TUF 19 Edgar VS Penn Episode 6 Discussion

Ian won all three rounds, and there shouldn't have even been a third round.
 
BrazilianDude said:
Because you can't win a split decision unless the majority of the judges had you winning the fight. If two judges scored it a draw, it is a majority draw.
I don't think anyone knew what they would do, because this had never happened before, but I liked their solution of scoring the fight as a whole.
Click to expand...

ahhh you're right. thanks for clearing that up. Well that's a clear flaw in a sudden victory round where it's a tie round.

Also they can't just go ahead and say, well let's look at the fight as a whole, who do you think won. Then the judges say Zapata. What's wierd is I bet Stevens won more points if you added up all the judges score cards. For all three rounds. With the one 10-8 in the 3rd, he must have, mathmatically, with no 10-8's in round one or two. If you want to "score" the fight as a whole that's how you should do it imo. If you want to start judging fights as a whole, get rid of the scorecards, or go with PrideFC rules.

So basically for me the judges just showed the world their asses.
 
It was a joke. Dana wants it to be a kickboxing match.

Strikers need help winning fights, from refs, rounds, rules. Grapplers don't. And to be a champion, you need both, but, mostly a grappling background. Its why we don't have many elite fighters who are primarily just strikers. All the best have elite jiujitsu or wrestling, or both.

But, give it 5 years. Dana will turn it into K1 with takedowns, and a "mat clock" where if the fight goes to the ground, you have 10 seconds to finish, or you stand up.
 
I still don't get how the decision was scored.

Zapata didn't win the fight if you go by standard MMA scoring. But at least he tried, so I wasn't unhappy that he got the decision.
 
If your coach is advising you to run out of the building so the judges can't reverse their decision, there's a good chance you really didn't just win that fight
 
Absolutely disgusting. Just makes me sick for Ian. I hope he gets a UFC fight regardless.

Ian won all three rounds. There shouldn't have been a third round. As for Dana's damage argument, the damage on Ian was pretty much the cuts on his head.

I think the point deduction was fair. Zapata was given an insane amount of warnings about numerous fouls, including the 12-6 elbows.
 
Some pretty horrific judging. Seemed obvious Stephens won. And Dana being completely idiot again this episode.
 
people who think stephens clearly won all 3 rounds are retarded.

it was a close fight, depending on what you value more -- positional dominance or damage.

realistically, all 3 rounds could have gone either way. stephens had no near submissions or good strikes.
 
Haven't watched the rest of this TUF season, but after seeing a lot of comments on a possible change in judging, I watched this episode.

Based on prior fights I'd have expected Stephens to get the judges' decision based on positional dominance and threatening with the rear naked choke.
I actually like that they gave one round to Zapata, presumably for the elbows which managed to cut him and the strikes which marked his face.
I'm not sure how you could give at least one of those rounds to Stephens and not give him the third round though, where he was more dominant and landed some strikes at the end. I wasn't aware of the method for avoiding draws (judges just pick an overall winner) either, and it seems flawed.
Still, if the judging of strikes over positional dominance is a trend (haven't seen it like this since Bas Rutten defeated Kevin Randleman), I like it.
 
EndlessCritic said:
people who think stephens clearly won all 3 rounds are retarded.

it was a close fight, depending on what you value more -- positional dominance or damage.

realistically, all 3 rounds could have gone either way. stephens had no near submissions or good strikes.
Click to expand...

If all three rounds could have gone either way why would someone that scored it for Ian Stephens be "retarded"? You are the retard.

The damage Zapata inflicted is overstated and it's not Pride.
 
Zapata getting credit for blood drawn via illegal strikes that got him a clear warning.
 
Bboy said:
I don't know about you guys, but BJ Penn was cracking me up post-fight. He said something like "There's no way this kid could have won the decision. Leave! Leave before they can reverse the decision! That's what I would do."
Click to expand...

