Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 21 to 35 of 35

Thread: UFC 214: Cormier vs Jones II - DISCUSSION

  1. #21

    RainShaker's Avatar

    Status
    Online
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Korakuen Hall Safe Standing Section
    Posts
    15,635
    Rep Power
    424495
      Country                    Jamaica

    Re: UFC 214: Cormier vs Jones II - DISCUSSION

    Quote Originally Posted by Stonewall Dakson View Post
    I have admitted that I am not enthused with the current UFC product therefore I have not watched much lately.

    That has nothing to do with me not knowing about MMA. I still keep somewhat up to date even though I don't purchase every PPV like I used to.

    Anyone here can google 'UFC 181 controversy' and read the numerous articles about why it was a controversy. It was a controversial decision because a title change was involved. That almost never happens. You claim it has happened a lot but you cite no examples. It sounds like you are the one talking out of your ass and not backing it up.

    https://www.google.com/search?site=&...k1.yh0Z0MnXQfY

    You can read right? I said it was controversial because people thought Hendricks got robbed by the judges. Not because the title changed hands. What don't you get about that? People weren't in shock that the belt changed hands by decision. They were shocked that Hendricks was judged to have lost the fight. What about that do you not get, snowflake?

    Here's your examples:

    Dan Severn over Ken Shamrock UFC 9
    Maurice Smith over Mark Coleman UFC 14
    Randy Couture over Maurice Smith UFC Ultimate Japan


    AND that's just the first three title fights in the UFC that went to decision. Do you want me to go on?





    IMPORTANT MESSAGE

    Spoiler:




    ~~ WE ARE ALL ONE~~
    Spoiler:






  2. #22
    Putting America First
    Dakstang's Avatar

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    20,086
    Rep Power
    97106
      Country                    United States

    Re: UFC 214: Cormier vs Jones II - DISCUSSION

    Quote Originally Posted by RyuShake Taguchi View Post
    You can read right? I said it was controversial because people thought Hendricks got robbed by the judges. Not because the title changed hands. What don't you get about that? People weren't in shock that the belt changed hands by decision. They were shocked that Hendricks was judged to have lost the fight. What about that do you not get, snowflake?

    Here's your examples:

    Dan Severn over Ken Shamrock UFC 9
    Maurice Smith over Mark Coleman UFC 14
    Randy Couture over Maurice Smith UFC Ultimate Japan


    AND that's just the first three title fights in the UFC that went to decision. Do you want me to go on?
    Apparently you cannot read because almost any article you read on the fight will talk about the title change and why it was so controversial.

    Were any of those split decisions or were they unanimous? That makes a huge difference doesn't it?

  3. #23

    RainShaker's Avatar

    Status
    Online
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Korakuen Hall Safe Standing Section
    Posts
    15,635
    Rep Power
    424495
      Country                    Jamaica

    Re: UFC 214: Cormier vs Jones II - DISCUSSION

    Quote Originally Posted by Stonewall Dakson View Post
    Apparently you cannot read because almost any article you read on the fight will talk about the title change and why it was so controversial.

    Were any of those split decisions or were they unanimous? That makes a huge difference doesn't it?
    Link me specific article with quote to prove your point.

    All I have read is that it was controversial and a bunch of reaction that people thought Hendricks won the fight. Not people saying it's controversial because the champion wasn't awarded the fight on the basis of being the champion in a close fight. So, idk, seems like you're the one who can't read, dude. And yes, I know Mike Bohn in one of those articles said that Lawler was the first in UFC history to win a belt by split decision. He is wrong. Because the very first example I gave you was a split decision. The fight was controversial because Hendricks was thought to have clearly won the fight. Not because the belt changed hands on a split. That's what the outrage was about. Nobody was incensed at the idea a belt could change hands on a split. Don't be ridiculous.

    The first example I gave was a split. Second was unanimous as was the third. A unanimous or split decision doesn't dictate if a fight was truly close or not. Forrest Griffin beat Quinton Jackson by unanimous decision and most thought that fight was close. Diego Sanchez has won split decision in which people thought he was clearly blown out. Unanimous decisions can be razor thin too and come down to one extremely close round. Judging a fight as 'close' based on it being a split decision or not is wrong.





    IMPORTANT MESSAGE

    Spoiler:




    ~~ WE ARE ALL ONE~~
    Spoiler:






  4. #24
    Putting America First
    Dakstang's Avatar

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    20,086
    Rep Power
    97106
      Country                    United States

    Re: UFC 214: Cormier vs Jones II - DISCUSSION

    Yeah split decision title changes are rare.

