When GSP beat Hendricks :

[Everbest]

Yet you keep bringing him up. Thanks for giving him so much attention!

"avenging defeats" is a cardinal feature of a GSP supremacist.

Because he never avenged the clear loss to Hendricks, they have a pathological obsession with him.

Fun stuff.

 

[Everbest]

Had the commission brought in some competent judges for the fight, Hendricks wouldn’t have gotten robbed

They are obsessed with Hendricks because they know it was a robbery and Hendricks had GSP's number already.

They use the "avenged losses" as a parameter for their trolling, flaming and hating, so they are obsessed with Hendricks.
All the way to accuse the guy of PEDs, blah blah blah.

They are morally fluid.

 

[Call-of-Cthulhu]

"avenging defeats" is a cardinal feature of a GSP supremacist.

Because he never avenged the clear loss to Hendricks, they have a pathological obsession with him.

Fun stuff.

Although I believe Hendricks out-pointed GSP, through an early lead, in the end Hendricks was a beaten man, on bottom, with GSP completely dominating him.

So although I believe Hendricks got robbed, from the scoring system, he's lucky the fight ended when it did, because he would've been finished had it continued.

GSP was the stronger man in the end, and was the Champion; in the same way Jon Jones was the stronger man in the end, and the Champion, as to why the judges gave him the decision over Reyes.

You cannot "beat" a champion, gassed-out on your back, on the bottom the last two rounds — and you cannot beat a champion, back-pedaling in desperation, avoiding your beating, the last two rounds either.

For a title to change hands, you've got to dominate the Champion in the end, which is why they're called "the championship rounds"; it's the last two rounds which separate the true champions from the pretender-contenders.

 

[Everbest]

Although I believe Hendricks out-pointed GSP, through an early lead, in the end Hendricks was a beaten man, on bottom, with GSP completely dominating him.

So although I believe Hendricks got robbed, from the scoring system, he's lucky the fight ended when it did, because he would've been finished had it continued.

GSP was the stronger man in the end, and was the Champion; in the same way Jon Jones was the stronger man in the end, and the Champion, as to why the judges gave him the decision over Reyes.

You cannot "beat" a champion, gassed-out on your back, on the bottom the last two rounds — and you cannot beat a champion, back-pedaling in desperation, avoiding your beating, the last two rounds either.

For a title to change hands, you've got to dominate the Champion in the end, which is why they're called "the championship rounds"; it's the last two rounds which separate the true champions from the pretender-contenders.

Wait

The guy who scored more points in the contest is the loser?

 

[Call-of-Cthulhu]

Wait

The guy who scored more points in the contest is the loser?

Yes. I think when the champion dominates the last two rounds, the judges are going to give the champion the last two rounds, as they should, and then they decide which round they are gonna take away from the pretender-contender, who faded in the end.

Why do you think judges scorecards are never shown?
So they can make changes in favor of the champion, precisely for occasions like this, when a contender did well early, but falls apart in the end.

Not saying it's fair, but it's the way it goes.

 

[Everbest]

Yes. I think the judges give the champion the last two rounds, as they should, and decide which round are gonna take one from the pretender-contender, who faded in the end.

Why do you think judges scorecards are never shown? So they can make changes in favor of the champion, precisely for occasions like this.

Not saying it's fair, but it's the way it goes.

I dunno man.

You are lucky I'm not a GSP supremacist. They would discredit you based on your join date.

Welcome to the community brother.

 

[Everbest]

Yes. I think when the champion dominates the last two rounds, the judges are going to give the champion the last two rounds, as they should, and then they decide which round they are gonna take away from the pretender-contender, who faded in the end.

Why do you think judges scorecards are never shown?
So they can make changes in favor of the champion, precisely for occasions like this, when a contender did well early, but falls apart in the end.

Not saying it's fair, but it's the way it goes.

So, the last Figueiredo fight should not have been a draw....?

 

[Call-of-Cthulhu]

So, the last Figueiredo fight should not have been a draw....?

I personally scored the fight a draw.

I don't think the Figueiredo fight qualifies in this context, because Moreno was not a beaten man, nor was he fading. Even though Figueiredo was on top in the end, it was just a takedown.

Brandon Moreno was not fading, he was still very much in the fight, IMO.

No one could say any man was the "clear winner" at the end of the Figueiredo fight; so a DRAW was a justifiable result.

In the end, GSP had beaten Hendricks, and Jon Jones had beaten Reyes, both of whom had yielded to (and were in the process of being owned by) the better man when each fight ended.

No one had yielded, or was close to yielding, and the Figueiredo fight. They both fought like Champions.

 

[Everbest]

I personally scored the fight a draw.

I don't think the Figueiredo fight qualifies in this context, because Moreno was not a beaten man, nor was he fading. Even though Figueiredo was on top in the end, it was just a takedown.