Hahaha, we actually LOL'ed for real at that :D
 
ArtOfDrowning said:
As much as I hate LnP/dry humping Stephens won that fight. He actually won both first two rounds and I was surprised it was even going to the 3rd. Nothing Zapata threw was better than grappling control of Stephens. Zapata was landing elbows but also Stephens got a few subs attempts and pretty much dominated positions all fight.

That 3rd round was again clear Stephens and Zapata won via "pick the guy who should have won"? Just unbelievable. If its a draw on 2 cards out of 3 its a freaking majority draw. I don't see whats the problem, why pick a winner? Its a draw, have another round.

Also Dana Fucking White going on and on about Maz when if fact Maz was warning about elbows and fence like 10 or more times. There is no "this is your last warning", when did a ref said that? Dana just making things up. Good job by Maz for taking that point away, there were clearly more than few 12-6 elbows to the back of the head even with all the warning. Dana gonna keep on hating Maz
Click to expand...


100% agree
 
Hellboy31 said:
If your coach is advising you to run out of the building so the judges can't reverse their decision, there's a good chance you really didn't just win that fight
Click to expand...

Dana kept screaming that there was no way he could win with the point deduction so everyone jumped on board with that. It's because he, along with pretty much everyone else, didn't understand what happens when a fight ends like that. We all figured that the best he could get would be 9-9, which made people think there's no way he could win.

It's odd/funny to see so many people suddenly defending a blanket when they would give so much shit to blankets, who were actually much more active than Stephens, in past fights.
 
the best part of the episode was Mazzagati announcing the winner and saying "IAN ZAPATA!" and Zapata has to correct him.

Then Mazzagati says "wait let me do that agian"
hahahah, what a guy
 
CO68 said:
Dana kept screaming that there was no way he could win with the point deduction so everyone jumped on board with that. It's because he, along with pretty much everyone else, didn't understand what happens when a fight ends like that. We all figured that the best he could get would be 9-9, which made people think there's no way he could win.

It's odd/funny to see so many people suddenly defending a blanket when they would give so much shit to blankets, who were actually much more active than Stephens, in past fights.
Click to expand...

I hate blanket fights as much as the next fan. The issue is that most of the damage was done from illegal strikes. Be it 12-6 or the fact he consistently struck in the back of the head. This was honestly one of the worst case of judging I have ever seen followed by a complete wtf moment. I hate the fact that superior wrestlers can just dominate with ground control and win, but by the judging criteria that is simply the case. The legal strikes that Zapata landed were in no way near enough to give him the nod over 12 or so minutes of one fighter controlling the fight not to mention the fact that Stephens was attempting submissions, granted they weren't very good or close to ending the fight. I am just flat out confused as to how 2 judges gave round 3 to Zapata, just flat out makes no sense. There has long been the opinion that judging in MMA is screwed up and something needs to be done, I think this is just another blatent example of that fact.
 
ArtOfDrowning said:
As much as I hate LnP/dry humping Stephens won that fight. He actually won both first two rounds and I was surprised it was even going to the 3rd. Nothing Zapata threw was better than grappling control of Stephens. Zapata was landing elbows but also Stephens got a few subs attempts and pretty much dominated positions all fight.

That 3rd round was again clear Stephens and Zapata won via "pick the guy who should have won"? Just unbelievable. If its a draw on 2 cards out of 3 its a freaking majority draw. I don't see whats the problem, why pick a winner? Its a draw, have another round.

Also Dana Fucking White going on and on about Maz when if fact Maz was warning about elbows and fence like 10 or more times. There is no "this is your last warning", when did a ref said that? Dana just making things up. Good job by Maz for taking that point away, there were clearly more than few 12-6 elbows to the back of the head even with all the warning. Dana gonna keep on hating Maz
Click to expand...
^^this
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,236,907
Messages
55,454,508
Members
174,787
Latest member
Gladiator47

Share this page

Back
Top