    That was a major part of the controversy. If it had not involved a title change it would have been no where near as controversial as it was.

    Point proven.

  5. #25

    RainShaker's Avatar

    Status
    Online
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Korakuen Hall Safe Standing Section
    Posts
    15,635
    Rep Power
    424495
      Country                    Jamaica

    Re: UFC 214: Cormier vs Jones II - DISCUSSION

    If you say so, mate.

    It was clearly controversial because the vast majority of people thought Hendricks won the fight. It'd have been equally controversial if people thought Lawler won the fight and he lost by split decision.

    See you next year.





    IMPORTANT MESSAGE

    Spoiler:




    ~~ WE ARE ALL ONE~~
    Spoiler:






  6. #26
    Putting America First
    Dakstang's Avatar

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    20,086
    Rep Power
    97106
      Country                    United States

    Re: UFC 214: Cormier vs Jones II - DISCUSSION

    Quote Originally Posted by RyuShake Taguchi View Post
    If you say so, mate.

    It was clearly controversial because the vast majority of people thought Hendricks won the fight. It'd have been equally controversial if people thought Lawler won the fight and he lost by split decision.

    See you next year.
    If you look at all of the split decisions involving title defenses the overwhelming majority go to the Champion.

    You can deny it all you want and try to minimize and misdirect but anyone can see that a title change on a split decision is what made that decision so controversial.

  7. #27

    RainShaker's Avatar

    Status
    Online
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Korakuen Hall Safe Standing Section
    Posts
    15,635
    Rep Power
    424495
      Country                    Jamaica

    Re: UFC 214: Cormier vs Jones II - DISCUSSION

    Quote Originally Posted by Stonewall Dakson View Post
    If you look at all of the split decisions involving title defenses the majority go to the Champion.

    You can deny it all you want and try to minimize and misdirect but anyone can see that a title change on a split decision is what made that decision so controversial.
    I'm not misdirecting. You clearly haven't read the articles you've linked The vast majority emphasise the idea that Hendricks was robbed rather than the idea the belt changed hands on a split. Your own proof literally works against you. You can't claim this as fake news, either.





    IMPORTANT MESSAGE

    Spoiler:




    ~~ WE ARE ALL ONE~~
    Spoiler:






  8. #28
    Putting America First
    Dakstang's Avatar

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    20,086
    Rep Power
    97106
      Country                    United States

    Re: UFC 214: Cormier vs Jones II - DISCUSSION

    Quote Originally Posted by RyuShake Taguchi View Post
    I'm not misdirecting. You clearly haven't read the articles you've linked The vast majority emphasise the idea that Hendricks was robbed rather than the idea the belt changed hands on a split. Your own proof literally works against you. You can't claim this as fake news, either.
    There have been many split decisions in the past that were controversial.

    This was a bit different. What made it different? It involved a title change. Most of the articles have that in the headline, "Lawler wins title in controversial decision". It would have been no where near as big of a deal if it hadn't involved a title change and everyone knows it.

    But this whole argument started because I suggested based on previous split decisions that a close round in a championship fight will more than likely go to the Champion.

    I have more than proven that.

    You are grasping at straws at this point to get some victory in this but no victory shall be had on your part. You were wrong to call me out to begin with and you were wrong to do a laughy face because I was right.

    Some questions for you though....are you the MMA mod? If so why would you act so hostile to someone who rarely posts in an MMA thread? Isn't the whole idea to get more people to post in your section and make it more active?

    What you did does not accomplish that because you have created a hostile environment to which I have no desire to visit again.

    Maybe one of the Admins or Super Mods should describe your goal as a Moderator to you again.
    Last edited by Dakstang; 07-30-2017 at 03:31 AM.

  9. #29

    RainShaker's Avatar

    Status
    Online
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Korakuen Hall Safe Standing Section
    Posts
    15,635
    Rep Power
    424495
      Country                    Jamaica

    Re: UFC 214: Cormier vs Jones II - DISCUSSION

    Quote Originally Posted by Stonewall Dakson View Post
    There have been many split decisions in the past that were controversial.

    This was a bit different. What made it different? It involved a title change. Most of the articles have that in the headline, "Lawler wins title in controversial decision". It would have been no where near as big of a deal if it hadn't involved a title change and everyone knows it.

    But this whole argument started because I suggested based on previous split decisions that a close round in a championship fight will more than likely go to the Champion.

    I have more than proven that.

