Would you rather watch a good technical fighter who sticks to a gameplan/neutralizes his opponent/wins even if only by dec......or........an exciting balls out/try anything even if I lose/can't stand dec. fighter? Just curious.
The objective of the match is to finish your opponent, so anything to that end is fine by me. Any attempt to deliberately ride out a decision sucks.
tito does both imo
I've often thought that if a fight ended without a winner...it should be a draw (kind of like when you fight Royce). Judges are a bad idea.
Obviously neither fighter was head and shoulders above the other, or they would have finished them.
That said, I'll ALWAYS prefer an 'exciting' fighter to a 'good' one.
Exciting
A good fighter.
To me a great fighter is just intrinsically exciting.
A guy who wins, who beats all challenges is what I want... However, the clincher is if he goes ahead and finishes that class of opponent frequently.
Exciting fighter any day. You need to be a finisher IMO, the bout going to decision should be incidental not a strategy.
A fight that goes to a decision really is a let down for me.
Sylvia's win over Arlovski is still more dominant in my opinion than both Fedor's JDs over Nog combined.
Styles make fights and sometimes your style will happen to match up well and shut the other guy down.
But if you finish him theres no further questions.
"Sylvia's win over Arlovski is still more dominant in my opinion than both Fedor's JDs over Nog combined."
Not really fair. Nog has never been finished in 30 fights, whereas Arlovski's weak chin has gotten him finished four times in 13 fights. Tim actually only "dominated" 15 seconds out of a four-minute fight as opposed to almost 40 minutes for Fedor over Nog.
The mentality of seeing a decision as not a 'proper' result is disappointing. Some of my fave fights have been decisions.
Nog v Ricco. Riley v Lawler. Fedor v Nog. Shogun v Mini Nog are some of those.
nothing better than the old ufc. no rules no weights no time limits, tournament style.