That was a Unanimous decision win? Lol

[maximus__]

Just wondering what people thought of the Paul Craig vs. Bo Nickel fight because I honestly felt my perception was gaslit af at the end of it, when all 3 judges thought that was a unanimous win by Bo and Bo thought he dominated the fight. I'm starting to question reality lol, wtf?

I knew that Paul needed to do just a little more because Bo had the next white hype darling advantage in a razer close fight if it goes to decision, but never did I think that was unanimous or a "domination".

NIckal dropped the first round. It should have been 29-28.

He got picked apart in the first. No real argument for him in that round. He won the 3rd off the cut.

2nd was his based off stats, but I didn't watch this round with full attention.

Solid performance, but he showed he is still pretty green. That's two average fights in a row as he steps up to established fighters though.
He can knock out regional guys on debut or fighters with losing UFC records. He just kept himself outside the rankings for another fight I reckon.

 

[smart.feller]

I had it 29-28 for Bo. It was not a great fight, but I thought he was clearly the more active/aggressive fighter in rounds 2 and 3.

 

[Tweak896]

Sure, you can predict there might be a split decision. But thinking a unanimous or split decision is the right call doesn’t make any sense.

Edit: Well actually that’s not quite accurate. You can criticize a split decision if you think it’s obvious one fighter won and the dissenting scorecard was wrong. But criticizing a unanimous thinking it should be a split makes no sense. You’re essentially arguing one judge should have scored it differently than the other two, a common mistake that people make that think that reflects a close fight.

I've said a "split decision is a right call" for fights where they are so close I wasn't sure who won a crucial round, maybe all 3 rounds were toss ups. So I guess my line of thinking is the 3 judges should probably not all have the same guy for each round. And also there are split decisions where I'm screaming they should've been unanimous because the rounds were so obvious.

Does that make sense? Some fights I think the judges should all agree because its clear as day, and others I think there should be mixed results. I don't feel that's crazy to think that way after a fight played out. Like the ones you feel you should need to slow it down and count everything to really make the call.

 

[sonhow]

I never understood what the problem is with predicting a split decision. When a couple rounds are close or toss ups, you can assume one the 3 judges are going to score them differently, and can score for either fighter. You can't personally score a split or unanimous for that matter, but you can predict judges will.

You can predict split decision nothing wrong with that. Saying a fight should have been a split decision is dum dum world stuff. Saying that you are surprised fight wasnt split decision is fine.

 

[Tweak896]

You can predict split decision nothing wrong with that. Saying a fight should have been a split decision is dum dum world stuff. Saying that you are surprised fight wasnt split decision is fine.

Now that makes more sense to me. It's only 3 people, sometimes theres going to be a consensus. But to play devil's advocate, if a fight is a coinflip to most watching, you could still be shocked everyone chose heads. I guess this is kind of semantics.

 

[sdpdude9]

I've said a "split decision is a right call" for fights where they are so close I wasn't sure who won a crucial round, maybe all 3 rounds were toss ups. So I guess my line of thinking is the 3 judges should probably not all have the same guy for each round. And also there are split decisions where I'm screaming they should've been unanimous because the rounds were so obvious.

Does that make sense? Some fights I think the judges should all agree because it’s clear as day, and others I think there should be mixed results. I don't feel that's crazy to think that way after a fight played out. Like the ones you feel you should need to slow it down and count everything to really make the call.

Not to sound like an asshole but that line of thinking doesn’t really make sense. You’re basically saying that because a round was close, the scoring should be split to reflect that. Problem is, that’s not how it works. All the scorecards are rendered independent of one another, they don’t converse and come to an agreement together on how they’re going to score the round.

You can’t say they it wrong by all agreeing. They were either all right or all wrong. Or if you think it could either way, then any combination of scorecards is acceptable. There is a fallacious thought process that unanimous reflects not being close, but that’s not what it means. It merely means all agreed, it doesn’t speak to how close it was.

 

[sdpdude9]

You can predict split decision nothing wrong with that. Saying a fight should have been a split decision is dum dum world stuff. Saying that you are surprised fight wasnt split decision is fine.

Yes, predicting makes sense. Being surprised one didn’t score it the other way makes sense. But one as an individual cannot say not scoring it a split is the wrong call. It doesn’t make sense.

 

[Chaotic Progressor]

It was not even close to a dominant win, what planet are people on, what are they watching.

It was a mostly non-eventful, close fight.

