- Joined
- Dec 7, 2017
- Messages
- 11,781
- Reaction score
- 8,999
Judging is weighed by these new criteria...
"Impact, Dominance, and Duration"
Now what is impact?
"Impact can include visible evidence such as swelling or lacerations, but is also the "diminishing of their opponent's energy, confidence, abilities and spirit.""
Till did more damage with the leg kicks, and the knockdown.
Till controlled the octagon and was always on the offensive.
Defence unfortunately doesnt earn points.
Till had the more sig strikes and his shots clearly did more damage.
Till won on impact (1/3)
Now what is dominance?
"Dominance is an opponent's lack of offensive actions in a round. "...when the losing fighter is forced to continually defend, with no counters or reaction taken when openings present themselves...Merely holding a dominant position(s) shall not be a primary factor in assessing dominance. What the fighter does with those positions is what must be assessed.""
According to this who was more offensive and who was continually forced to defend?
Till was more offensive and WB was consistently on the backfoot. Till won on dominance (2/3)
Now what is Duration?
"Duration is the time a fighter spends effectively attacking, controlling, and damaging the opponent, with little offensive output coming in return. "A judge shall assess duration by recognizing the relative time in a round when one fighter takes and maintains full control of the effective offense.""
Again Till won on duration (3/3).
There isnt 3 rounds where you could say WB won but there are 4 round in which you could see Till winning.
Fight metric has Till outsriking WB for 3 rounds and with the 2 rounds he lost by 1 strike each.
Sources: http://www.fightmetric.com/fight-details/cd117bfce747184f
https://www.bloodyelbow.com/2016/8/...fied-rules-new-judging-criteria-2016-mma-news
Till won get over it...
"Impact, Dominance, and Duration"
Now what is impact?
"Impact can include visible evidence such as swelling or lacerations, but is also the "diminishing of their opponent's energy, confidence, abilities and spirit.""
Till did more damage with the leg kicks, and the knockdown.
Till controlled the octagon and was always on the offensive.
Defence unfortunately doesnt earn points.
Till had the more sig strikes and his shots clearly did more damage.
Till won on impact (1/3)
Now what is dominance?
"Dominance is an opponent's lack of offensive actions in a round. "...when the losing fighter is forced to continually defend, with no counters or reaction taken when openings present themselves...Merely holding a dominant position(s) shall not be a primary factor in assessing dominance. What the fighter does with those positions is what must be assessed.""
According to this who was more offensive and who was continually forced to defend?
Till was more offensive and WB was consistently on the backfoot. Till won on dominance (2/3)
Now what is Duration?
"Duration is the time a fighter spends effectively attacking, controlling, and damaging the opponent, with little offensive output coming in return. "A judge shall assess duration by recognizing the relative time in a round when one fighter takes and maintains full control of the effective offense.""
Again Till won on duration (3/3).
There isnt 3 rounds where you could say WB won but there are 4 round in which you could see Till winning.
Fight metric has Till outsriking WB for 3 rounds and with the 2 rounds he lost by 1 strike each.
Sources: http://www.fightmetric.com/fight-details/cd117bfce747184f
https://www.bloodyelbow.com/2016/8/...fied-rules-new-judging-criteria-2016-mma-news
Till won get over it...
