Discussion in 'UFC Discussion' started by Pitier of Fools, Jan 3, 2015.
Neither loss takes anything away from either fighter.
So the point is moot.
Jones first loss? You mean his only loss?
Fedor has like 3 or 4 more now, all by stoppage.
Fedor's first loss was more legit, Arona clearly beat him under any ruleset :wink:
I'm not sure if most organisations allowed elbows to the head back then. In Japan pretty much none did and it was the Mecca of MMA.
I still say that had to of been rigged somehow. Watched it many times now, can never get over it. I was never much for Arona, but getting that win he deserved could of helped him for sure.
Fedor, doctor stoppage vs a fight Jones was eviscerating his opponent to the point where they DQ'ed him.
When did the ufc ever NOT allow elbows to the non-back of the head? If you look up the rules back then you might find they even allowed them to the back of the head. Maybe it was earlier that the back of the head rule was taken out, but as they started in the mid 90's to late it was there.
Thanks John McCain!
I don't get what's not legit about the Jones loss. He clearly broke the rules and the rules in this instance were clear about the consequences. Yes, the rules are stupid and yes he would have won, but that doesn't make the loss less legit.
It's like a basketball player or a tennis player stepping over the line. The free throw or the ace won't get awarded. It doesn't matter if the free throw or ace would still have been made if you hadn't broken the rules.
It doesn't take anything away from his talent, though.
Neither is really legit but Fedor was the one with his face busted up, ill put it that way.
It's NOT as clear as a tennis player stepping over the line. The 12-6 elbows rule is pretty cloudy tbh. It's more comparable to a faulty throw-in in football or something like that.
Fedors cause he was the one being hurt. Jones was on the offense.
Jones loss was an actual loss, a result of him choosing to use an illegal tactic (something he is well familiar with). Fedors loss was due to somebody using an illegal move on him and does not result in an actual loss.
No, no. The rule is perfectly clear, no 12-6 elbows allowed.
Except when they are. And back of the head strikes arent allowed either. Except when they are. There are no rule in MMA that's enforced nearly as consistently as stepping over the line in tennis or grabbing the ball with your hands in football. In fact, most times when a fighter finishes with back of the head strikes, he is awarded the victory. Most fence grabs infamously slips as well with nothing but a verbal warning. Did Jones even get warned by the way? Now I'm not saying he didn't break the rules, I was just calling out a hyperbolic comparison regarding a situation where fighters are free'd as often (or maybe even more often) then they are fouled.
You really can't compare the two, completely different circumstances.
There's no denying he used an illegal strike(s). The question is the effect of those strikes. After the illegal strike the fight should have been paused, Jones should've been warned and possibly had a point taken away, and Hamill should've been given time to recover before resuming the fight. Unfortunately for Jones, the incompetent referee didn't stop the fight much earlier when it should've been stopped and Hamill was already too fucked up from earlier punishment to continue. The illegal elbows were not the cause of Hamill's inability to continue.
It would be like Bisping being declared the winner over Hendo if Hendo inadvertently kneed Bisping in the groin while diving in for that final shot after Bisping was already unconscious.
exactly. anyone who compares those, "losses" to the more traditional way in which fighters lose, are insane beyond belief.
Separate names with a comma.