It's clear you're the one who is biased with your emotionally charge wall-of-text lacking any paragraph breaks, and thus unsurprisingly - any substantial facts.
The reality is neither guy was landing cleanly, Till or Thompson. Till landed plenty of shots with his left, and they were the most significant strikes of the fight. The problem in general was most of them weren't clean. Just like Thompson's shot weren't clean. Both guys were moving, and especially puling back really well. There was no significant volume advantage on either side. That is just fact.
So like in any other fight, you use other analytical measures like damage and octagon control to decide the fight. Till's shots were cleaner, and thus did more damage. Thompson was knocked down, his legs visibly chewed up (somebody nobody seems to take into account in strikes, because I guess they are too stupid to assume this isn't boxing). He had virtually no control in the fight, and fought to run away most of the fight..which I'm completely fine with if it meant he capitalized on it. He didn't. He narrowly jabbed his was to a round or two.
I would not have even minded saying three and giving this fight a draw. However, acting like this fight was a robbery is absolutely idiotic and goes to show the level of intellect here. A Till decision isn't out of the question in the fucking middle of Africa, and rightfully so.
