"to be the champ you have to beat the champ" is a lie

[Mohawk Banditó]

Wait so damage isn't one of the judges criteria now? There's just massive inconsistency, massive interpretation of the rules, that happen all of the damn time. That one woman who always jumps in the arms of the commentators after she wins, she got a victory over a chinese lady, despite being taken down repeatedly, which led to actual ground fighting. *Repeat there's a problem in MMA/judging forever without ever doing anything about it. HERE. WE. GO.

Damage is part of striking, and judging impact and effect of striking.

The problem with the wide criteria of judging is a problem, but it's not fixed by this dumb thread

 

[Mohawk Banditó]

First Colby, now Strickland. TS is having a rough time. Everyone be nice.

If only this forum could be a space, in which he could feel safe...

 

[Killer Kadoogan]

Damage is part of striking, and judging impact and effect of striking.

The problem with the wide criteria of judging is a problem, but it's not fixed by this dumb thread

Still thought Sean did more damage as evident by the visual representation of having landed 76 more strikes, 36 more sig strikes, more strikes four rounds to one.

The problem will never be fixed, nothing will ever remotely happen, and we'll all just continue to bitch/complain from here to UFC 450.

 

[Bloupotlood]

X-files time, did you guys know Monster Energy is a South African company?

Can anyone confirm if one of the judges were drinking Monster? Just a thought...

 

[El Fernas]

TS, you are thinking about draws, there, )in doubt) the champion gets to keep their belt, cause he didnt win, and didnt lost either.

 

[Mohawk Banditó]

Still thought Sean did more damage as evident by the visual representation of having landed 76 more strikes, 36 more sig strikes, more strikes four rounds to one.

The problem will never be fixed, nothing will ever remotely happen, and we'll all just continue to bitch/complain from here to UFC 450.

But damage isn't the primary factor, like I just said.

 

[Snake Fist]

I got a feeling if the fight played out that exact same but it went down in Vegas, Sean would have go the nod from the judges, but no way was Sean walking out of Canada with a decision.

So many fighters have walked away with questionable decision victories due to the location of the fight.

In boxing Josh Taylor VS Jack Catterall was a horrifying robbery.

 

[JustforBROCK]

The champion should be a man or woman that decisively, unquestionably, won a title fight.

Sean Strickland won the title decisively against Izzy. He left no doubt. It was a schooling from beginning to end.

The champion deserves the benefit of the doubt, such as Jones has gotten numerous times in his career, or GSP against Hendricks, etc.

This is extremely sad and Strickland's life will change dramatically without the belt.

Man I bet you family really enjoys your company. /s

 

[maximus__]

The champion should be a man or woman that decisively, unquestionably, won a title fight.

Sean Strickland won the title decisively against Izzy. He left no doubt. It was a schooling from beginning to end.

The champion deserves the benefit of the doubt, such as Jones has gotten numerous times in his career, or GSP against Hendricks, etc.

This is extremely sad and Strickland's life will change dramatically without the belt.

No. The person who won the fight should win the fight.

 

[Killer Kadoogan]

But damage isn't the primary factor, like I just said.

I'm not disagreeing dude

 

[FrankNStein]

And how exactly would you propose to implement this? Each individual judge is unaware of how the other judges are scoring the fight. No one knows it’s a split until Buffer announces it. You want Buffer to read the scores, then go to Dana, and be like “Nah, we’re just going to disregard the scorecards and let the champion keep the title”? That sounds fair to you?

 

[ComfortablyNumb55]

Man I bet you family really enjoys your company. /s

They hate my guts.

 

[Elvis.]

So all the champions have to do is not get finished and convince one of the 3 judges and they get to keep their title , that doesn’t sound like a bag of shit at all
<{ByeHomer}>

 

[B ville Famous]

So if your sports team wins by a point it's not a real win?

Yeah every championship team should have a huge handicap on their next season. It’s only fair lol. @ComfortablyNumb55 is clearly a moron.

 

[Bloupotlood]

So all the champions have to do is not get finished and convince one of the 3 judges and they get to keep their title , that doesn’t sound like a bag of shit at all
<{ByeHomer}>

Creates an interesting meta of just running in circles for 5 rounds, maybe get 1 jab in for posture.

 

[Dr. Rose]

Pfffffft.

no one said this when TJ lost his title to dom. TJ was a snake in the grass everyone loved dom.

All this is just favoritism. Close fights are close. It happens. if you want to retain the belt, Either finish the fight or leave no doubts.

I agree with your point, but when TJ fought Dom, I was rooting for a double ko.

 

[chardog]

These arguments in favor of explicitly biasing the decision process in favor of the champ are very dumb. If the champ lost by the slightest margin they deserve to lose the belt, being champion means you do better than your opponent, not worse. And if it's a 50/50 toss-up, the champ should have a 50% chance of losing their belt. They should've fought better to have it not be a 50/50 toss-up if they wanted more than a 50% chance of keeping the belt

fighting is judged by judges, and the default draw favors the champ, inherent bias exists.

if your not universally recognized as beating the champ, a case can be made you shouldnt be the champ. On the flip side, if you can only score a split decision, maybe a rematch is warranted.

 

[Dr. Rose]

Did anyone else notice how contradictory this is?

If a champion should be the person who "decisively, unquestionably, won a title fight" then the champion should not "deserve the benefit of the doubt," since they did not win "decisively" and "unquestionably."

The only way this makes sense is if ts meant for the title to change hands, but that is not what is said.

 

[Bradillac]

That literally makes no sense.

 

[gentel]

If a champion should be the person who "decisively, unquestionably, won a title fight" then the champion should not "deserve the benefit of the doubt," since they did not win "decisively" and "unquestionably."

Yeah it almost makes me think that when there's a draw, champ and challenger should both get interim belts instead while the undisputed title becomes vacant, rather than "and still"

Obvs they'd never do that cause it screws with marketability and it's not fun for neither guy to win the title (also it's major bs how in a draw, neither side gets their win money)