    You are grasping at straws at this point to get some victory in this but no victory shall be had on your part. You were wrong to call me out to begin with and you were wrong to do a laughy face because I was right.

    Are you actually dense? It's a controversial decision because most view it as a robbery People wouldn't have cared if Lawler won a split decision in a title fight that the majority thought he won in the first place. The fact is: most people thought he deserved to lose that fight. That's where the controversy comes from. If he had done enough in the eyes of the majority to win the fight and still won by split decision, it wouldn't have had as much of a controversial tinge to it. The point I've been making is that people did not view it as controversial solely because the title changed hands on a split. They viewed it as controversial because most viewed it as the wrong decision. It would have had the same level of controversy if Hendricks retained via split and most thought he clearly lost. The fact it is a title fight does have added controversy but it's the fact that the majority thought the outcome was wrong that is the most controversial part.

    and lol. The top article in that google page you linked is from MMAJunkie. You are aware that they have an article of twitter reactions for every controversial decision, right?

    You haven't proven shit. You haven't even told me of one title fight where the fighter retained by split decision, lol. I wasn't wrong to call you out to begin with. You made a dumbass comment about champion bias from judges when there is, infact, none. Do you think the judges are told to judge in favour of the champion if a round is close?


    I am not MMA Mod. I never acted hostile to you in the first place. I laughed at you stating judges having champion bias is a fact without proving anything and knowing that you barely watch MMA nowadays to know whether that's true or not. If you think that was me being hostile then I don't know what to tell you other than that you're a precious snowflake. Why are you complaining, anyway? You don't watch MMA much so you'd barely visit here, anyway. Maybe you should stop being paranoid and thinking I'm out to get you every time I question you. Not my fault you suffer from social anxiety and think that I hate you just because I question the shit you say. I'm sorry you feel victimised.
    Last edited by RainShaker; 07-30-2017 at 03:40 AM.





    IMPORTANT MESSAGE

    Spoiler:




    ~~ WE ARE ALL ONE~~
    Spoiler:






  10. #30
    Putting America First
    Dakstang's Avatar

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    20,086
    Rep Power
    97106
      Country                    United States

    Re: UFC 214: Cormier vs Jones II - DISCUSSION

    I think Judges are hesitant to award someone a title on a split decision.

    Which anyone who follows MMA already knows and the numbers show that.

    The overwhelming majority of championship fights that have resulted in a split decision have been in favor of the Champion.

    You know it is true, keep arguing but you know it is true.

    At this point we are just rehashing things. Our points have been argued. It is over.

    I shall exit this thread now to nevermore return to it.

    Make the last post so you can feel that you won and got the last word.

    Farewell.
    Last edited by Dakstang; 07-30-2017 at 03:38 AM.

  11. #31

    RainShaker's Avatar

    Status
    Online
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Korakuen Hall Safe Standing Section
    Posts
    15,635
    Rep Power
    424495
      Country                    Jamaica

    Re: UFC 214: Cormier vs Jones II - DISCUSSION

    ... what are you talking about? You think judges are hesitant to award someone a split decision? You do know that the judges don't know each other's scores and who they have winning the fight, right? Or do you think a split decision is someone winning by 1 round or something?

    How could the judges feel hesitant about awarding someone a split decision if they don't know what each other's scorecards are? That point makes absolutely zero sense.


    And I'm going to have to ask you to provide the stats on that. The only split decisions I can think of that a champion retained was Benson Henderson vs Frankie Edgar II and GSP vs Hendricks. Maybe Benson vs Gil, I can't remember if that was unanimous or not. There might be a few more. You already know of two examples where the challenger wins (Lawler vs Hendricks II and Severn vs Shamrock)...

    You are probably right. But it's not an overwhelming majority and, in no way, does it prove any champion bias from judges. If anything, I'd bet that it's pretty much even. Maybe one fight difference. (I actually just checked and it is 4-3 in favour of the champion retaining. 'Overwhelming' lol)

    Peace.
    Last edited by RainShaker; 07-30-2017 at 03:53 AM.





    IMPORTANT MESSAGE

    Spoiler:




    ~~ WE ARE ALL ONE~~
    Spoiler:






  12. #32
    Scumbag Role Model
    Tennessee Nicky's Avatar

    Status
    Online
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Tennessee
    Posts
    44,469
    Rep Power
    631926
      Country                    United States

    Re: UFC 214: Cormier vs Jones II - DISCUSSION

    hey calm down losers

    As a longtime Maia fan it was a little disappointing to see him get pawned into a strategy like that. Woodley fought the fight he had to fight, and tactically he was great, but it beckons for someone to put him in check because he's one of the least exciting champions I can ever recall.

