Was Penn/Edgar 1 a robbery?

No, it was just a close fight, thought Edgar won but was semi expecting them to give the decision to BJ because he is BJ.
 
48-47 Penn. First 3 went to Penn.

Not a robbery because it was a typical Edgar tap and run snoozefest.

Some goofball judge had it 50-45 Edgar.
 
some people on sherdog act as if it is a given that BJ was robbed, but I never saw it like that. Edgar was at his pitty-pat best while BJ did nothing to earn the victory. It was just a closer version of what their second fight was, where Edgar won decisively
 
It was very close. Not the definition of robbery. If Penn had blatantly won the fight, then it would be a robbery. Everyone around here cries "robbery" when the decision does not favor their fighter.
 
Last edited:
The 50-45 and 49-46 cards for Frankie were retarded, he has no argument for winning either of the 1st 2 rounds. Rounds 3-5 were close/competitive enough that a Frankie win wasnt the worst thing in the world but most did have BJ taking at least 3 rounds.
 
Big Penn fan but no it wasn'the a robbery. I thought Penn won 3 rounds to 2 but Edgar winning 3 rounds to 2 is completely reasonable
 
Frankie 3 Penn 0
salty BJ fans can't stand that Frankie owns him
 
It was a bad decision. Maybe not bad enough to call it a robbery, but then again, maybe it was.



People need to remember that this was right after greasegate, during the period of Penn's career where he was the most hated fighter in the sport by leaps and bounds. His fans were pretty rabid, almost like Conor fans, and his haters were a million times worse (as haters always are.)


This is one of those fights where you can't rely on fans' opinions. If you listened to the fans, Edgar schooled him and it wasn't close. If you're an objective viewer who understands striking and MMA, very hard to score it for Edgar. He was busy but not effective. Penn was countering with the left hook almost every time Edgar came in.
 
I had Penn winning cause I didn't like Edgar at the time. But it was close. Wasn't too mad at it
 
I definitely gave it to Penn.

Not a robbery just a bad decision. I thought it was close but Penn clearly won.
 
IngaVovchanchyn said:
You want salt? Let's talk about how Ben Henderson owns Frankie. Bendo 2 Frankie 0.
Click to expand...
Ooooooo that second Bendo fight was baaaaad though. Maybe worse than Penn vs Edgar 1
 
Gun'n'Run said:
It was a bad decision. Maybe not bad enough to call it a robbery, but then again, maybe it was.



People need to remember that this was right after greasegate, during the period of Penn's career where he was the most hated fighter in the sport by leaps and bounds. His fans were pretty rabid, almost like Conor fans, and his haters were a million times worse (as haters always are.)


This is one of those fights where you can't rely on fans' opinions. If you listened to the fans, Edgar schooled him and it wasn't close. If you're an objective viewer who understands striking and MMA, very hard to score it for Edgar. He was busy but not effective. Penn was countering with the left hook almost every time Edgar came in.
Click to expand...

Plus BJ was considered the near untouchable LW at the time, destroying pretty much anyone he fought at the weight, was a -900 favorite (odds wise its a top 10ish upset in MMA i think) and practically everyone expected him to finish Frankie. When guys have that kind of mystique and a huge underdog makes it a competitive fight to the scorecards there is always bias there ITO scoring.
 
Eater of Souls said:
It was very close. Not the definition of robbery. If Penn had blatant won the fight, then it would be a robbery. Everyone around here cries "robbery" when the decision does not favor their fighter.
Click to expand...
Have you ever seen an actual "robbery"?

Evan Dunham vs Tyson Griffin was close. Some judge gave that fight to Griffin.
 
skysolo said:
Have you ever seen an actual "robbery"?

Evan Dunham vs Tyson Griffin was close. Some judge gave that fight to Griffin.
Click to expand...

Yeah, but do not remember them off the top of my head. I know there were a couple where I was like "HOLY SHIT WHAT THE FUCK!!!!" and I do not really get worked up about shit.
 
It was certainly a bad decision. And combined with the fact that they took a champion's belt away with a bad decision, I consider it a robbery.

BJ out-landed Frankie in each of the first 3 rounds. And you don't have to be a rocket scientist to recognize that BJ is the more powerful striker -- by a significant margin. So if BJ landed more shots than Frankie in each of the first 3 rounds, AND he landed the harder shots, it seems readily apparent that he won those rounds. Not to mention the fact that he stuffed all of Frankie's takedown attempts in those rounds.

The first round was clear -- BJ almost doubled Frankie in strikes landed. In the second and third rounds, BJ threw more strikes, landed more shots, landed harder shots, and stuffed all takedown attempts -- that's a pretty solid case for winning those rounds. The fourth was closer, with Frankie landing one more strike. But again, BJ hits harder and he stuffed all of Frankie's takedown attempts. I think reasonable people can disagree about this round. The fifth was all Edgar.

In summation, scores of 49-46 or 48-47 for BJ seem most appropriate. Scoring the fight for Edgar doesn't quite add up. And 50-45 and 49-46 for Edgar, as two judges scored it, borders on criminal.
 
The scorecards were messed up but it wasnt a robbery i remember when they were reading the score cards i was on the edge of my seat as a bj fan didnt know who won coulda been bj coulda been frankie
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,236,898
Messages
55,453,446
Members
174,785
Latest member
ljae89

Share this page

Back
Top