- Joined
- Dec 24, 2010
- Messages
- 36,793
- Reaction score
- 9,752
I don't get the Costa gassing comment, he has consistently shown good cardio and fights at a very fast pace.
Media Whittaker on the 29-28 scores, having to fight this version of Costa + his questioned chin
- Thread starter Unheralded Truth
- Start date
- Joined
- Jul 28, 2022
- Messages
- 2,058
- Reaction score
- 3,522
Post fight Hobbit was not giving any credit to Costa, at least that has changet in this ten days. He admitted in the submission radio interview that the kicks were fast and his opponent was much faster than he thought he would be.
I don’t get why the fighters often down play their opponents skills or abilities, for me it would be much cooler to win against a high level opponent.
- Joined
- Jan 20, 2002
- Messages
- 35,824
- Reaction score
- 30,497
More than likely.
Still an argument at least you could give it to Rob. “Edged” suggest it was close.
- Joined
- Dec 24, 2010
- Messages
- 36,793
- Reaction score
- 9,752
Yeah it's like he's trying to diminish his own victory it's weird.
- Joined
- Dec 24, 2010
- Messages
- 36,793
- Reaction score
- 9,752
A round can both be close and clear on who won, they aren't mutually exclusive concepts.
- Joined
- Oct 20, 2021
- Messages
- 1,628
- Reaction score
- 3,753
costa should move up to 205. he loses too many fights due to running on empty at the start of round 2
- Joined
- Jan 22, 2006
- Messages
- 6,071
- Reaction score
- 17,137
I disagree that costa would have gassed. He gassed once against Rockhold at elevation on a card where literally everyone gassed (except Merab the freak). Look at the Vettori fight he “looked” gassed r4 but went into overdrive winning r5 comfortably bringing the fight into Vettori’s face the entire last 5min. People think it’s all jokes with him but he is an incredibly well conditioned athlete that shows that he stays dangerous the entire fight every single time.
- Joined
- Jan 20, 2002
- Messages
- 35,824
- Reaction score
- 30,497
- Joined
- Dec 24, 2010
- Messages
- 36,793
- Reaction score
- 9,752
I mean you're definitely in the minority on that opinion.
- Joined
- Jul 28, 2022
- Messages
- 2,058
- Reaction score
- 3,522
I don’t think it’s a weight cut related thing. He gassed just like that in the fight against Vettori and that was 205. Then he got a second wind in the next round and continued to push the same pace for 3 rounds. It’s more like how your body deals with lactic acid buildup.
- Joined
- Feb 22, 2014
- Messages
- 921
- Reaction score
- 710
That's not what the rules say:
"Contribute towards the end of the match" are the key words here. On those criteria, Costa ekes out the round, but it's close. Head shots that don't results in some brain rattling, an eyebrow cut, or a broken nose don't usually do that much towards ending an MMA match; they don't wear a fighter down the way body and leg shots can. On body/leg shots the fighters were pretty even, so it comes down to whether a landed head kick that didn't do much apparent damage does more towards ending a fight than a bunch of landed head punches that did very little apparent damage each. We can't really know for sure, but that kick was more likely to be a brain-rattler than any of the head punches that led to Whittaker's striking advantage, so yes, Whittaker taking Round 1 is probably the right call, but if a judge had some good angle on the punches landed by Whittaker where some hard neck-snapping by Costa was more apparent than on the standard video shots, giving the round to Whittaker would have been entirely reasonable.
- Joined
- Jan 20, 2002
- Messages
- 35,824
- Reaction score
- 30,497
Yeah, the myriad threads about it, suggest it is an open and shut case.
- Joined
- Dec 24, 2010
- Messages
- 36,793
- Reaction score
- 9,752
Minority doesn't mean zero.
Robert Whittaker def. Paulo Costa :: UFC 298 :: MMA Decisions
You're in a very small minority of people though. Very few people had Whittaker winning round 1.
Costa gets round 1 under the current criteria because there is a heavy emphasis on the 'immediate.'
But anyone claiming Whittaker just 'barely outpointed him', or didn't do any damage himself are complete morons considering what Whittaker did to Costa's legs. You don't get to go full Cecil Peoples and just ignore leg kicks.
People are exaggerating how meaningful the kick was and downplaying how comfortably Whittaker otherwise won that round in order to justify their overly simplistic understanding of the criteria.
- Joined
- Aug 8, 2020
- Messages
- 21,851
- Reaction score
- 49,122
This reminds me of Bisping vs Hendo ll.
