[Baco Xtath]

Everybody's got their own opinion, and, yes, I agree, it was a close fight. I usually call robbery when I've got no doubt to the outcome (Bisping/Hamill foremost to mind). I thought Hendricks was going to finish him on several occasions and not once, save the first round guillotine, did I think GSP had him.
I'm usually pretty accurate with my judging (I called the Lawler/Rory split). But, honestly, I'm not emotionally invested so I probably won't think more about this match past today. However, I would like to see a rematch and furthermore, I'd love to see the GSP of old come out and whip some ass like he used to.

[Daeg]

There's no doubt gsp got busted up more than Hendricks. Hendricks took a lot of shots and put a lot of effort into showing everyone that he wasn't hurt. But he took those shots regardless.

For a big puncher with phenomenal power he didn't have gsp in trouble very much. A 30 second span in round 2. A round where gsp got in his face and landed consistentently for the rest of the round. Round 4 had some decent ground and pound but that arose from a trip not an awesome game plan or a serious power punch. A cut was opened up and then they were up.

To be honest, the most significant and impressive part of hendricks' performance was his knees in the clinch, his cardio and his ability to defend the takedown. I thought he would fade by the end of round 2 (which he did) but I never thought he would have energy like he did in round 4. Hats off to him for hanging with the best cardio in the sport.

If you are only interested in mma as a "who has the biggest bruises" sport, then hendricks was a clear winner. But if you appreciate the sport for adaptability, recovery, stamina and well...ability to land strikes in many different ways...its easy to see that gsp fought an excellent fight as well.

In no way was this fight a blow out. Was hendricks robbed? No. He said he would knock the champ out by putting his hands on him one time. He has finished so many people like that yet he had 5 rounds to do it and his power punches barely dominated 30 seconds of the entire fight. If you don't finish a fight EVERY single thing gets judged, not just the high light reel. Of course there was no high light reels in this fight.

Excellent fight though. I was on the edge of my seat the entire fight.

[Jakovasaurus]

This is impressive.

[Baco Xtath]

Daeg, on 18 November 2013 - 07:13 AM, said:

If you are only interested in mma as a "who has the biggest bruises" sport, then hendricks was a clear winner. But if you appreciate the sport for adaptability, recovery, stamina and well...ability to land strikes in many different ways...its easy to see that gsp fought an excellent fight as well.

Condit, Pat Militech, and Hughes call it the worst decision in UFC history (which I don't agree with). Varner, Lauzon, Dana White and tons more call bullshit. Sherdog and MMAjunkie scored it 3-2 for Hendricks. I appreciate all aspects of MMA and I'd have to argue that these professionals, who definitely do, probably have more insight than any of us. So, no, I'm not on crack for my opinion - it is very widely shared. However, I am done discussing it and we'll just have to hope that GSP doesn't retire and we'll get to see a rematch.

[Daeg]

Baco Xtath, on 18 November 2013 - 01:08 PM, said:

Daeg, on 18 November 2013 - 07:13 AM, said:

If you are only interested in mma as a "who has the biggest bruises" sport, then hendricks was a clear winner. But if you appreciate the sport for adaptability, recovery, stamina and well...ability to land strikes in many different ways...its easy to see that gsp fought an excellent fight as well.

Condit, Pat Militech, and Hughes call it the worst decision in UFC history (which I don't agree with). Varner, Lauzon, Dana White and tons more call bullshit. Sherdog and MMAjunkie scored it 3-2 for Hendricks. I appreciate all aspects of MMA and I'd have to argue that these professionals, who definitely do, probably have more insight than any of us. So, no, I'm not on crack for my opinion - it is very widely shared. However, I am done discussing it and we'll just have to hope that GSP doesn't retire and we'll get to see a rematch.

Did someone say you were on crack? No, just that you were a dick. Lol. I didn't say that though.