Brandon Moreno was not fading, he was still very much in t<[analyzed}>he fight, IMO.

No one could say any man was the "clear winner" at the end of the Figueiredo fight; so a DRAW was a justifiable result.

In the end, GSP had beaten Hendricks, and Jon Jones had beaten Reyes, both of whom had yielded to (and were in the process of being owned by) the better man when each fight ended.

No one had yielded, or was close to yielding, and the Figueiredo fight.

I don't agree.

That's a "pride rules" mentality. If all fights were scored that way, or damage was part of the game in a rigorous way, sure, I'd agree with you.

It is not the case.

So, in the scoring system, it was a clear Hendricks victory, no matter how the fight looked in the end.

To be clear: if those were consistent rules, I'd not dispute the argument, but I'd like to see
many decisions reversed. It is not the case.

Like I said,

welcome

 

[bjpenngoat]

"avenging defeats" is a cardinal feature of a GSP supremacist.

Because he never avenged the clear loss to Hendricks, they have a pathological obsession with him.

Fun stuff.

Imagine having to avenge a devastating ko loss to a journeyman LW in your prime. At least Fedor and Anderson didn't lose in their primes to guys a weight class behind. I know Fedor lost to hendo but that was after his prime. Avenging the serra loss isn't something to boast its a huge gigantic mark to his shaky paper thin legacy.

 

[Sweater of AV]

When GSP beat Hendricks he said he was taking some time off and Dana threw a hilarious bitch fit.

 

[Everbest]

Imagine having to avenge a devastating ko loss to a journeyman LW in your prime. At least Fedor and Anderson didn't lose in their primes to guys a weight class behind. I know Fedor lost to hendo but that was after his prime. Avenging the serra loss isn't something to boast its a huge gigantic mark to his shaky paper thin legacy.

Oh, that crowd will bring up the Ryo Chonan defeat by Anderson too. But it's clearly before Anderson had a ground game and can easily
be dismissed as "pre-prime".

Another important feature of this crowd: they are hate-based. Hating on the likes of Fedor, Jones and especially Silva is very important. It's why I don't even like to refer to them as "fans". Their mentality is more in tune with the S-word.

 

[Call-of-Cthulhu]

I don't agree.

That's a "pride rules" mentality. If all fights were scored that way, or damage was part of the game in a rigorous way, sure, I'd agree with you.

It is not the case.

So, in the scoring system, it was a clear Hendricks victory, no matter how the fight looked in the end.

To be clear: if those were consistent rules, I'd not dispute the argument, but I'd like to see
many decisions reversed. It is not the case.

Like I said,

welcome

Thanks.

For the record, I've never once said there were "consistent rules."

I also agreed that, looking only at points, Hendricks got the best of GSP in their fight.

However, from a Championship perspective; I think GSP won in the end. He was the fresher fighter, and was beating a downed, exhausted foe.

The difference between fighting and every other sport is the idea of "an ultimate winner." There's something distasteful about giving a guy a world title, when he's actually been beaten man in the end, in A FIGHT.

This is why the fighting sports always hide their scorecards, IMO, precisely to "make adjustments to the point system" in order to favor THE PERCEIVED ULTIMATE WINNER of the fight.

Looked at this way, GSP beat Hendricks and Jon Jones beat Reyes. The challengers were faded, beaten men when the bell rang, yielding to the stronger, current Champion.

In some sense, "points" mean nothing. In the same sense, "looking good early" means nothing.

In a fight we want to know the winner, not necessarily "the scorecards" like a game. Fighting is not a game.

Every other sport is "played"; boxing and MMA are FOUGHT.

 

[Everbest]

Thanks.

For the record, I've never once said there were "consistent rules."

I also agreed that, looking only at points, Hendricks got the best of GSP in their fight.

However, from a Championship perspective; I think GSP won in the end. He was the fresher fighter, and was beating a downed, exhausted foe.

The difference between fighting and every other sport is the idea of "an ultimate winner." There's something distasteful about giving a guy a world title, when he's actually been beaten man in the end, in A FIGHT.

This is why the fighting sports always hide their scorecards, IMO, precisely to "make adjustments to the point system" in order to favor THE PERCEIVED ULTIMATE WINNER of the fight.

Looked at this way, GSP beat Hendricks and Jon Jones beat Reyes. The challengers were faded, beaten men when the bell rang, yielding to the stronger, current Champion.

In some sense, "points" mean nothing. In the same sense, "looking good early" means nothing.

In a fight we want to know the winner, not necessarily "the scorecards" like a game. Fighting is not a game.

Every other sport is "played"; boxing and MMA are FOUGHT.

But there are scorecards and rules.

