You're acting as if these things are equally good for both fighters, and it's not even close, Shogun is still winning even when he's not in mount, he's just not winning by as much, if you are on top you are in the better position in MMA(if you aren't getting hit or threatened with subs) and he was landing strikes as well. Shogun was on top for 4:31 seconds most of which he either had Hendo mounted or was in side control or halfguard all of which are dominant positions over being on bottom like Hendo was.
Shogun landed like 80 strikes to Hendo's 8 in round 5 while also being dominated in grappling, that's a clear 10-8 round when one fighter has almost no offense and/or his opponent outlands him at 10-1 while dominating grappling at the same time. Round 3 wasn't close to as dominant as round 5 was.
I can see the argument for a 10-8 in the third but you should be able to see that round 5 was a far more dominant round than round 3 was, you left out that Shogun had a good submissions attempt in round 3.
If someone is fully mounted, and they get out of full mount, that is a "win" in terms of grappling, for the person getting out of full mount. It's a smaller win than getting mounted, but it's not like it's nothing.
I'm just saying that Shogun fans were delusional enough that this did not occur to them. It's looking like it's entirely possible that you are one of those Shogun fans. They were acting like it was the equivalent of someone who got full mount in each round, but all in a single round. I'm not talking about a "Shogun maintained positional dominance for almost the entire round," but people making a "5X dominance" argument.
You're also making the fight-stat logical fallacy of pretending that all strikes are created equal. Hendo hurt Shogun badly enough that the fight easily could have been stopped in that sequence and no one would have complained that it was a bad stoppage. The two minutes of Shogun trying to run out the round by pressing Hendo into the fence didn't bring him back in that round, he took more serious damage from Henderson's elbows than he gave out during that period.
Shogun rained down 80 soft, tired, listless and weak strikes from mount. He was also exhausted. While salting the round away and piling up points, they weren't particularly damaging.
If putting in any kind of submision attempt is that important for you, the first time Henderson gets out of mount, he put Shogun into a guillotine that wasn't seriously dangerous to Shogun, easily defended, but he had him in it. So, does that guillotine negate the 10-8 dominance? I don't think it did.
The same could be said about Shogun's heel-hook attempt that never had Henderson in any serious danger in Round 3 and was easily defended.
The judges were still adverse to scoring 10-8s back then. In that lens, they scored who won each round correctly. If you aren't adverse to scoring 10-8 rounds, both the third and the fifth are pretty easily 10-8, and the fifth is nowhere close to a 10-7. Shogun wins the round 10-8 by positional dominance throughout the round. Henderson wins 10-8 by having a sequence where he had Shogun hurt so badly that he was nearly finished and it easily could have been stopped, and then by additionally winning the rest of the round outside of that sequence. If you feel that the fifth was more clearly a 10-8, super duper, but being "more 10-8" doesn't mean the other one wasn't 10-8.