It was a close fight, regardless of who wants to hype it up. I like how people always go to other people's opinion to somehow bolster their own. It's called "jumping on the bandwagon". It's funny that 2 out of your first 3 "sources" were people who have lost to gsp. I'm surprised you didn't throw Nick Diaz and Jake Shields name out there also. Dana didn't seem to happy with gsp's surprise announcement either but he's so level headed no one would accuse him of bias.

I said from the beginning that Hendricks probably won that fight. But with gsp clearly winning 2 rounds its easy to see how he could get the decision. Its very unfortunate when a great fight like that is torn down by sensationalists who want to turn this into a referendum on poor judging. I thought all the other bouts were scored very fairly. Usually when you have bad judges there is several redicules verdicts. I remember thinking how well those other fights had been judged.

Hendricks knows this game well. He knows how to finish fights. Its his claim to fame. It was his game plan. He coasted most of the 5th round. Who does that? Who pretends like he's rocking out to some song and then goes out there and coasts the LAST round of a fight? Gsp did not and he won the fight. If you want to say Hendricks was robbed, fine. But lay the blame where it belongs. It belongs on him and his team for believing for a second that they had it in the bag. To fight the 5th round like that was a disaster.

I have a question for ya. Are you in the habit of quoting someone, completely disagreeing with them and then announcing that you're done talking about it? If you are, then you don't understand how communication works. The time to be done talking about something is BEFORE you make a contradictory statement. Just sayin.

[bubba]

As someone who has been watching since UFC 1......I can see no scoring by GSP that was higher than Hendricks. GSP has been my favorite fighter for years, and I still think he lost.

Just my two cents....

[amphibian]

I wanted Hendricks to win this - and I still score it for GSP.

Be really careful when citing Miletich and Hughes - they happen to be some of the dumber fighters walking around. Pat loooooooves being a Tea Party bro and arguing very badly on Twitter with people about Tea Party stuff.

Joe Lauzon has a nice graphic up that really signifies how the scoring slants to GSP (in his and my view):

http://imgur.com/Pct2NQZ

[Daeg]

Bubba, on 18 November 2013 - 06:15 PM, said:

As someone who has been watching since UFC 1......I can see no scoring by GSP that was higher than Hendricks. GSP has been my favorite fighter for years, and I still think he lost.

Just my two cents....

You crazy, cracked out, dirty son of a...

J/k

I started watching in 94, the 2 or 3rd. Things were a lot simpler back then. No weight classes and no scoring. Fight to the finish. Very rare to have any controversy.

I'm an advocate for the idea that only a finish gets a win. All other bouts end in draw. I doubt that idea will gain much momentum in the sport but its one way to improve action and encourage finishes. Especially on title fights.

I can understand the idea that big power trumps smaller punches. I can understand that a smothering wrestler with no real ground and pound trumps jiu jitsu submission with no real ground and pound. I can understand that pushing forward can be considered better fighting than "stick and move".

But I don't always agree. Each fight dynamic is different. Sometimes smaller punches control the opponent much more than the big power. Sometimes throwing submission after submission effects the fight much more than laying on top of someone. Sometimes sticking and moving is far more effective than stalking down an opponent. The deciding factor is elusive.

In this fight, big power contributed very little. Smaller punches held the big power at bay very well. I could plainly see the frustration on jh's face when he constantly got slowed down and redirected by the less powerful punches and kicks

Neither fighter did much with the ground and pound except for a few quick elbows in the 4th. Those elbows were nice. Very strong. There's no doubt they won the 4th round. It was lucky that gsp slipped but lucky or not it won the round.

The big question in this fight comes down to knees. Hendricks knees to the thighs were awesome. Gsp had some nice knees to the body but in my opinion the thigh knees were much more fight effecting than the knees to the body. But I am willing to bet that the judges considered the body shots as more important. A legitimate line of thinking as people have been finished with knees to the body but not the thigh. I may be wrong but I believe Hendricks knees in the clinch changed the entire dynamic of the fight and to be honest this is the only reason I thought he probably won this fight. Those knees were that effective.

Anyway...as a paying fan I believe my opinion is just as valid as anyone's, including hall of famers. I believe everyone's 2 cents are just as valid as mine. I also believe that sometimes you have to have some guts and say your opinion despite what the "majority" may be saying.

