Am I the only one that thinks it is weird that one judge scored it 30-26???? What did Edgar do in any of the rounds that explains that? If anyone gets a round like that it is Karo but even he got all 30-27.
No, you are not. Now let it go young man. Edgar ran a clinic on his ass,
and I like Spencer. The 1 point you mention was nowhere near a fight
deciding factor. There have been MUCH WEIRDER scores previously that
DID decide fights.
No the point does not make a difference I am just curious as to why a 30-26 round was entered in this fight when all of the Karo/Ryo rounds were 30-27...seems to me that Ryo did less than Spencer is all
not that i'd have scored it that way, but maybe round 1?
yeah rd1.all rds edgar was running a clininc.i can see any of the rds where a judge just saw fisher not doing a damn thing.not a single sub attempt and just lettin edgar make sweet love to him.
Kinda weird to score a 10-8 round in that fight. Fisher had a fairly active guard and didn't take a lot of damage. Until the scoring is altered, I don't think any round should have been 10-8. Edgar wasn't close to finishing Spencer at any time.
"What did Edgar do in any of the rounds that explains that?"
The real question for that particular judge was, "What did FISHER do in the fight?", which was absolutely nothing. Did he even land a clean strike on Edgar at ALL?
What is the criteria for a 10-8 round? That's the question.
10-9 is "when one fighter wins by a close margin" according to the unified rules.
Which of those rounds were remotely close? Fisher had absolutely nothing in the entire fight.
10-8 is when one fighter dominates the round.
The fight should have been 30-24.
10-8 should happen more often, 10-9 means close, most of the time rounds arent that close.
I agree, 10-8 should happen more often. 10-8 should also be clarified as to what it means and used with consistency. It's not.
Right now, IMO, 10-8 means a fighter nearly finished the fight. That didn't happen in the Edgar/Fisher fight.
more 10-8's would be a good idea so it's not just a "win 2 out of 3 rounds" situation. but just judging the fight in its entirity would work too.
whats funny is that when a fan is biased and agrees with the judging of a 10-8 round, but when someone like Tito dominates forrest griffin, all the haters sit there and say there is no way that was a 10-8. What Tito did to forrest is 10x worse than anything edgar did to fisher. I love nut huggers on here. There was no way any of those rounds was a 10-8. These judges need to be consistent or go get another f'ing job.
Correct
I'd like to see more 10-8 and 10-10 rounds. They are underutilized and make the 10 point must system better for MMA IMO.