In the second round Bisping was easily winning the round on points, imo. After almost getting massacred in round 1 by an H-Bomb with plenty of GnP. Then right at the end of round 2 he landed another H-Bomb. But could not follow it up before the bell, iirc. The question was does one great strike with a KD win you the round when you were obviously losing the round?
2 judges said yes, and one said no. In real time I was watching this at an RV park in Arkansas. We had excellent WiFi on the trailer as it’s own hotspot. I actually watched a fair amount of UFC cards while we were on the road all over the US.
I gave Bisping that round. But I don’t disagree if you gave it to Hendo. Luckily the scores in round two didn’t change the overall score. Bisping still won three rounds on all 3 official scorecards. So it was 48-47 X 2. And 49-46 on the other scorecard. You could make the case round 1 was 10-8 Hendo. But in 2016, 10-8 was rarer than they are now with the changes they’ve made to scoring.
In real time I was tempted to give Whittaker round 1. For about a second. Whittaker was on Bambi legs for a few seconds. But didn’t even get knocked down. And did recover pretty quickly. I scored round one for Costa. 29-28 Whittaker.
It’s always going to be up to each individual whether you agree or not. I always just give my score/opinion, and move on.
Some people gave Whittaker the round, including himself. And I can see how, or why. And if you are a fair judge. If you honestly thought Whittaker won the round, that’s fine. But I respectfully disagree, and I really wanted Whittaker to win.
Judging is often about perception, from your pov. And personal biases can play a role in your perception. Even if you don’t actually realize you’re doing it. And watching on tv we all get the same pov. But the judges literally all have a different pov to eachother, and the tv audience.
I just hope the judges get the right winner in a decision. And in both cases I thought the proper fighter won both fights.
In the second round Bisping was easily winning the round on points, imo. After almost getting massacred in round 1 by an H-Bomb with plenty of GnP. Then right at the end of round 2 he landed another H-Bomb. But could not follow it up before the bell, iirc. The question was does one great strike with a KD win you the round when you were obviously losing the round?
2 judges said yes, and one said no. In real time I was watching this at an RV park in Arkansas. We had excellent WiFi on the trailer as it’s own hotspot. I actually watched a fair amount of UFC cards while we were on the road all over the US.
I gave Bisping that round. But I don’t disagree if you gave it to Hendo. Luckily the scores in round two didn’t change the overall score. Bisping still won three rounds on all 3 official scorecards. So it was 48-47 X 2. And 49-46 on the other scorecard. You could make the case round 1 was 10-8 Hendo. But in 2016, 10-8 was rarer than they are now with the changes they’ve made to scoring.
In real time I was tempted to give Whittaker round 1. For about a second. Whittaker was on Bambi legs for a few seconds. But didn’t even get knocked down. And did recover pretty quickly. I scored round one for Costa. 29-28 Whittaker.
It’s always going to be up to each individual whether you agree or not. I always just give my score/opinion, and move on.
Some people gave Whittaker the round, including himself. And I can see how, or why. And if you are a fair judge. If you honestly thought Whittaker won the round, that’s fine. But I respectfully disagree, and I really wanted Whittaker to win.
Judging is often about perception, from your pov. And personal biases can play a role in your perception. Even if you don’t actually realize you’re doing it. And watching on tv we all get the same pov. But the judges literally all have a different pov to eachother, and the tv audience.
I just hope the judges get the right winner in a decision. And in both cases I thought the proper fighter won both fights.
- Joined
- Jan 20, 2002
- Messages
- 35,824
- Reaction score
- 30,497
Minority doesn't mean zero.
Robert Whittaker def. Paulo Costa :: UFC 298 :: MMA Decisions
mmadecisions.com
You're in a very small minority of people though. Very few people had Whittaker winning round 1.
Never said I did. I just said there was an argument to give it to Whitaker……which there obviously was.
- Joined
- Jan 20, 2002
- Messages
- 35,824
- Reaction score
- 30,497
Basically.
- Joined
- Dec 24, 2010
- Messages
- 36,793
- Reaction score
- 9,752
It's a very poor argument.
- Joined
- Jan 20, 2002
- Messages
- 35,824
- Reaction score
- 30,497
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2012
- Messages
- 3,888
- Reaction score
- 7,366
They really need to start scoring fights as a whole again, gives fighters a much clearer idea of who is winning as the fight progresses then guessing which rounds they’ve won.