[Baco Xtath]

Daeg, on 18 November 2013 - 05:37 PM, said:

Baco Xtath, on 18 November 2013 - 01:08 PM, said:

Daeg, on 18 November 2013 - 07:13 AM, said:

If you are only interested in mma as a "who has the biggest bruises" sport, then hendricks was a clear winner. But if you appreciate the sport for adaptability, recovery, stamina and well...ability to land strikes in many different ways...its easy to see that gsp fought an excellent fight as well.

Condit, Pat Militech, and Hughes call it the worst decision in UFC history (which I don't agree with). Varner, Lauzon, Dana White and tons more call bullshit. Sherdog and MMAjunkie scored it 3-2 for Hendricks. I appreciate all aspects of MMA and I'd have to argue that these professionals, who definitely do, probably have more insight than any of us. So, no, I'm not on crack for my opinion - it is very widely shared. However, I am done discussing it and we'll just have to hope that GSP doesn't retire and we'll get to see a rematch.

Did someone say you were on crack? No, just that you were a dick. Lol. I didn't say that though.

I have a question for ya. Are you in the habit of quoting someone, completely disagreeing with them and then announcing that you're done talking about it? If you are, then you don't understand how communication works. The time to be done talking about something is BEFORE you make a contradictory statement. Just sayin.

1) you implied that I was scoring based on damage and didn't appreciate the finer aspects of MMA - I quoted professionals who do this every single day - who know this better than you or I, regardless of what you believe, who scored it for Hendricks.
2)to say I don't understand how communication works and your tone in general is condescending as hell and you're now on my ignore list because you obviously lack social grace in communication. Just sayin.

This post has been edited by Baco Xtath: 18 November 2013 - 09:31 PM

[amphibian]

I think Hendricks's skin and beard hid a few bruises, like BJ Penn's skin did. GSP was hitting him mostly on the jaw, on the side of the head and in the body. Hendricks was hitting GSP in the eye region (why he's so busted up there and almost nothing along the jaw).

But superficial damage like that isn't actually a great measure of fight damage. Sometimes it works, but sometimes one fighter just has delicate skin that marks up readily and the other one doesn't.

[Daeg]

Baco Xtath, on 18 November 2013 - 09:30 PM, said:

Daeg, on 18 November 2013 - 05:37 PM, said:

Baco Xtath, on 18 November 2013 - 01:08 PM, said:

Daeg, on 18 November 2013 - 07:13 AM, said:

If you are only interested in mma as a "who has the biggest bruises" sport, then hendricks was a clear winner. But if you appreciate the sport for adaptability, recovery, stamina and well...ability to land strikes in many different ways...its easy to see that gsp fought an excellent fight as well.

Condit, Pat Militech, and Hughes call it the worst decision in UFC history (which I don't agree with). Varner, Lauzon, Dana White and tons more call bullshit. Sherdog and MMAjunkie scored it 3-2 for Hendricks. I appreciate all aspects of MMA and I'd have to argue that these professionals, who definitely do, probably have more insight than any of us. So, no, I'm not on crack for my opinion - it is very widely shared. However, I am done discussing it and we'll just have to hope that GSP doesn't retire and we'll get to see a rematch.

Did someone say you were on crack? No, just that you were a dick. Lol. I didn't say that though.

I have a question for ya. Are you in the habit of quoting someone, completely disagreeing with them and then announcing that you're done talking about it? If you are, then you don't understand how communication works. The time to be done talking about something is BEFORE you make a contradictory statement. Just sayin.

1) you implied that I was scoring based on damage and didn't appreciate the finer aspects of MMA - I quoted professionals who do this every single day - who know this better than you or I, regardless of what you believe, who scored it for Hendricks.
2)to say I don't understand how communication works and your tone in general is condescending as hell and you're now on my ignore list because you obviously lack social grace in communication. Just sayin.

