Romanov got two first rounds in two judges cards.

Now did I think Romanov lost if they scored the fight up to that point? Yeah.

But you can't give the fight to the guy who ended the fight with nutshot either.

There have been much worse decisions. Like I said, I thought Espino 2-1, but you can't give the fight to the guy who ended the ight with nutshot.

Ok so why are you even responding if you don't even disagree with me... all three judges gave him round 3 according to you, I didn't see the cards myself, but we'll go with that if that's what you're saying... the round that ended with a nut shot by Espino was given to Espino. So what the fuck are you talking about?

Giving Romanov round 1 makes no sense. Bad decision, don't care if there have been worse decisions.

 

[Sticko]

If I know we are 1-1 going into the 3rd and I have a good minute but feel gassed I can just kick my opponent in the balls and win??? That wouldn't make sense. A clean nut shot should be an automatic point. A fence grab should be a point. even if it is seen in review/replay between rounds. Eye pokes should be a point. Foul take a point no questions so warnings.

Well theoretically you could do that, but you would have to somehow:
1) kick your opponent in the balls so hard that he quits
and at the same time
2) also make it look like a complete accident

 

[Bboy]

All these people haven’t heard of a technical decision before. I’m getting old.

 

[Sticko]

Imagine wanting to give Espino the fight for having a 30 seconds mount in a round he was handily losing before, and in the second getting dominated and close to stopped by GNP if Romanov had a little more gas.

I guess he totally won those 40 seconds of that third round.

That's what listening to Dominic Cruz does to mouth breathers.

Espino clearly won R1 IMO. He had 2 takedowns to 1, landed more and better strikes, threatened an americana from mount, and had top control for more than thirty seconds.

 

[JustOnce]

Ok so why are you even responding if you don't even disagree with me... all three judges gave him round 3 according to you, I didn't see the cards myself, but we'll go with that if that's what you're saying... the round that ended with a nut shot by Espino was given to Espino. So what the fuck are you talking about?

Giving Romanov round 1 makes no sense. Bad decision, don't care if there have been worse decisions.

I'm saying you can't give that fight to Espino who ended the fight with the nut shot. You ever been kneed in the balls before? It hurts like a mofo. You ever been kneed by a trained 258 pounds fighter in the balls? LEt me know how it feels.

 

[Sticko]

UFC and athletic commission are literally making decisions off the cuff. Literally the last three fight cards had different outcomes from fouls. Not a good look for a premiere sports league.

UFC and the athletic commissions have nothing to do with it.

It's solely the ref's discretion to determine if the foul was accidental or intentional. After that the outcome is determined by what round we're in.

 

[No Mas]

Espino clearly won R1 IMO. He had 2 takedowns to 1, landed more and better strikes, threatened an americana from mount, and had top control for more than thirty seconds.

There's a reason Romanov was -650 live in play after the second. Hint it was not because Espino "clearly" won round 1. It was a closeish round and depended on who was judging. Romanov did more damage and had control for longer.

 

[Leafs42084]

is it an actual rule that the person who threw the knee or kick to the nuts cant sit during the 5 minutes? or was Marc Smith just power tripping?

 

[JustOnce]

At the end of the day, I think people are forgetting two things.

In the first round, Romanov was winning before the TD.

For a long time now, fighters have been getting fucked over when they had dominant grappling position in scoring, even if they tried subs, which Espino didn't really. It was Romanov trying to kimura? which probably wasn't anywhere close or just to control Espino.

Given the current trends, round 1 for Romanov isn't really shocking or anything like that.

I had Espino but yeah, it's not half as bad as some people are making it out to be.

And Espino was the one who commited foul to end the fight too. He can't win that fight man

 

[zuffazombee]

UFC and athletic commission are literally making decisions off the cuff. Literally the last three fight cards had different outcomes from fouls. Not a good look for a premiere sports league.

1. Intentional, fight-ending foul = DQ

2. Unintentional, fight-ending foul, BEFORE halfway point of the fight = NC

3. Unintentional, fight-ending foul, AFTER halfway point of the fight = Technical Decision

How is this difficult to understand & how are the UFC & the commission "literally making decisions off the cuff"? The rules have been in place for years.

 

[Murrrdah]

3 UFC fights I know of that ended by technical majority decision:
Jarjis Danho lost to Daniel Omielanczuk (groin strike)
Alan Belcher lost to Michael Bisping (eye poke)
Gian Villante lost to Ovince Saint Preux (eye poke)

In all of those fights the guy who got fouled lost. 1 judge scored a draw and the other 2 scored it for the winner.

What makes them choose that though vs other options? Just seems like a very odd thing to do.

 

[dipstickjimmy]

Well theoretically you could do that, but you would have to somehow:
1) kick your opponent in the balls so hard that he quits
and at the same time
2) also make it look like a complete accident

Rules have to be made so that those scenarios do not happen. Otherwise the Org (UFC in this case) are scrambling and look bush league. Imagine giving that win to the guy who blasted his opponent in the balls???

 

[Sticko]

What makes them choose that though vs other options? Just seems like a very odd thing to do.

Ref decides the foul was accidental. Fight goes to scorecards if it's more than half over (3rd round of 3 round fight, 4th round of 5-round fight). That's all there is to it.