The Miguel Torres - Demetrious Johnson Robbery

not this shit again, upkicks, knees etc etc... what mma needs is better judges, plain and simple, let the wrestler do his thing, if he can LnP on someone, and cause some damage at the same time, then he deseves to win... but when the guy on bottom is doing all the most damage, with an active guard, conecting elbows etc etc, threating with subs.. then he deserves to win. That will never ever be possible as long as we have idiots who have not spent 1 single minuto grappling in their entire lifes... in order to judge the ground battle, you have to at least know something about grappling. Its not like boxing where who hits more wins, grappling is different.

I hope sometime in the future, before MMA dies, they can get judges like ricardo alemeida and others ex fighters to judge fights. Or at least big fights, or at least UFC fights.

God damn it I miss PRIDE.
 
the no upkicks and heel kicks and even Florian-esque elbows are completely counteracted by the no knees on the ground

knees on the ground by wrestlers would fight deciding way way way more then any thing that the dude on bottom could do

yes but they'd have to try and pass the guard first, that will lead to more action, more sweep opportunities, scrambles, etc.
 
Whilst we are it it, bring back headbutts + watch wrestlers win even more.

Not exactly. Go look at the results from when Head Butts were allowed. They didn’t finish many fights at all. This is part of the “Don’t allow strikers to do X/BJJ guys do Y because Wrestlers can’t headbutt/knee to head on ground and that makes it even.” meme. Guys biased towards american wrestling make this argument and usually also make the “learn to wrestle, this is MMA you have to know everything” argument and they don’t jive. Guys with a wrestling base know bjj and striking now so they get hurt by stupid rules against the guard/groundfighting/striking as well.

Plus, have any of y’all actually done a nasty headbutt? A dude on my rugby team in college did a headbutt and ended up with a concussion from it. He wasn’t a ‘roided up Mark Kerr or Coleman but still. Its not an “I win” move.
 
yes but they'd have to try and pass the guard first, that will lead to more action, more sweep opportunities, scrambles, etc.

yes, and at the same time ref stand ups should be removed so that the guy underneath is forced to try to sweep, stand up or submit. that to will lead to more action, more guard passes etc etc
 
That was ridiculous. What total abuse of the 10-9 system.
Posted via Mobile Device
 
That Bjj was inspirational , f*ck it that he didn't get the W , he displayed a beautiful game.
 
I was hoping Torres would get the win.. The BJJ he was showing on the ground was amazing! But like he was on bottom.. I cant really say it was a robbery tho, its pretty well known that if u are on the bottom then ur not seen as controlling..

Even if you are the more dangerous fighter.
 
I posted this in another thread about the fight. Def was not a robbery imo

Fight was close. Watch it again and note how long those sweeps were held for. Alot of the sweep attempts just helped torres escape to standing, where he got taken down at will. MM passed multiple times throughout the fight.

Torres would have lost if it was straight BJJ too.
I did the scoring ADCC, and IBJJF in another thread, MM dominated that criteria, the sub attempts were flashy, but only a couple were relatively close. The sweeps that landed were in the first which Torres easily one, but nothing but scrambles in the second, the third had one sweep, but MM had three TDs and passed guard. I break it down by the criteria further down

Its not bad judging, its not bad judges, it is what it is.
I. Effective Grappling
1. The Judge shall recognize the value of both the clean takedown and active guard position.
2. The Judge shall recognize that a fighter who is able to cleanly takedown his opponent, is effectively grappling.
3. A Judge shall recognize that a fighter on his back in an active guard position, can effectively grapple, through execution of repeated threatening attempts at submission and reversal resulting in continuous defense from the top fighter.
4. A Judge shall recognize that a fighter who maneuvers from guard to mount is effectively grappling.
5. A Judge shall recognize that the guard position alone shall be scored neutral or even, if none of the preceding situations were met.(items 2-4)
6. A Judge shall recognize that if the fighters remain in guard the majority of a round with neither fighter having an edge in clean striking or effective grappling, (items 2-4), the fighter who scored the clean takedown deserves the round.
7. A clean reversal is equal to a clean takedown in effective grappling

MM obviously gets number 2 each round
Torres wins 1 with an active guard(number 3) and moving to mount(number 4)

In round 2 the only pass was made by MM
He gets Number 2, and number 4, while torres gets 3. 2 criterion to 1. It nowhere notes they are weighted differently. So round 2 to MM

In round 3 MM gets number 2, Torres number 3, and number 4 becomes the question? Is taking the back w/o hooks and passing the guard worth more than one sweep to mount in number 4 of the criterion? I can see an argument either way. I would consider round 3 a 10-10. 29-29 draw.

This was not a robbery. A draw makes the most sense to me, and the judging seemed at least fair.
 
i think the above post is a perfect example of why judges still scoring rounds 10-9 by default is an absolute sham.

and, based on effective grappling, those arguments are correct. now let's see what did more damage and attempts to finish the fight from those positions.

i believe that clearly gives us our winner.


i'm clearly not biased.
 
The decent thing to do would have been to at least let Miguel put on some lipstick before the decision so he could look pretty while he was getting fucked.
 
Torres got robbed, just like Amoussou was robbed in Bellator recently.

Torres even more so. He controlled the fight, displayed amazing jiu jitsu and beautiful grappling. I guess grappling is effective only when you effectively submit an opponent in the judges' eyes.

This fight was ridiculous.
 
We should write a petition, to get the decision overturned !
 
Am I the only pure bjj guy that thinks torres didn't get robbed?

If he could maintain position of his sweeps, then I say he wins.

He got reversed just as many times as he swept.

As a bjj guy, I say position>submission and he did a poor job of maintaining any dominant position.
 
upkicks should be legalize against a kneeling position especially when you're in the bottom & your opponent isn't planning to pass guard or mount an offense. kidney shots as well.

it's far too easy to learn bjj defense compared to offense, give the bjj player more weapons & the wrestler would have 2nd thoughts of taking anybody down.

Head butts for top guy too
 
Am I the only pure bjj guy that thinks torres didn't get robbed?

If he could maintain position of his sweeps, then I say he wins.

He got reversed just as many times as he swept.

As a bjj guy, I say position>submission and he did a poor job of maintaining any dominant position.

I am the biggest Fitch/lnp/whatever you wanna call it supporter on here but I think MM failed in that he was technically in a dominant position but wasn't controlling the position

he gained points for the takedowns but didn't do enough to get many positional points, heck Torres landed more strikes then him from the guard
 
Am I the only pure bjj guy that thinks torres didn't get robbed?

If he could maintain position of his sweeps, then I say he wins.

i agree. with 5 passes and 3 reversals, i'd say he maintained them well enough. also holding mount against DJ as long as he did showed some amazing control.

He got reversed just as many times as he swept.

FightMetrics would disagree with you. Like I said: 5 passes, 3 reversals compared to DJ's 1 reversal. So of his 5 passes, he was only reversed once.

As a bjj guy, I say position>submission and he did a poor job of maintaining any dominant position.

really? funny how you claim he did a poor job maintaining position, and deserved to lose, and others say he *only* maintained the position and did no damage and deserved to lose.

I'd say your argument is definitely the more faulty of the two.
 
Back
Top