I didn't reply to anything you said regarding how you judged or how you appreciated anything. My comment was a general opinion on the philosophy of judging fights. Never did I include you or single you out, as you chose to do with me.

I'm not surprised you might choose to ignore me. You directly respond to me and then say you don't want to talk about it anymore. Then you respond and say you are ignoring me, shutting off all communication. If I sound condescending then how do you think you sound?

I'm sure you're a decent person but I think you are a little defensive towards someone who wasn't even talking directly to you.

[amphibian]

I'm not a mod, but I ask that the both of you stop bringing the "attack each other" mentality here.

It's a controversial decision, but that doesn't mean being rude to one another or believing that shutting off discussion with insults is acceptable.

Basically, both of you settle down and realize that nobody's calling anybody out for being a loon - except me doing that for Pat Miletich. I'd even say that to his face, too.

[Daeg]

amphibian, on 18 November 2013 - 11:27 PM, said:

I'm not a mod, but I ask that the both of you stop bringing the "attack each other" mentality here.

It's a controversial decision, but that doesn't mean being rude to one another or believing that shutting off discussion with insults is acceptable.

Basically, both of you settle down and realize that nobody's calling anybody out for being a loon - except me doing that for Pat Miletich. I'd even say that to his face, too.

No...I live to fight with people on book forums about mma. It's what I do. Lol

J\k

I suppose my casual observations could come across as condescending. No hard feelings on my part. I' m not going to try to improve myself or anything. =)

[Jakovasaurus]

Maybe if the fight comes down to a close split decision, the condition of the fighter's appearance should be a weighing factor. The "eye test" if you like. Could work?

[Bonesaw85]

Jakovasaurus, on 18 November 2013 - 11:47 PM, said:

Maybe if the fight comes down to a close split decision, the condition of the fighter's appearance should be a weighing factor. The "eye test" if you like. Could work?

Agree 100%... Condit was totally robbed of that split decision

[Daeg]

Bonesaw85, on 20 November 2013 - 07:49 AM, said:

Jakovasaurus, on 18 November 2013 - 11:47 PM, said:

Maybe if the fight comes down to a close split decision, the condition of the fighter's appearance should be a weighing factor. The "eye test" if you like. Could work?

Agree 100%... Condit was totally robbed of that split decision

I still havent seen that fight. Took a couple months off from mma so I could afford guns, ammo and various accessories.

[amphibian]

MMA is really only sustainable as a viewing hobby if you're rich or have a large cast of friends who also like it.

Fortunately, I have the latter, but there's no shame in taking a while off to do other things.

The GSP Condit fight had one moment of real danger for GSP. Otherwise, he whooped butt all night. Fun card though.

[Bonesaw85]

Lol, I was joking. That pic is from after the Condit fight. That was a good fight though.

[Daeg]

Bonesaw85, on 22 November 2013 - 08:01 AM, said:

Lol, I was joking. That pic is from after the Condit fight. That was a good fight though.

Yeah, I recognized the pic but I would have liked to see the fight. Ive probably missed 3 ppv UFC's in the last 7 years and that was 1 of them.

Condit's a decent fighter. I felt he clearly beat Diaz, which a lot of people thought was a controversial decision.

[Bonesaw85]

Daeg, on 22 November 2013 - 05:33 PM, said:

Bonesaw85, on 22 November 2013 - 08:01 AM, said:

Lol, I was joking. That pic is from after the Condit fight. That was a good fight though.

Yeah, I recognized the pic but I would have liked to see the fight. Ive probably missed 3 ppv UFC's in the last 7 years and that was 1 of them.

Condit's a decent fighter. I felt he clearly beat Diaz, which a lot of people thought was a controversial decision.

More than a decent fighter. If his fight against Hendricks would have been 5 rounds Condit most likely would have won. I think him and Hendricks are close to no.2 WW behind GSP.

Really excited for his fight with Matt Brown. Never really thought too much of Brown, but damn he's been on a run. Condit should be a heavy favorite and should be a fairly easy win for him, but at this point I wouldn't be too surprised to see Brown KO him. This sport is crazy, I love it!!!