As mentioned in the broadcast, Nevada is not using the updated rules until July or August. The fifth round of this fight, which was sanctioned under the old system, is by definition not a 10-8. Therefore the judge that scored it as such is a complete and total fucking retard.
Don't be racist, bro.
tenchu - Don't be racist, bro.
This
Judges were racist against white people
Still a 10-8
Only one judge did I think, the one that had it 47-47. Woodley clearly lost 430 of that round and had 20s of good damage, wonderboy was returning fire when he got to his feet. Not close to a 10-8
A near finish should score every bit as much as a knockdown would in boxing. If a near finish is NOT a 10-8, then what is?
Shit fight. Wonderbread won more wons, Woodley won the fight. Never entertain the idea of a trilogy.
The Kangaroo -Under the old system, a 10-8 isn't defined by fight ending moments. It is defined by clear and dominant control over the course of the round. 22 seconds of dominance is not the course of the round.A near finish should score every bit as much as a knockdown would in boxing. If a near finish is NOT a 10-8, then what is?
Shit fight. Wonderbread won more wons, Woodley won the fight. Never entertain the idea of a trilogy.
Sal D'Amato made it a 10-8 after first writing 10-9. Just saw the scorecards.
Wölfie66 -Lol yepDEADLEAGUE - Judges were racist against white peopleThat's ok though last I heard
HunchyRedux -The Kangaroo -Under the old system, a 10-8 isn't defined by fight ending moments. It is defined by clear and dominant control over the course of the round. 22 seconds of dominance is not the course of the round.A near finish should score every bit as much as a knockdown would in boxing. If a near finish is NOT a 10-8, then what is?
Shit fight. Wonderbread won more wons, Woodley won the fight. Never entertain the idea of a trilogy.
I would say dropping the guy and have the ref nearly stop the fight is far more controlling than scoring some point fighter shots.
HunchyRedux -The Kangaroo -Under the old system, a 10-8 isn't defined by fight ending moments. It is defined by clear and dominant control over the course of the round. 22 seconds of dominance is not the course of the round.A near finish should score every bit as much as a knockdown would in boxing. If a near finish is NOT a 10-8, then what is?
Shit fight. Wonderbread won more wons, Woodley won the fight. Never entertain the idea of a trilogy.
I dont give a shit about any dipshit criteria, im talking about common sense. A near finish should score at least the equivalent of a knockdown in boxing. IE 10-8.
Wölfie66 -DEADLEAGUE - Judges were racist against white peopleThat's ok though last I heard
carcaju -HunchyRedux -The Kangaroo -Under the old system, a 10-8 isn't defined by fight ending moments. It is defined by clear and dominant control over the course of the round. 22 seconds of dominance is not the course of the round.A near finish should score every bit as much as a knockdown would in boxing. If a near finish is NOT a 10-8, then what is?
Shit fight. Wonderbread won more wons, Woodley won the fight. Never entertain the idea of a trilogy.
I would say dropping the guy and have the ref nearly stop the fight is far more controlling than scoring some point fighter shots.
Well yeah. But that doesn't make it 10-8. Just doesn't.
carcaju -HunchyRedux -The Kangaroo -Under the old system, a 10-8 isn't defined by fight ending moments. It is defined by clear and dominant control over the course of the round. 22 seconds of dominance is not the course of the round.A near finish should score every bit as much as a knockdown would in boxing. If a near finish is NOT a 10-8, then what is?
Shit fight. Wonderbread won more wons, Woodley won the fight. Never entertain the idea of a trilogy.
I would say dropping the guy and have the ref nearly stop the fight is far more controlling than scoring some point fighter shots.
Yes, which is why he should've won the round with a 10-9. He didn't dominate his opponent throughout the entirety of the round though, which is generally grounds for a 10-8.
lol, keep crying over your bullshit racism claims, and I thought the libs were the pussies.
I couldn't care less what a 10-8 Round is defined as in the rule book, if you can, with a straight face, tell me that Round 5 should be scored the same as Rounds 1-4, you're a fucking idiot.
Not a 10-8
The Kangaroo -HunchyRedux -The Kangaroo -Under the old system, a 10-8 isn't defined by fight ending moments. It is defined by clear and dominant control over the course of the round. 22 seconds of dominance is not the course of the round.A near finish should score every bit as much as a knockdown would in boxing. If a near finish is NOT a 10-8, then what is?
Shit fight. Wonderbread won more wons, Woodley won the fight. Never entertain the idea of a trilogy.
I dont give a shit about any dipshit criteria, im talking about common sense. A near finish should score at least the equivalent of a knockdown in boxing. IE 10-8.
This is MMA. There is no common sense. But the closest we have is the unified rules. And under the unified rules. This wasn't a 10-8.
Milford Cubicle -
lol, keep crying over your bullshit racism claims, and I thought the libs were the pussies.
I couldn't care less what a 10-8 Round is defined as in the rule book, if you can, with a straight face, tell me that Round 5 should be scored the same as Rounds 1-4, you're a fucking idiot.
And if you can tell me with a straight face that under the unified rules of MMA, that round 5 was a 10-8, then you don't understand what you're watching.
Round 5 could be 10-9 as long as the bullshit rounds where neither guy did much are 10-10. It's a joke to have those uneventful snoozers scored the same as the round where one guy was almost finished.