 

[HI SCOTT NEWMAN]

I had it exactly the same as all 3 judges did, 30-27, but it was not a great performance at all, he just won the rounds by doing more, but I honestly thought he would have much more success in the striking, Paul is so slow and awkward in the striking

 

[Aurelian]

I gave Craig the 1st and Bo the 2nd and 3rd. 29-28 Bo I think is the correct score. If I remember right Bo landed some good decently powerful shots in the 2nd and 3rd that edged them to him for me. I thought Paul did enough in the first to give him that round.

 

[Bobby00]

Paul Craig could have won and it was a lot closer than people thought it was gonna be. Round 3 Craig fought like he just did win 2 rounds thats on him. Bo lacks expirience in striking and you could see it.

 

[Meathead Jock]

Bo clearly won close rounds 2 and 3. Round 1 was a coin flip, and the UFC has a history of coin flips going to the hyped prospect, so all 3 having it 30-27 isn't surprising but a 29-28 wouldn't have been wrong.

The odds never made sense on this one, Vegas must have made a lot of money because Craig was a bad matchup in terms of gatekeepers with his size/reach advantage and submission game.

 

[Tweak896]

Not to sound like an asshole but that line of thinking doesn’t really make sense. You’re basically saying that because a round was close, the scoring should be split to reflect that. Problem is, that’s not how it works. All the scorecards are rendered independent of one another, they don’t converse and come to an agreement together on how they’re going to score the round.

You can’t say they it wrong by all agreeing. They were either all right or all wrong. Or if you think it could either way, then any combination of scorecards is acceptable. There is a fallacious thought process that unanimous reflects not being close, but that’s not what it means. It merely means all agreed, it doesn’t speak to how close it was.

Still you have to admit that most split decisions are close fights. Doesn't mean unanimous decisions can't be. I guess I don't get up in arms when something isn't a split decision myself, usually just when its the wrong winner.

 

[Pilo]

I gave him the 1st, but not by much, could go either way.

I agree, I thought he won the first by half a ass hair.

The third also was quite close until those final seconds, if I remember correctly. But I wasn't shocked this was UD.

 

[Fedorgasm]

Nah, Bo won that fight, if you want to call it that. They should both be ashamed of themselves though. Both fight tentative and scared. Ugliest fight I've seen in a minute

There should be a way to assign both fighters a loss for fights like that

 

[Oscar Madison]

Just wondering what people thought of the Paul Craig vs. Bo Nickel fight because I honestly felt my perception was gaslit af at the end of it, when all 3 judges thought that was a unanimous win by Bo and Bo thought he dominated the fight. I'm starting to question reality lol, wtf?

I knew that Paul needed to do just a little more because Bo had the next white hype darling advantage in a razer close fight if it goes to decision, but never did I think that was unanimous or a "domination".

Craig spent his time posturing as a bearded gladiator and taunting like a Frenchman.

He got out-pointed by the sporadic awkward striking of Bo.

And, NO -- Rogan's fascination with Craig spamming "hand kicks" don't mean shit.

 

[CrimsonFan]

It was a weird fight.

there was no way the guy with all the hype was losing. that is just the way the judging goes. as far as what the future holds for Bo, we could not find any top 15 fighter on the roster to pair Bo up with for an easy win

I think Nickal picked the guy with the best guard in the division to fight it's kind of an odd choice. Against anyone else he will be grappling. So I don't think the fight really tells us anything about how other fights will go. It was essentially a waste of time.. but it did show that Bo's striking is not very good.


I would have liked Nickal to at the very least go for some takedown in the last 25 seconds of the rounds to really secure them. I think he did leave too much in the judges hands there. And he'd clearly approaching this as a game or a sport rather than a fight. He's gonna be in for a rude awakening when he really fights a killer in there. And it's going to be awesome to watch. But I suspect his grappling will carry him to the top of the division

 

[GrantB13]

Unanimous just means that all three judges agreed. A unanimous decision can be very close.

It wasn't a fun fight to watch, but Bo Nickal very obviously is the winner.

What rounds do you think Craig won?

I sometimes fall into this trap looking at results. A lot of probably associate "unanimous" with "one way traffic". In reality a super close 30-27 unanimous decision is the same result as a 30-25 on paper.

 

[koa pomaikai]

Bo requested Craig because his striking is shit, lay-ups should be on the prelims.

I mean a lay-up would be a bad grappler, so Bo can win in 30 seconds.