Your perspective doesn't really matter. Scoring the points and awarding the W to the worthy competitor is how
the UFC has chosen to go by with it.

The rest is play on words: "play" vs "fight" and so on.

 

[Koro_11]

Yet you keep bringing him up. Thanks for giving him so much attention!

I’m not outside of sherdog tho.



Anyway I got nothing against Big Rigg, I can appreciate him for what he was. But lol at all you triggered haters letting GSP live in your heads rent free after all these years. Get help brother.

 

[llperez22]

i scored it gsp but im a fan of his and was pulling for him. i did watch it twice and the fact is that it was super close and could have gone either way. I dismiss anyone who calls that a robbery.

 

[robbie]

Don't you salty dogs have anything better to do than rag on a MMA legend day after day? If you prefer someone else as the GOAT, no problem. There have been several great MMA fighters worthy of GOAT discussion which would include GSP if you are willing to look at the factual data in a fair, reasonable and unbiased fashion. Facts are very different than biased opinions and questionable assumptions. Jones, GSP, Silva, Aldo, Mighty Mouse, Fedor and a few others are all worthy of respect and GOAT consideration. Kind of pathetic to flog the same old horse every day with opinions rather than hard data/facts. For example, you don't like GSP's win over Bisping for the MW belt then perhaps Silva shouldn't have lost to Weidman twice (KO and TKO), Weidman shouldn't have lost to Rockhold by TKO and Rockhold shouldn't have been KO'd by Bisping. If you want to trot out Matt Serra, which is fine, it happened...but by the same token Bisping winning the MW belt happened. He KO'd Rockhold in R1. It's a fight, Bisping did his job, came in with a game plan and executed. Bisping won the belt. Facts mean you look at all the fight results not sort through an entire career of fights to decide which fights you like to use and which ones you don't want to use.

Silva got finished by Takase and Chonan. It happened...Silva had lost once before those two fights and 8 more times after that for a total of 11 losses. Nobody forced Silva to keep going after he lost the belt to Weidman by KO and nobody forced GSP to retire after 2 major knee surgeries and some concussion syndrome effects after many years of fighting and training. Each fighter was able to make their own decisions and pursue their own opportunities. GSP left with a 26-2 record, avenged each defeat, dominated the WW division for over a decade, wore two UFC belts including the one above his natural weight class (which Silva did not do at 205). Both Silva and GSP had long title reigns and many successful title defenses. Silva was a better striker, GSP was a better grappler. Given that Silva had problems with Sonnen who has acknowledged that training with GSP made him understand that GSP was the better fighter, I think GSP would have been competitive with Silva and could find a way to win if he was able to close the distance rather than fight at range vs. a bigger, taller, longer fighter. Both are legends as are several others. I personally have Jones at #1 despite a few close decisions which is part of the business if you leave it up to the judges. His only official loss saw Jones beating the snot out of Hamill and the 12-6 elbow was a during a period of brutal GnP that ended a fight which would have ended soon anyway even if the questionable elbow had not been thrown. Hamill was a badly wounded animal at that point. Wins over Cormier (HW and LHW champ) and many others have me giving the nod to Jones. If you want to use the PEDs argument against Jones, then you have to disqualify Silva as well since he got popped too.

 

[maximus__]

I need to watch that fight again and see if time has changed my mind about who won.

Just watch round 1. It's the only round in dispute really. Hendricks coasted round 5 and lost himself the fight.
Round 1 was an even round and the fight should have been a draw or GSP just winning under the scoring criteria at the time. Today's scoring criteria and Hendricks wins.

 

[ThunderStruck]

Imagine having to avenge a devastating ko loss to a journeyman LW in your prime. At least Fedor and Anderson didn't lose in their primes to guys a weight class behind. I know Fedor lost to hendo but that was after his prime. Avenging the serra loss isn't something to boast its a huge gigantic mark to his shaky paper thin legacy.

Anderson lost to two small japanese journeyman in his prime.

 

[bjpenngoat]

Oh, that crowd will bring up the Ryo Chonan defeat by Anderson too. But it's clearly before Anderson had a ground game and can easily
be dismissed as "pre-prime".

Another important feature of this crowd: they are hate-based. Hating on the likes of Fedor, Jones and especially Silva is very important. It's why I don't even like to refer to them as "fans". Their mentality is more in tune with the S-word.

Also.a huge difference is that yes ryo chonnan is known for that insane submission, probably top 10 sub in the history of the sport but Anderson didn't make him a champion. Georges st Pierre made matt serra a legend and a champion. He immortalised a .500 fighter in his very first title defense. How do you compare a fluke sub that probably would.have caught Marcelo Garcia on most nights compared to getting flat lined by a LW journeyman in your very first title defense. How on earth do they not see that as a huge flaw in his goat case.