(1) "You have to beat the champ."
While this is technically true (to win, you must . . . er, win?), it's a misnomer. The champion gets ONE advantage - he/she keeps the belt in the case of a draw. He/she gets not benefit of the doubt in the 10 point must system. If the round is a draw, it must be scored 10-10. Otherwise, whoever wins the round gets more points and you move onto the next round.
If you think Robbie won 3 of 5 rounds and all rounds were 10-9, he's your winner. If you think Condit won 3 of 5 rounds and all rounds were 10-9, he's your winner.
To this end, rounds 1, 2, 4, and 5 have all been relatively uncontroversial. (I've heard arguments that Condit won round 5, but most people have disagreed. Other people have suggested round 4 was 10-8, but if it was 10-8, round 2 probably should have been, as well.) Thus, for most people this fight came down to round 3. Most people scored it for Condit, but that's really the main place of disagreement.
(2) "Condit landed way more strikes throughout the fight."
This isn't a relevant statistic. Round by round breakdowns are all that matter in the 10 point must system.
(3) "Condit was point fighting"
This is honestly one of the dumbest things I've read on the forum. Robbie spent tons of time backing up, as well. Neither guy was point fighting. If you think they were, your opinions on marital arts are not valid.
I gave the fight to Carlos. I think it came down to round 3. Reasonable people can disagree. But the above should all be agreed upon before moving forward with a debate. If you want to argue one of the above, people shouldn't engage with you.
4) Condits 'knockdown' in the first was a push/slip 
HolyHackBBCZack - 4) Condits 'knockdown' in the first was a push/slip
I'll have to watch that again.
It's not super relevant. Without it, Carlos still clearly won round 1 I think.
But it's interesting.
So those 30% kicks and punches are doing what? To me, that is point fighting. If Condit wanted the W, he should of threw like he wanted to be the next champion.
The fight should be a draw. If we are really splitting hairs this much 24 hours later with close to 50% on each side, neither fighter clearly bested the other, They competed evenly, and that's a draw
I seem to remember neither guy doing much in the 3rd, Condit holding a bit of an edge, when Lawler kind of swung back in the last couple minutes
There is no point to this debate anyway. Anybody who scored round 3 for Lawler is not worth engaging with. They clearly have limited intelligence or are deluded by emotional investment or both.
If someone could be swayed by reason, they wouldn't have scored such a clear round incorrectly in the first place.
Round 3 was close. When watching it live I scored it for Condit. Upon rewatch it was closer than I recollected but I am going to watch it again.
Rewatch the fifth. You could argue that was the closest round of the fight. Three was also close but Condit edged him by landing more.
kuttdawg - So those 30% kicks and punches are doing what? To me, that is point fighting. If Condit wanted the W, he should of threw like he wanted to be the next champion.
It would be . . . if that was all he was throwing.
But he was also throwing absolute bombs, flying knees, and tons of other things.
If you really think throwing light is "point fighting" and you expect nothing but bombs, you don't understand fighting. You need to wear on people, setup hard shots, etc.
The Power Double - Rewatch the fifth. You could argue that was the closest round of the fight. Three was also close but Condit edged him by landing more.
I'll definitely rewatch it. My gut reaction was that Lawler won it, but I can be swayed.
Willin -
Round 3 was close. When watching it live I scored it for Condit. Upon rewatch it was closer than I recollected but I am going to watch it again.
BE does a great job breaking down the round. I forgot about the flying knee.
Condit won it. But the argument needs to be had on these grounds. Not on "gotta beat the champ to be the champ grounds."
http://www.bloodyelbow.com/2016/1/3/10704314/ufc-195-robbie-lawler-carlos-condit-third-scoring-3rd-round-decision-controversy-mma-news
wiggum -The Power Double - Rewatch the fifth. You could argue that was the closest round of the fight. Three was also close but Condit edged him by landing more.
I'll definitely rewatch it. My gut reaction was that Lawler won it, but I can be swayed.
Was a closer round than people think, but Robbie still takes it.
wiggum - (1) "You have to beat the champ."(5) Condit won
While this is technically true (to win, you must . . . er, win?), it's a misnomer. The champion gets ONE advantage - he/she keeps the belt in the case of a draw. He/she gets not benefit of the doubt in the 10 point must system. If the round is a draw, it must be scored 10-10. Otherwise, whoever wins the round gets more points and you move onto the next round.
If you think Robbie won 3 of 5 rounds and all rounds were 10-9, he's your winner. If you think Condit won 3 of 5 rounds and all rounds were 10-9, he's your winner.
To this end, rounds 1, 2, 4, and 5 have all been relatively uncontroversial. (I've heard arguments that Condit won round 5, but most people have disagreed. Other people have suggested round 4 was 10-8, but if it was 10-8, round 2 probably should have been, as well.) Thus, for most people this fight came down to round 3. Most people scored it for Condit, but that's really the main place of disagreement.
(2) "Condit landed way more strikes throughout the fight."
This isn't a relevant statistic. Round by round breakdowns are all that matter in the 10 point must system.
(3) "Condit was point fighting"
This is honestly one of the dumbest things I've read on the forum. Robbie spent tons of time backing up, as well. Neither guy was point fighting. If you think they were, your opinions on marital arts are not valid.
I gave the fight to Carlos. I think it came down to round 3. Reasonable people can disagree. But the above should all be agreed upon before moving forward with a debate. If you want to argue one of the above, people shouldn't engage with you.
And still......
Hard Aground -
For the overwhelming portion of the fight, the choice was between Condit's style or no fight at all. If Condit wanted to only point fight, and not engage in toe to toe, he would have had an easy shutout.
Yeah. This is a good point.
If Carlos actually did point fight, he probably would have won (if he didn't already).
2mmafreaks -wiggum - (1) "You have to beat the champ."(5) Condit won
While this is technically true (to win, you must . . . er, win?), it's a misnomer. The champion gets ONE advantage - he/she keeps the belt in the case of a draw. He/she gets not benefit of the doubt in the 10 point must system. If the round is a draw, it must be scored 10-10. Otherwise, whoever wins the round gets more points and you move onto the next round.
If you think Robbie won 3 of 5 rounds and all rounds were 10-9, he's your winner. If you think Condit won 3 of 5 rounds and all rounds were 10-9, he's your winner.
To this end, rounds 1, 2, 4, and 5 have all been relatively uncontroversial. (I've heard arguments that Condit won round 5, but most people have disagreed. Other people have suggested round 4 was 10-8, but if it was 10-8, round 2 probably should have been, as well.) Thus, for most people this fight came down to round 3. Most people scored it for Condit, but that's really the main place of disagreement.
(2) "Condit landed way more strikes throughout the fight."
This isn't a relevant statistic. Round by round breakdowns are all that matter in the 10 point must system.
(3) "Condit was point fighting"
This is honestly one of the dumbest things I've read on the forum. Robbie spent tons of time backing up, as well. Neither guy was point fighting. If you think they were, your opinions on marital arts are not valid.
I gave the fight to Carlos. I think it came down to round 3. Reasonable people can disagree. But the above should all be agreed upon before moving forward with a debate. If you want to argue one of the above, people shouldn't engage with you.
And still......
What?
Of the 0P's post makes any sense
scarfacedave - Of the 0P's post makes any sense
What?
ttt
I get it that people think Condit won, but he got the shit kicked out of him in the end no matter how much he scored. Do you really want a champ who got his ass beat like that?