    Jones is so good and the idea of Lesnar/Jones is insanely awesome. Glad DC got marked.

    Cyborg and Lamas with really impressive victories.
    -------
    [07:37 PM] Shake: I am obsessed with Nicky its true
    People Obsessed With Nicky: RainShaker, indyfan
    -------
    Quote Originally Posted by RaiZ-R View Post
    What the fuck is happening to you guys? I once got a blowjob where she used her teeth a little bit too much and I ended up with a bloody dick, I still enjoyed the blowjob up to the point I started bleeding. I can honestly say that I have never had anything I would call a bad blowjob, that wasn't a great experience but up until I started gushing blood I was having a great time!

  13. #33
    Cheese!

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Perth, Australia
    Posts
    6,193
    Rep Power
    41490
      Country                    New Zealand

    Re: UFC 214: Cormier vs Jones II - DISCUSSION

    Quote Originally Posted by RyuShake Taguchi View Post
    And you don't know anything about mine so maybe you shouldn't talk out of your ass first eh?

    Your implication was that Cormier being champ was the deciding factor in who won the rounds, ergo, the judges decide he is the winner of the round based on him being the champion. Champions do not get close decision bias.

    How far back are we talking here? Because I don't remember it ever being a massive deal. I remember the title changing hands being a massive deal. Not it being by decision, though. Not even when Couture beat Ortiz. There are plenty of examples of the belt changing hands on close decisions. How many close title fight decisions can you tell me there are anyway? The last one I can even remember going that far back was Rampage vs Forrest. And that went to the challenger.

    Edit: and looking up to see that the first time judges were used in a title fight, the belt changed hands via split decision Actually, a whole bunch of title fights that went to decision ended up with the belt switching hands. Just what era of the UFC are you speaking about bruv?
    C'mon man, it was a wide spread opinion within MMA that Champs had an advantage in close fights. The vast majority of close fights were always given to the Champion.

    Thanks to Jabberwocky for the amazing Gabrielle gif


  14. #34

    RainShaker's Avatar

    Status
    Online
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Korakuen Hall Safe Standing Section
    Posts
    15,635
    Rep Power
    424495
      Country                    Jamaica

    Re: UFC 214: Cormier vs Jones II - DISCUSSION

    Quote Originally Posted by Darling Nicky View Post
    hey calm down losers

    As a longtime Maia fan it was a little disappointing to see him get pawned into a strategy like that. Woodley fought the fight he had to fight, and tactically he was great, but it beckons for someone to put him in check because he's one of the least exciting champions I can ever recall.

    Jones is so good and the idea of Lesnar/Jones is insanely awesome. Glad DC got marked.

    Cyborg and Lamas with really impressive victories.
    Lamas starched Knight bad. Was some performance.
    Quote Originally Posted by ETE View Post
    C'mon man, it was a wide spread opinion within MMA that Champs had an advantage in close fights. The vast majority of close fights were always given to the Champion.
    Eh, I wasn't really disputing that it was an opinion in the MMA community. More that people would be surprised to see belts change hands by decision. Various examples of close decisions where this has happened - Cruz/Dillashaw, Benson/Frankie, Frankie/BJ, Forrest/Quinton amongst others. I only really remember this champion bias stuff coming up cause of Machida vs Shogun. I really dont think there have been enough 'close decisions' in UFC title fights to definitively state there is champions bias. Especially when you can break those fights down and see reasons within the judging criteria that a certain fighter would get it.

    In any case, the implication that judges dont want the belt changing hands on a split is silly. Judges don't just automatically give 10-9s to someone because they're champion. If they did, you'd see consistent champion bias. Instead, you've got inconsistency.





    IMPORTANT MESSAGE

    Spoiler:




    ~~ WE ARE ALL ONE~~
    Spoiler:






  15. #35
    Sky Blue Hyper Technican
    MC 16's Avatar

    Status
    Online
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Location
    Osaka-Jo Hall
    Posts
    3,313
    Rep Power
    117957
      Country                    Great Britain

    Re: UFC 214: Cormier vs Jones II - DISCUSSION

    Glad jon jones won. After all the criticism he took after his "actives" (and rightfully so) he come back and regained the light heavyweight title. Hope Lesnar vs Jones happens.
    Koi Suru Fortune Cookie

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •